date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2019/02/04
| 572
| 2,435
|
<issue_start>username_0: I found out that a collegue published about 5 years ago a paper in the proceedings of a conference about education in engineering (proceedings has ISBN, but publication has no DOI, in case that matters for this question). Then reworded the whole paper but kept literally the same references, same research questions, same arguments all over the paper and published in another conference (IEEE, this time with a DOI). So I imagine he purposely reworded and made up two papers with "the same" content, though he obviously rewords paragraph by paragraph (changes sentence order, synonyms, etc.). I thought this practice was not allowed but does anyone know the legality of publishing the same paper (though reworded) in two conferences?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't know of any legal regimen in which self plagiarism is an issue. It is scientific misconduct, but not illegal, to use your own words and ideas without citing them. This is a case in which the legal and the ethical aren't the same.
It isn't "stealing" ideas when you self plagiarize. It is just sloppy scholarship that makes it harder for readers and other scholars to find the complete context of the ideas expressed.
Of course, if you have given up copyright to some words, then using those words again may violate the copyright that you once held, but no longer do. A publisher that holds the copyright might make a legal claim against you, but it isn't because of self-plagiarism, but copyright violation.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't think there is anything illegal. However, it does sound like an academic misconduct, namely case of [Duplicate Publication](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duplicate_publication).
>
> Duplicate publication, multiple publication, or redundant publication
> refers to publishing the same intellectual material more than once, by
> the author or publisher. It does not refer to the unauthorized
> republication by someone else, which constitutes plagiarism, copyright
> violation, or both.
>
>
>
Scientific ideas presented multiple times, even reworded, are not useful for community, and might distort impression of your output. At best, you waste your own time, at worst you are wasting time of others by presenting old research as novel.
On the other hand, I can imagine someone writing a "review" of their own paper, but then they still have to cite the original.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/04
| 2,089
| 8,702
|
<issue_start>username_0: I hope to begin a PhD in the near future in a technical field. I feel that my strength is in being able to ask interesting questions / come up with a creative high level approach / make new connections between fields or ideas (several of my mentors have commented on this) and being extremely motivated and hardworking. I've done pretty well as an undergrad and one of my mentors told me that I shouldn't have trouble getting into my top choice PhD program.
However, my huge weakness is in quick thinking. I am embarrassingly slow to answer "brain teaser" type questions and feel that essentially all of the people I interact with in a research context are way faster than I am in their speed of problem solving and understanding technical papers.
So my question is: for those of you working in fields such as computer science, statistics, applied math - how important is raw speed of technical problem solving? Can I compensate for my slowness with hard work, or will I eventually reach some ceiling? I sometimes consider switching to an "easier" field, but I don't like the idea of giving up ...
It has taken me some time to see myself clearly (in large part because I had perfect scores on almost all standardized tests back in high school, and so thought I was "smart" ...), and after frankly looking at my strengths and weaknesses I suspect I might do better in a field where asking the right question is the most important part, and answering it is largely a matter of being motivated and conscientious. However, I can't think of any such field that truly excites me at the moment, and that also has reasonable exit options outside of academia.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I hope to begin a PhD
>
>
> understanding technical papers
>
>
>
You should not expect to understand technical papers even as an advanced undergraduate. These are often written to impress and placate referees more than to make readers' life easy. Sure, *some* papers will be fun to read, but most of the time reading a paper is a painful exercise in balancing between patience and criticism. I have read 0 non-expository papers in my 5 years of undergrad.
>
> how important is raw speed of technical problem solving?
>
>
>
As a *cause*: probably fairly unimportant. Your output won't suffer much *because* you are a slow thinker. Researchers don't usually spend much of their time solving problems; it's closer to 10% problem solving and 90% bookkeeping, teaching, and other chores. If the former 10% take up 20% of your research time instead, well, you'll have a little bit less spare time then, or do worse at teaching, or compensate otherwise.
As a *symptom* or *correlate*: possibly, if the theories about thinking speed being (highly correlated to) a central component of intelligence (read the unending flamewars around Spearman's g if you think modern science has gotten boring) are true. But if several of your mentors have vouched for your motivation, willpower *and* creativity, you're likely not in much trouble either way. Very few scientists have "maxed out" all these attributes together.
Sorry, this was somewhat of a reddit-style answer, but then again it is a reddit-style question. Quantitative results are scarce. I don't recall seeing any studies correlating academic success with thinking speed; most studies use measures like SAT, which themselves are mediated by thinking speed. Feel free to respond with citations :)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: **Answer after edit:**
If you are getting perfect scores on standardized tests, I wouldn't doubt the general horsepower. Perhaps there is some very specific aspect of mental processing that enables you to perform well on GMA tests, but not on brain teasers. And perhaps even there are fields that benefit from fast brain tease ability. But this is a subtlety, among many when you look at what to do with your life (which has no Euclidean answer).
However, the comment on picking right problem is very interesting. One of the most important aspects (very underrated) is having good intuitions about which problems are high likelihood of success. Lot of sad stories from grad students who spin their wheel on "a problem the boss gave me". Conversely I picked something I knew would work, sounded cool, and was cool; and project selection made my time so much more calm. I think almost every field has cool problems and that when you get into it you will find them, especially if you think identifying good problems is a skill of yours. Specifics will come from getting into the field though.
Personally I would go towards whatever interests you. One small advice I would give is not to underestimate the experimental or applied sciences. I was the classic "math science" type who wasn't perfect at a lab notebook and test tube cleanliness (and was scared by subjects involving difficult experiments or apparatus building...figured I was a pencil/paper type). However, the truth is that a lot of what determines success in those fields at the real research level (as opposed to school courses) is picking projects and ability to read and interpret the literature. And they are a lot of fun...
**Answer prior to question edit:**
Your question is rational and candid. We all have to look for comparative advantage.
There is a huge literature showing a correlation between IQ and performance in mentally complex jobs. See, for example, meta studies by Hunter and Schmidt.\* (It is the strongest statistical relationship in nonpathological psychology.)
Of course, nothing is 100% as a predictor, but in general there is a certain amount of smarts needed to handle some areas like grad physics (Jackson E&M) and grad math (God knows). And having more seems to be better even for those who have the minimum in those topics.
Again, it is not a 100% predictor. Neither is speed or strength or size for certain sports. But it is a strong factor. Consider that there have been only 25 NBA players in the history of the league who were 5-9 or less. Conversely if you meet a 7 foot man, there is a 1/6th chance he has or will play in the league. So obviously specific traits (talents) can influence performance at high levels.
Note that there is some sorting of and probably different floors by academic topic. With the more mathematical topics needing more horsepower and the more applied ones less. See XKCD: <https://xkcd.com/435/> However, be of good cheer. The good part is the more applied ones are more interesting--more hair on the ball, more direct connection to industry/society. Or so I tell myself to feel better for not solving Fermat's Last Thereom. ;-)
\*Link: <http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.172.1733&rep=rep1&type=pdf> I think this is the classic summary paper of theirs, but they have published several others, including some more recent.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> I've done pretty well as an undergrad and one of my mentors told me that I shouldn't have trouble getting into my top choice PhD program.
>
>
>
I think there’s your answer right there, staring you (sort of) in the face. You will apply to grad programs, and the best and most experienced researchers out there will take all the data you and other applicants will submit, and use their best judgment to determine who among this group has the highest potential to succeed. *If* you get admitted to a top program (a big *if* - it’s certainly nice that your mentor says so, but I wouldn’t pop the champagne just yet), what that would mean is precisely that **to the best of anyone’s ability to predict based on available data (which is much more data than is available to us here on this modest forum), you would be as well-positioned as anyone else to succeed in research**.
Put differently: if grad programs thought that being good at quickly solving brain teasers was important, guess what - they would very likely try to have you solve brain teasers as part of the admissions process. Since they don’t, well, that kind of tells you everything you need to know about whether that’s considered an important skill...
By the way, everything I said above also applies if you get in to a very good program that happens not to be at the very top of your list. Plenty of really smart people end up in those programs. So basically, the admissions process is precisely the kind of evaluation that has been optimized over many years to measure (as best anyone is able to do that) your potential to succeed. There is no need for you to come up with other, external metrics. Just give it a shot, and if you get in, that by definition means you’re qualified. Good luck!
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/02/05
| 1,366
| 5,535
|
<issue_start>username_0: How do I judge a professor's quality while choosing a PhD?
I have completed my Masters in Pure Mathematics.
I want to work in fields which involve Algebra,Functional Analysis,Complex Variables.
I also have my own funding to pursue my research.I have passed a qualification exam which will fund my studies for 4 years.
But I have the following questions:
* Most of the questions asked here for example [How to judge the reputation of a potential advisor or research group for good quality research for PhD?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/28827/100969) asks to visit the labs.
In Mathematics we don't have any labs.
* I searched some Professors working in the areas I have mentioned.
Some of the Professors had great citations in the period 2005-2010 but now they don't get enough citations hardly 1 or 2.
* Also should I try to join a reputed University as I believe all professors will have great publications there?
Or should I not judge a Professor on where he/she teaches?
* Also it is not possible to visit every Professor personally
In other words I am confused.
I don't understand what to see and what not.
Can you kindly say how I should judge a professor or what factors should be taken into account ?<issue_comment>username_1: 1. Go off their paper importance. And then your impression of them, based on conversation if possible, or popular writings. In addition to their math skill, you will need someone that is a good advisor. In particular ask previous or current students about the reputation for getting people done quickly (or at least not the converse) and for getting people into good jobs. And for personal relations.
2. I think this might be a little less important in math than in the sciences. You're going to discover your own theorems regardless. It's not like you need an active lab group. As long as the fellow still has prestige in his field you should be fine. Also often older advisors are kinder.
3. Going to a good university is key. You need to include it in the calculus. People will consider where you were able to get into. You still need a good advisor too--don't go with a jerk or a weak one at a name school. But I advise against going with a big fish in a small pond. In addition, peers will be better at the name school. Also likely it is in a bigger town (more fun). You also have better fallback options for other advisors. More people come to talk there. You might even collaborate with other professors. The undergrads are smarter. It's just better all around.
4. Be selective. Even if you miss some you still learn just from going through the process (what you care about, what are factors, etc.) If there is a key, key one, reach out by telephone or email or mail. Obviously let the person know that he is a key one, not just you trying to talk to all, so he gives you the time.
Caveat: I am not a mathematician.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Disclaimer: My answer rather aims at underlining that judging which Professor is the best for you depends on your long-term objectives.
>
>
>
You might want to choose your supervisor for two reasons. They sometimes do not align (i.e., it's either-or).
* **Choosing a Professor for *during* the PhD:** You might want to choose a good supervisor *for the time you are PhD student*. In such case, you are looking for someone who has already supervised PhD, has time, has research focuses aligning with your research topic/motivations, etc. This will ensure you have a "nice time" during your PhD, with enough support and guidance. Talking with former PhD students might help. Note that in this case, the institution (in terms of courses, funding, support, etc.) matters too.
* **Choosing a Professor for *after* the PhD:** However, sometimes, what you focus on is the next step. It may vary from one field to the other (I don't know about math at all), but I know first-hand that sometimes, what matter the most for getting the position is recommendation letters (more precisely, who wrote them). Having the right (meaning "well established and acknowledged, with large network) connexions helps you getting visiting PhD/PostDoc positions more easily. Don't get me wrong: you won't get those positions if you are not doing good research. However, when you have reached a certain "enough good" level (except in some rare case where you're extraordinarily brilliant), *my opinion is that* the quality of your work matters less than who recommends you — for junior researcher position, at least. So in such case, working with a Professor that has an above-average impact factor, published in renowned journals, and, most importantly, have "sent" PhD students in prestigious institutions (what they — the Professor — can easily do because their best buddy is PI there) and "landed" former students in cool positions is what you are looking for. Even if they might be less good mentors during the PhD. So track where are currently working their former students.
In both cases, look for a Professor that is interested in what you are doing.
Remember also that it's just like houses or spouses: there is no such thing as a ideal positions. You want to find the best "good-enough PI" that would accept you, even if they are not perfect in some aspects.
Finally, please consider that you are choosing a position that will significantly impact your life for the next 3–6 years. Don't neglect your personal needs/requirements (a very good position is not worth anything — in my opinion).
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/05
| 1,268
| 4,962
|
<issue_start>username_0: Maybe it's because I'm a very shy person, but whenever I am in a big classroom setting (lecture), I am too afraid to raise my hand and ask questions or answer questions in class. It's really odd to me how some people can just do it so naturally. Recently, I've been trying to participate more in class, but after I say what I want to say, I completely zone out due to the pressure. So when my professor asks me something again, I tend to almost freeze. There's also the knowledge that there's a lot of smart students in the room, which adds to the fear of getting humiliated. Is there a way to overcome this?<issue_comment>username_1: There are several difficulties you're dealing with:
1. It is genuinely not easy to formulate and ask a good question. You know how they say that a good question is more than a half of the answer. That's why it is so important to learn how to ask a question and how to split a question in several smaller questions.
2. You usually do not have a lot of time in class as the lecturer tends to move on quickly. It is harder to come up with a good question in limited time.
3. Other students are also present and you may feel that they are "smarter" and they are "judging" you. Whether this is true or not, is another question (spoiler: it's probably not true), but the perception makes it harder to act.
Now, what can we do about it? My suggestion is to decouple the problems. First, start by learning to ask a question *outside* of the classroom setting.
* As soon as you have a question in a class, **write it down** on paper. After the class, re-read it, and try to find the answer yourself. Try also to re-formulate the question in a more clear, concise and answerable way.
* If your professor offers **office hours**, attend them and ask your question in person. Talking to your professor one-to-one will help you both to learn the subject and to learn how to communicate more efficiently. It will also improve your confidence and build a good relationship with your professor.
* When you are ready, **ask more questions** in class. Write down professors' answers and (if you have time) note your own reaction. Hopefully you will find it easier to ask questions as you do it more often. If not, meet your professor and discuss your questions again.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Nobody asks questions, or speaks about anything in public, naturally. Everyone has to learn. The best way to develop public speaking skills is to practice. You can practice speaking in a room by yourself, and you can practice in front of a group of people. As @roland mentioned, [Toastmasters](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toastmasters_International) is an organization that will help you practice. Ask your professors for other opportunities.
Now I have to stop writing this answer and go practice my conference talk.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: This is what you "see":
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/umzvg.jpg)
This is what the lecturer sees:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/7LDyUm.jpg)
Can you see the person who is talking? They are standing near the door, wearing a black shirt. So you see, in the lecturer's viewpoint, you are just a dot in another hundred dots. After you have finished talking, their attention is not on you anymore. And even when you are talking at them, they are not fully listening to your words. In their and other students' minds, there is always a topic much much more important than you: themselves. You are insignificant in their life, let alone your fear.
Whenever I have an anxiety like this, I always try to put myself into other's perspective, and see how unimportant I am in their eyes. At that time, I suddenly realize this:
>
> Wait, what exactly am I fearing at? Nothing. NOTHING. I just assume that everyone is looking at me carefully, while in fact they are just busy on their problems. They don't even know that I fear at them. I make up an illusion, and then I fear of it. This is silly.
>
>
>
At the time you can see how silly your fear is, then not only it will disappear like it never exists, and but also a sympathy for their problems will take place instead. Sometimes in my imagination I think that I cut off my fear with the sharpest sword I have. I really like the feeling of having my fear cut off and my mind become crytall clear again. It makes me feel courage.
If you are interested in how I visualize the distortion we make in our minds, so that you can cut down your fear regardless the context, check out my article: [A theory of perspective](http://lyminhnhat.com/2018/12/21/a-theory-of-perspective/?utm_source=Stack%20Exchange&utm_medium=Academia&utm_campaign=Perspective&utm_term=fear_bigclass). Skip to the section "Communication and perspective-taking" if you don't have time.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/02/05
| 1,049
| 4,417
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a third year Physics & Mathematics student, and I want to work with a specific advisor. I have read almost all the related questions in this site and this [blog post](http://science-professor.blogspot.com/2011/10/writing-to-me-reprise.html). However, almost all of them suggest the student to make a research proposal, or - sort of - a problem that s/he is planning to work in his/her Phd.
But, the thing is, I haven't had a chance to neither doing a self-study, nor
taking a course in the field that I want to work on, though I'm very familiar with the basic concepts; I can easily read papers on the level of undergraduate.
In that case, how am I supposed to make -sort of - a research proposal, or suggest a problem that I can work on ?
I mean, for example, this last semester I took a graduate level Algebra I course, if I were to work on Group/ Ring theory, I could almost find fifty interesting research problems top of my head, but I'm not familiar with the actual problems in the field that I want to work on; I'm only familiar with general problems and general methods, and I don't want to look like "I'm interested with the field and to work with you, but I don't know what I'm actual interested in" in my email, so what should I supposed to do in this case ?<issue_comment>username_1: You may be giving yourself an unnecessary task. While I don't know the academic traditions specific to Turkey, for mathematics in the US it isn't normally necessary to propose a specific problem to a professor. It may be different in the physical sciences, such as the blog post you cite implies, but in maths you need only suggest a fairly narrow sub-field in which you want to work. Algebra is too broad, Group Theory, still very broad. But non-Abelian groups is getting you closer to a field of *interest*.
Your question suggests that you may have some insight into algebra since you think you can propose interesting questions. That is what you want to stress in your communication with a potential advisor. "I'm interested in this tiny field and think I have some insight into the inner workings there."
Research problems in mathematics don't come out of the blue, they come out of study of other mathematical things and questions that arise there. They come from asking "what if". What if I drop an axiom? What if I change this definition?
Topology, for example, as a field suitable for deep study, came out of focusing on a particular aspect of Analysis (open sets), and then generalizing. But that came out of studying analysis, not just proposing something unrelated to other mathematics.
One great way to come up with research problems in mathematics is to attend research seminars led by the potential advisor. Take a lot of notes. Ask a lot of questions. What is known? What isn't known? What is related? What if we change something just a bit (generalizing or specializing).
But for the initial contact, it is likely enough (here anyway) to express that you have narrowed the field of study to one that is feasible to explore more deeply.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Just try to open a conversation with the fellow. It is not an expected thing for every new grad student to have a research problem. For all you know, the fellow is looking for students or wants them to work on what he wants them to (this is very normal).
Sure, there is nothing wrong with developing your own research proposal and it is an act of independence. But I really wouldn't put it in your head as a requirement or the norm (whatever those blog posts say).
It would help if you would examine why you want to work with this fellow in particular. If you and him interested in same scientific subfield (fluid dynamics, star spectra, whatever) than surely that is a point to open the discussion between you two.
If it's for some other reason than I wonder if your motives are correct (there are a lot of professors that are nice, have funding, get people jobs, etc.) But really I don't know. But it sounds peculiar to be so fastened in on one guy already.
In any case, I would emphasize to look at more than one school or one professor (even if you want to study physics of crocodidle bites and this is the only guy publishing on it). Profs sometimes lack funding or don't like you or turn out to be jerks or what have you. You need to have options.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/02/05
| 1,299
| 5,758
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am doing a PhD in molecular biology where we conduct research on human skin and skin diseases. Our group (EU based) has been in a discussion with another research group from the USA, where we can factually show that our methods are 'better' and cleaner than theirs. Nevertheless, they keep publishing work where **they don't even cite any** of our papers. We noticed that our publications were rejected by journals where people from the USA group function as editor/reviewer as well. We are always open for discussion and collaboration because good science cannot be done alone.
Very curious how we should handle this problem.<issue_comment>username_1: Continue to publish your results in journals that will accept them. After a while people will be able to see for themselves whether the US group is ignoring your publications.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Consider a Europe-based journal or even a native language one. It's not ideal -- usually the American society core journals are the best. But there are some legacy good ones overseas also. At a certain point, it becomes more important to get your stuff out and not be blocked. I was tangentially involved in two specific instances related to this, where the publish abroad method was used successfully:
* Tiff between two very big natural scientists with the US one blocking French group. The French ended up in a French language journal (not ideal, but important because it was a very hot area and they needed to get priority for a series of discoveries).
* American-born, but France-based economist who published some findings that made several US companies unhappy (statistical evidence of collusion). He made sure his book was printed in Europe.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: If you are interested in the long game, having a record of your precedence will be helpful in three ways:
* First, it may act as a deterrent to the US group. You can ignore one or two significant recent findings and defend it as an honest mistake, but if there is a long trail of it, this is a big problem. It may reach a point they are unwilling to pass.
* Second, it makes it more likely the rest of the community notices.
* Third, when it does emerge, you'll only get the credit for the work you actually published first.
Notice there is not a particularly strong effect of where the record exists for any of these points. Letters to journals etc can all help.
In the short term if you're convinced this is deliberate on their part there is not a huge amount I am aware of that you can do. The journals and the institution the US group are connected with may be willing to apply pressure to the group on your behalf. However their is no guarantee of any of this as it's even if it's clear to you what's going on it's potentially difficult to see this as anything other than grey until someone close to the field is involved (especially if there is not a publication record...). Also if there is something, it will likely not be you directly doing any of this. If the rest of the group is aware, there's no much more for you to do.
This is unfortunate for you as this kind of thing can take a while to be resolved, which in an established position may not be so bad but for a PhD this could well be to late for important events. I am sorry you are in this situation.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: An increasing number of journal offers the possibility to publish short articles of critical feedback, often called "letters to the editor" and generally published online.
An example that comes to mind is PNAS' [Letters](https://www.pnas.org/letters) in which scientists can reply to articles, provide feedback, point to fundamental methodological errors etc.
If you have reason to assume that the competing teams' methods are flawed, this type of open comments may be a good way to (constructively) suggest that alternative techniques (such as yours) are more accurate?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> we can factually show that our methods are 'better' and cleaner than theirs.
>
>
>
Your methods may be better, but if their methods are adequate to support the results they claim, they may have good reasons to continue using their methods. They already have the equipment for their method in their lab. They are more familiar with the analytical techniques related to their method. They want to be able to compare new results with past ones. Etc.
Only if their methods are actually producing wrong results would their not using your method require a letter to the editor other public response.
>
> Nevertheless, they keep publishing work where they don't even cite any of our papers.
>
>
>
If they don't use your method, it doesn't seem necessary to cite your papers with reference to methods in a paper focused on experimental results rather than on methods.
If their results are contradictory to yours, then it could be out of line to present their results without discussing why they feel yours are in error. It also justifies publishing your results with a discussion of why your methods are an improvement, and makes your results more valuable as they overturn previously published ones.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: Ask them why they are ignoring your work!
Send a polite message saying you are following their work and very interested in it, it's proving very helpful to your own thinking. Ask them if they have considered using your approach, as if they think it would help, say you would be happy to discuss further or share lab protocols.
Come on guys, these petty lab squabbles are so tiresome and an immoral waste of funders money. There cannot be anything to 'steal' if you have already published.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/05
| 1,446
| 6,068
|
<issue_start>username_0: Even though my advisor is reasonably friendly with me, it feels like he doesn't 'trust me' as much as he trusts the other grad student (let's call him X) in the lab. A few examples:
* I joined a lab a few weeks before X and we both worked on the same project until recently, and both made significant contributions to the project - but I was first author on the paper. Without telling me, my advisor asked X, the second listed author, to present our work at a local conference, instead of simply asking us both who would be available. I did not even know about it until X asked me to review his presentation.
* He asked X to review an article in his name, about something that I know more about: the manuscript is focusing on something very similar to what I was working on during my Master's, whereas X is unfamiliar with some fairly important notions in this sub-field. One again, I learned about it by chance.
* Both X and I have moved on to different projects now, and are both working full time on these. A collaborator suggested a new side project that would quickly and easily lead to a paper. Guess who was offered the opportunity to join that project (despite not having more relevant experience)? That's right: X again.
I don't think I mentioned anything along the lines of "I have so much work I can't do anything more" but I also don't think I came out as idle or unproductive. I show initiative (or at least I believe I do) so I really have no I idea why I'm not given these opportunities to learn and/or build an academic record.
I'm afraid that asking if something is wrong would make my advisor defensive, and make me appear like a negative person - which obviously does not help. But if I'm doing something wrong (or not sending the right signals, or anything like that) I have no idea what, and I would like to fix it as soon as possible.
Any idea about how to approach this issue diplomatically?<issue_comment>username_1: You may be misinterpreting and actually getting it backwards. Of course, I don't know the prof or the other interactions, but much of what you write here could well be explained by your advisor trusting you completely to get it right and the other student needing more help and practice to get up to where you are.
Student X may need all the help they can get, whereas you are trusted to make it without the need for extra intervention. It could also be that some people know you already have enough to do.
I could be wrong, of course.
But it would be worth having a face to face conversation asking your advisor for advice on your progress and, especially, any advice on what to do to position yourself for a great career. I'll guess that if there are any reservations about you that they would become obvious in such a conversation without having to directly ask whether you are trusted or not. And if you are trusted, the advice would probably be pretty valuable in the future.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: I would at least bring it up since it is on your mind. But I would not escalate it to an ultimatum. The story rings true and I have seen similar. Some people you need to at let them know the objection or they continue to walk on you. But again, I would not expect satisfaction. But at least get it off your chest and get the guy on notice.
Oh...and take care of yourself on papers going forward (take first author, write stuff up before discussion, etc.) Continue to include X and the advisor, but stay in front on the papers. Most important thing. Oh...and finish up and get out of there ASAP. Sounds like you are a self sufficient as a researcher and the relationship is turning competitive.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> **both made significant contributions to the project** - but I was first
> author on the paper ... Without telling me, my advisor asked X, the second listed author, to present our work at a local conference
>
>
>
Based on your own judgement, is your contribution is much more significant than that of X? If no, then maybe your advisor is trying to balance the credits. You are the first author, but then X is allowed to present. Would you choose the other way round, i.e. to present the paper with X as the first author?
>
> He asked X to review an article **in his name**
>
>
>
Not sure what do you mean by "in his name". But reviewing an article is often considered as an exercise to get familiar with the field. As you already worked on this topic in your Masters, X was the one who needed to do this exercise.
>
> A collaborator suggested a new side project that would quickly and
> easily lead to a paper.
>
>
>
At the end of the day, your advisor needed to make a choice. If he chose you, perhaps perhaps it were X to ask this question. Maybe the next opportunity is your turn. Maybe you are closer to your own paper, and your advisor wants you to focus on your own project. I would not too fast to jump on the conclusion that your advisor favors X. From what you have described, I do not see any problem with the advisor-advisee relationship. It seems to me that you just overthink it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: There are 2 questions here:
* Should you (i.e. is this really evidence you are not trusted) broach the subject.
* Can you do it tactfully.
The first one, has already been weighed in on. The answers sound very reasonable to me and while they may not be right there is no substitute for knowing those involved directly, there isn't anything I feel qualified to add .
Secondly (if you want to proceed anyway) is tricky. Effectively it boils down to you telling your supervisor:
Either you have underestimated my ability or have systematically treated me as such.
It's hard to put a non-confrontational light on that. You might avoid out-right hostile but...
On a case by case basis you might get further. If you know there is something coming up you would like to be considered for and you show enthusiasm for it, you might get better odds irrespective of trust issues.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/02/05
| 2,080
| 8,921
|
<issue_start>username_0: I plan on leaving my current postdoc at the end of the first year to go to industry. My question is two fold:
Is 3 months a good length of notice to give?
When should I begin applying for positions in industry?
With regards to the first, there are already plenty of answers saying the more the notice the better, however I do not want to give too much in case I am replaced before the end of the year.
I would ideally like to begin a post in industry (computer science) at the beginning of 2020. It may be too early to begin applying now but I'm not sure about the interview timeline etc.
Thanks in advance.<issue_comment>username_1: 1. You should always be applying. Postdocs are short term positions. It is understood.
2. Give notice after you get AND have accepted a firm written job offer.
You really don't owe any more than that.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I think three month notice is a good length. You can ask your HR department to make sure it is appropriate at your institution. Your supervisor already knows that you will leave at some point, so don't worry about that. Also don't worry too much about unfinished projects: There are always projects going on. Your colleagues will manage.
You can talk to people in your research group about it before you sign a new contract, but it doesn't really make sense before you start actually applying for jobs. You work in computer science, so you shouldn't have difficulties finding suitable positions, and once you sent out several applications things can evolve really quickly!
I think you should start thinking about your next position yesterday and apply as soon as you see something that sparks your interest (but probably no later than six month before the end of contract). Now that you seem to be clear about your goals focus on your future. Good luck!
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Apply everywhere as soon as possible. Do not give notice before you have accepted something.
However, if (and only if) you have been treated well, and your present employer has earned it, do tell them as soon as you have decent chances of getting a position. Do try to leave in a clean manner, with as much done as possible and other things documented. There are a few reasons for this:
1. If you have been treated well, returning the favour is a good thing to do. The world is a better place when people treat each other well. This has served me fine thus far in the academia.
2. If you ever decide to return, or are in a position to co-operate with the academic world, or need some kind of reference or favour from academia, then having left on good terms makes everything smoother.
Also read your work contract with some care. It might tell how it takes you to formally design after you have declared it.
Personally, I have told my mentors as soon as I have started looking for jobs and as soon as it started getting serious. I have been blessed with fine mentors, who have been supportive, and nothing ill has come out of this practice of openness, as far as I know.
However, if you have been mistreated, little of this applies.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> Is 3 months a good length of notice to give?
>
>
>
Sure, but more importantly check what is the legal requirement for resigning from your position. For me it's 1 month, so I don't need to give any more heads-up, but it's surely appreciated. Consider that they will need to replace you with someone, which takes time to arrange.
>
> When should I begin applying for positions in industry?
>
>
>
Today! Right this second.. No but seriously, depending on the type of job you are looking for, a good fit might not come around whenever. Keep an eye out there, have some job alerts for your favorite companies. Talk to people, reach out into your network.
A word of advice though, if you do reach out to your network and these people know your current employer, you want to make sure that your boss is aware you are looking for something. You don't want to leave the impression of going behind someones back.
>
> I plan on leaving my current postdoc at the end of the first year to
> go to industry.
>
>
>
1 year as a postdoc is hardly worth it though, the idea is to learn something new, to publish some articles, overall develop your skills. So, unless you are really tired of what you are doing I am not sure if a planned end by the first year makes any sense.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Lots of these answers give the usual "HR is not your friend" talk. But things can be a bit different in Academia. Given that:
>
> Is 3 months a good length of notice to give?
>
>
>
It's the right order of magnitude, but I would try to avoid setting a firm, arbitrary date, especially one months in the future.
Assuming you and your supervisor are on reasonably good terms, and you are committed to leaving, there is no reason not to tell your supervisor that you are applying to industry jobs and anticipate leaving in the next six months:
* This will allow you some flexibility: it is simple enough to keep your supervisor in the loop as to your progress on the job hunt, and confirm that you are leaving once you accept a job. Your supervisor should be happy for you.
* Finding a replacement will take some time, and your supervisor can likely support two of you for a brief period, so you're unlikely to find yourself out in the cold.
* Moreover, being transparent will maximize the chances of remaining on good terms, which could be important if there is an opportunity for collaboration later.
If you and your supervisor are not on good terms, then giving a few weeks notice (enough time to wrap up your current commitments) is perfectly professional.
I would follow the advice about "give 2 weeks' notice after you have a job" only if your supervisor is terrible and would be so offended by your decision to leave that he is likely to fire you immediately.
>
> When should I begin applying for positions in industry?
>
>
>
Now. For computer science positions in the US, I would expect it to take 4-6 weeks to find a job if you are willing to cast a wide net, and maybe twice that if you have relatively narrow requirements. But there is *no* benefit to you for remaining in your post-doc a few more months (seriously!), and many benefits to starting on your "real career," so you should leave as soon as is reasonable.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: There’s a tradeoff here and I think you need to bear this in mind. On one hand a postdoc is a job and you have legal rights to terminate that position as stipulated on your contract. On the other hand, you’ve committed to a long-term project and your goal is a publication. Other people involved in the project deserve notice. Overall I think clear honest communication is key to an exit without burning bridges. You may need a strong character reference later in your career for example.
**It’s a job**. A postdoc is a fixed-term position so it’s expected that you will be jobhunting to secure income after that period (whether advancing in an academic career or seeking other work). Leaving early should you find a desirable job opportunity is completely understandable. It’s your legal right to terminate your contract as long as you give minimum notice required by law in the country you’re working in. Typically the legal requirement is 2 weeks (14 days) notice but it’s generally considerate to give at least a months notice. Please check you comply with any conditions you agreed to in your contract. This is the minimum you are required to do. Of course it’s advisable not to give formal notice until you have accepted a job offer elsewhere or signed a contract.
**Don’t burn bridges**. Remaining on good terms with a former supervisor can help you throughout your career. Be respectful to them and anyone else who has invested their time in your project. You are not legally obliged to work without pay or publish any unfinished work. Clear communication about your career plans and the possibility that you may leave will enable your supervisor to support your best with the time remaining. It’s unlikely you will be replaced as you’re still the most qualified person to continue your project. Giving enough notice will also help give enough time to hand over the reins if someone else is available to continue the project or to re-evaluate plans and publish as smaller scale paper while you are still there. Of course with limited time you will not be able to publish everything that has initially been planned but making a sincere effort and acknowledging that it was a valuable experience for you will make a good impression. Unfortunately it is not always possible to leave on good terms with a supervisor but where you still have a good working relationship, you should try not to tarnish that but leaving abruptly.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/02/05
| 984
| 3,992
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm seeking guidance here for a situation which is becoming unsustainable. As you can get from the title, I don't get along with my PhD (STEM) supervisor.
He never cared of my thesis, he doesn't even read my papers at all. All he does is charging me with his ideas that every time turn out to be unsuccessful. Even worse, when an idea of his turns out to be unfeasible, he asks me to fabricate the results (and by fabrication I mean totally invented works). This has become systematic.
For a good part of my PhD I cut him of from my activity, I almost finished my thesis and I published 6 first-author papers, 5 non-first-author papers and about 10 conference papers (I'm not including bogus works in the count).
The problem is that I'm starting an abroad period at another university and I need his recommendation. It goes without saying that he started again with his unethical and time-wasting requests.
After my abroad period, I'll come back some months (six) and finish my PhD. After that I'd like to apply for a postoc in that university.
My question is, if I prove myself during the abroad period, would I still need his recommendation for a postdoc application? Mind that I also have a second advisor for that, in case.
In the six months between my abroad period and the thesis defense I'll be again at his will, so this mean again losing times at crazy ideas and faking papers. I need to dump him as soon as I can. Will I need him for a postdoc, if they already know me at the place where I want to apply?<issue_comment>username_1: **Never ever fabricate**. I repeat: **never ever fabricate**.
If you do not manage to get a suitable reference from your superviser, your career may or may not take a nosedive, depending how lucky you are to find someone else to write you recommendations.
But if you fabricate, you will be found out if your research is of any relevance whatsoever (and if it is not, why do this research in the first place?) and then your career, sooner or later, *will be destroyed* with no hope of recovery.
Addendum: in my personal opinion, the two capital crimes in science are plagiarism and fabrication. But, in my very personal opinion, fabrication is the worse of the two, because it wastes many people's time and effort in trying to reproduce the results.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> All the fabricated material is still to be submitted. I'm trying as hard as I can not to put my name inside these works. I doubt that he's gonna accept, because if I refuse the authorship, the other professors (who are unaware that the work is false) could suspect.
>
>
>
This is very important - **do not participate in, or put your name to, any paper with fabricated results**. Not only are you not obliged to avoid confrontation in order to avoid arousing suspicion, but you should report this to your university immediately. If your description is correct then this is academic fraud, and your role should be as a whistle-blower, not a reluctant participant. Report this matter to your Head of Department, and send an email to your supervisor saying that you do not wish to be involved in those papers in any way, that you do not wish to have any authorship or acknowledgement in them, and that you believe they are fraudulent and should not be submitted for publication.
This is not a matter of "trying as hard as [you] can". In a matter this serious, *you don't try - you do*. If you end up participating in ---or putting your name to--- published papers with fabricated results, and that comes to light, then that is the end of your academic career. It's really that simple. If you participate in publishing results you know to be bogus fabricated results then you will have zero credibility, in any field, forever. However uncomfortable you feel confronting this matter, just think how uncomfortable you are going to feel when you are publicly known as someone who participated in academic fraud.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/02/05
| 476
| 2,089
|
<issue_start>username_0: I saw on the internet that many degrees are revoked due to data falsification, but the question here is: how come colleges cant identify data falsification or manipulation before the degree is awarded? Do colleges have to wait for another person to report the misconduct and waste time and money?<issue_comment>username_1: In some fields only a few people see the work before the degree is awarded and they may miss things since nobody knows everything. After the degree is awarded, and especially when publications result at that point, lots of people get to look and they may notice anomalies.
I suspect it is less of a problem in fields in which there is a lot of publication of data and results prior to publication and also less in fields (mathematics) that don't usually depend on things that can be easily falsified.
Sadly, some practitioners seem to believe that they can only succeed with "positive" results and so, when they get the opposite, try to fudge the data. This may be difficult to detect without a lot of eyes.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: There are two things to consider, in my mind, when thinking about your question.
The first is the possibility for sampling bias. If someone is caught falsifying data prior to their degree being awarded, they are likely expelled - and it's unlikely for the work to ever see the light of day. These detections are largely "silent", while the flashier ones that involve clawing back degrees, retracting papers, etc. are likely over-represented.
The other issue is to consider how data fabrication is detected. On a crude level, it's a function of both time and the number of people looking at the work. *Inherently* there's more time post-graduation than pre-graduation. There's also a larger number of people looking at it, especially if the work is being published. So if the detection of any given fraudulent work has a fairly low probability per person interacting with the work, it's entirely reasonable that the majority of these cases would arise after a degree is awarded.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/02/05
| 619
| 2,615
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a ~5 page references section with citations added by various authors in varying formats. What's the easiest way to get them all into the same format?
The two options I see are to do it manually or use citation management software like Zotero. Doing it manually is feasible but tedious, prone to mistakes and will probably take an hour or more. I'm not sure if it's possible to import these varying format citations into Zotero and export it in a common format, but that's what I'm about to try.
I wanted to check with experts here first. If I find Zotero works or not I'll add that info to this Q&A.<issue_comment>username_1: Doing this in a reference management software (I use Zotero, which you mention, but there are others) is absolutely the way to go. Of course, setting up the reference database for one paper may take the same amount of time as manually reformatting, and learning how to use it in the process may take longer. The advantage is in reusability. For any single paper the up front cost may not be worth it, but the time savings on paper number 2 and beyond is incredible.
Unfortunately you won't just be able to paste in the formatted citations and have Zotero recognize them (so far as I know). Zotero does have a way to add items by an identifier, so if your coauthors included DOIs, adding the references should move quickly. Additionally, if your coauthors used any reference management software themselves, you can ask them to export it to a common format (BibTeX is pretty commonly supported) and import those files.
If worse comes to worse, searching for each reference title in Google Scholar and using Zotero's automatic ingestion should also be pretty quick.
Zotero's documentation on these various ways to create items:
<https://www.zotero.org/support/getting_stuff_into_your_library>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: What I do is I search the source on google scholar and copy the bibtex from there for citation (watch out that you get the published one, google scholar also lists arxiv papers). Unfortunately you need to use a VPN service, as the page kicks you out after around 10 sources, but apart from that it helped me quite a bit to get everything in the same form.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: There is an amazing tool developed by CrossRef -- [Simple Text Query](https://doi.crossref.org/simpleTextQuery). So you paste a list of references, the format doesn't matter, one per line. The service tries hard to match you input to a paper listed in CrossRef DOI database. Then it's easy to feed the DOIs to Zotero.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/06
| 644
| 2,688
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently enrolled in a science research PhD study in Canada. I am co-supervised by 2 people in different fields. The problem is that I started my PhD ~1.5 years ago and was told that there was funding but there wasn’t; something didn’t work according to plan, I am not sure what happened. Since 2017, I have written every grant and submitted it under my primary supervisor’s name to get my PhD funded. The issue is that my primary supervisor told my co-supervisor that they had funding and told the department they had funding when they didn’t. However, I am not sure how the primary supervisor is funding the situation, but at times I have to incur expenses and am told I will be reimbursed. Is that normal? I also heard that grad students are not required to write the whole grant applications but can assist in sections if required? Should I speak up about having added stress of writing grant applications, which isn’t even my job? Furthermore, at one point, I would have to constantly ask for my monthly stipend. I have repeatedly asked them about the funding situation and the primary supervisor seems to be quite nonchalant about the whole issue and does not have any urgency regarding the matter. I am not sure if I should speak up to anyone about these issues, but I also don’t want to go over my primary supervisor’s head, betray them, and besmirch their words.
**Summary questions:**
1. should I tell anyone that all our grants are rejected and there isn’t any funding?
2. Should I be having to incur expenses for my own research? (**edit**: costs related to research expenses, not conference or food. Even in the past the conference expenses were not covered and I had to pay out of pocket)
3. Should I speak to my advisor about how I shouldn’t have to write the grant applications?<issue_comment>username_1: This situation (stop funding) could be happened, but rare.
I recommend you should check the funding reports in Canada.
It should be opened.
So, you can check the status of the budget of your lab.
For example, in USA we can check how much the lab has got or will get the governmental fund.
Another recommendation from me is to write not a grant but a fellowship.
It is much easier to get "your own" budget.
A lot of fellowships are floating in the USA/Canada.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Normal? Regrettably I would consider this semi-normal.
A good situation? Absolutely not.
Is the situation likely to get any better? From your description, definitely not.
As you say that you only started 1.5 years ago, and you are in a bad situation, change groups, and if that isn't possible leave or change university.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/02/06
| 955
| 3,920
|
<issue_start>username_0: I started graduate course in a national research institute abroad (3 years ago). I just realized now this is my third year and every year we had different projects.
Main problem is that I am not having enough time to focus in one area to publish papers. Second problem is that I am not obtaining knowledge from the other doctors.
Should I stop pursuing PhD if I feel I am not learning as much as I expected and feeling I am doing someone else work and tasks?<issue_comment>username_1: 1. The downside of academia that you are describing definitely exists. Have been hearing this for generations now (don't get me started on the pyramid, tournament style rewards, job prospects, etc.).
2. All that said, it is irrelevant to you. Do NOT cut your nose off to spite yourself. You are too close now. Just buckle down and finish and get the degree. It is helpful. And you will kick yourself if you miss it.
3. Be a little selfish about taking care of yourself on papers, etc. Focus, focus, focus. Pick your spots, but I would avoid volunteering always and also occasionally push back on collateral duties. And push, push, push for papers. They really are the score card...don't let anyone kid you the opposite.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: **You need a path to completion.** This means identifying an advisor, a topic, a schedule, etc. I think it's worth taking the time to really try to identify a path before giving up -- but if there is no path, better to recognize this now so you can cut your losses. In this case, switching to a master's and then doing your PhD somewhere else (or not pursuing a PhD at all) could make sense -- it all depends on what you want to do long-term, we can't make your decision for you.
**Focus on publishing** in the meantime. If you publish lots of interesting papers, you'll have more options no matter what you decide to do next. Fix yourself a set budget (e.g., 20-30 hours per week) for all tasks other than papers and thesis-related research and don't exceed that.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: At my university, there are some programs that have the students work on projects full time for 2-3 years and then having reduced workload for the other 2-3 years, to write a thesis. This way, the PhD student basically acquires his own funding.
Thus, at least when you are in such a program, it is not uncommon to not have a topic to work on, nor time for papers or anything, in the first few years. Of course if this is the case, it should be made clear, and you should be told (if possible, in your contract) when you will get time and advision (is this a word? No? too bad...) for your thesis.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: It's a false dichotomy.
A researcher is always a student: S/he *studies* problems and questions - both through his/her own reflection and experimentation and that of others. Less-qualified students, earlier in their life, study mostly, or only, through the previous studies of others, shared with them.
Also, a person doing research or teaching a university, whose goal as an institution is to conduct research and to teach, is generally a part of its staff. The question of recognition of the university and the graduate researcher or teacher's *employment relationship* is, however, a highly contentious matter - since it is financially useful for university management to underpay and mistreat graduate researchers and teachers.
Every workplace - when you're there at least partially due to preference - has parts of the work that you're personally invested in carrying out, and parts that you aren't. A Ph.D. should be flexible enough to allow for a large part of your work to be of the first kind. If it isn't, then you should try to change this state of affairs within the scope of your Ph.D., before considering leaving it in the middle.
Also, what @username_2 said.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/02/06
| 467
| 2,052
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a paper that I am working on . I found a special issue on the area I am working on.
My advisor told me special section have a good chance for acceptance.
What is good about special issue call for paper on journals ?
How many papers are usually accepted?<issue_comment>username_1: This may depend on your field of research and the specific venue. In my field, it is often considered easier to publish in special issues, because in general
* all contributions are submitted to review *en bloc*, so there is a chance for weaker contributions to be 'kept afloat' by stronger ones
* special issue editors have incentives to be lenient with rather negative reviews on individual papers, because they want their special issue to be published and therefore need a sufficient number of papers to survive
* the competition for slots in a special issue may be lower than for slots in a regular issue, due to the narrower topic
* papers whose general contribution may be questionable can still work in the context of a special issue with a more narrowly defined topic.
It is not possible to give a reliable estimate for acceptance rates, as this depends on many factors; however, it is likely higher for special issues compared to regular issues of a given journal.
As for the *call for papers*, the chance of your paper being accepted depends on whether the special issue editors seek to fill an empty slot in the proceedings of an earlier workshop, panel, etc., or whether this is an open call (and then of course on the quality and fit of your abstract/paper).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In a special issue, the journal focuses on one topic. That's helpful in the sense that if you work on that topic, you can find lots of papers on the same topic easily.
About the number of papers accepted: it varies. On the low end, it's usually at least enough to fill one issue (i.e. at least ~5 papers or ~100 pages), but I've also seen 15+ papers in an issue, similar to the number published in a conference.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/06
| 439
| 1,909
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently an undergraduate in mathematics and physics and graduate student in applied mathematics in the US. I am looking for a research position/internship for the summer (somewhere other than my current institution). Is it recommended to cold-call or send emails asking professors or researchers at other institutions around the world for an opportunity to work with them? In what other way can I find a position for this summer?
I am specifically looking at institutions in the US, Europe, Japan, Taiwan and China.
Thank you :)<issue_comment>username_1: Since you mention a broad range of countries, I think you should first try to get information about the typical yearly schedule, because in some countries summer may be a busy period.
For instance, since a couple years, I've started to receive emails from random students asking to do a summer internship with me. But from June to July, I'm busy with exams, workshops and conferences, in August I'm on vacation, and in September I have again exams and conferences. So, I usually decline any request in that period. I know other European groups with a similar situation.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Sure, just reach out with SHORT emails. I would not expect too much reply since it is a cold call but "a shot on net is always a good play". Mention a sentence or two to indicate you looked at their webpage or pubs and have an interest in their work.
In addition, try to send some inquiries (similar format) where have some connection (e.g. you mentioned friends had visited specific places in Italy, England). Professors like to get some "pipeline". (E.g. "we have had periodic Elbonia Uni students".) Just gives some slight familiarity for you/them and some feeling for them that they may get more positive experiences in future. However, note that expectations for undergrad visitors is not high.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/06
| 1,724
| 7,421
|
<issue_start>username_0: In websites such as publons, reviewers can declare that they reviewed papers for some journals. In addition, they are encouraged to upload the full text of their review.
On one hand, the review content might be useful for readers of the paper: it contains ideas and perspectivese that are often not visible in the final manuscript.
On the other hand, if the review content is made public, the author will know exactly who the reviewer is, which apparently harms the blind-review process.
Are there any other advantages/disadvantages to publishing review contents publicly?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't have a good solution/answer, but think the following should be considered.
If you ask different publishers whether publishing blind reviews is appropriate you will likely get different answers.
The timing of publishing such reviews surely matters. If you publish reviews after *final* resolution of the paper's fate, compromising the blind nature is probably moot. Neither the author(s) nor the reviewer can influence the other improperly.
Longer term, if the blind review process is undermined by (too early) publishing of reviews, something will be lost and games will be played that undermine the whole process. There are valid reasons for blind reviewing. Among other things, saying something bad about a paper's methodology or results will often, I think, be misinterpreted as saying something bad about the author(s). This could have very bad long-term consequences when people start to argue in public about things that should have been settled.
My personal view is that a paper should stand on its own, without the commentary of others. If it doesn't, then it isn't a very good paper, and those issues should have been settled during review and rewrite phases.
I wouldn't publish any review, but that is just a personal choice that I'm not yet willing to recommend to others. But if it is done, I'd suggest that it be with the knowledge and permission of all parties: reviewer, author(s), publisher.
On the other hand, I don't think there is any issue about someone who previously reviewed a paper commenting in public on the *final* version of the paper. You would certainly be permitted to do that had you not been a reviewer.
---
For what it is worth, there is an alternate process for improving papers that is used in the patterns community to improve patterns papers. It is called the [Shepherding Process](https://www.hillside.net/documents/language-of-shepherding.pdf) (warning: PDF). The paper at the link explains the process, expressed as a pattern language. The key element is that it is not blind reviewing, but a cooperative, iterative, process to improve the paper.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> the author will know exactly who the reviewer is, which apparently harms the blind-review process.
>
>
>
To consider the advantages and disadvantages, I think it helps to understand the motivations behind the blinding. In the case of the author not knowing the reviewer's identity, the reason is to allow the reviewer to be frank. For example, if you're an Early-Career Researcher, you might not want a more senior researcher to know you criticised their work. By hiding your identity, some of the pressure to withhold criticism is removed.
Thus, to consider whether you'd want to make your review contents public, you should consider whether you would mind the author knowing your identity, and whether that would affect how well you can do your job as a reviewer.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I believe that there are many sides to this, but overall I think that the "sanctity" of blind review should be maintained. In either case, I think that at most, one can allow access to the review content, but *not* reveal the identities of the reviewers, nor the **review scores**.
While it is true that one can sometimes guess a reviewer's identity from the content of the reviews, I think that this is not an issue because
1. It's still a guess, and more importantly
2. If your review potentially reveals your identity (say by you unnecessarily suggesting all of your papers as ones that should be cited), then it's a bad review, and the practice should be discouraged.
Review scores are often useful to weed out clear accepts and clear rejects, but become really hazy when talking about borderline cases (see further comments below).
Having gotten that out of the way -
**Pros of publishing reviews:**
* It encourages more careful reviews: if I know that my reviews will be public I'm encouraged to make sure that they're more careful.
* It discourages abusive and unprofessional language in reviews. Ad hominem attacks in reviews do happen, and are a bad practice.
* It encourages editors/program chairs to select reviewers who do a good job. I've seen reviewers submitting a single paragraph; this is not ok.
**Cons of publishing reviews:**
* It encourages reviewers hold back and not write scathing/overly gushing reviews even if they truly feel strongly about the paper.
* It may render papers less readable, as authors would rely on the reviews to clarify what they should have (as username_1 mentions)
* Reviewers will worry about their identity being compromised, and thus early career researchers may not want to review at all/write very positive reviews.
* It may cause community dissent: interdisciplinary communities host several small sub-communities, each with its own publication norms and acceptance thresholds. This is already a major issue, that will be further exacerbated by revealing reviews (this may be a pro, not entirely decided!).
I think that one of the main reasons I'm against revealing reviews is because the review process, unfortunately, involves a lot of random luck. As the [NIPS experiment shows](http://blog.mrtz.org/2014/12/15/the-nips-experiment.html), PCs can widely disagree on a lot of papers. It is important to note that there is general agreement on what are *very bad* papers and *very good* papers, but a significant chunk of them are borderline cases that could swing either way. I think that showing the reviews for borderline cases might be a bad idea, as it would cause a lot of dissent in the community ("why did my paper, with one weak reject, one weak accept and one accept, got rejected but my paper with better scores got accepted?"). I think that the "clear accept" papers can be easily listed with their reviews; the others? Not so sure...
Overall, I think that presenting reviews might be good in *some cases* and should involve the informed consent of *both the authors and all reviewers*. However, I worry about it becoming a norm. Paraphrasing a bit, review decisions are like sausages: it's better not to see how they're made.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: As argued in username_2's answer, anonymity of the reviewer is a good thing, at least in some cases.
It could be argued that making *some* reviews public already reveals information that harms the anonymity of all other peer reviewers: I know that prof. X would probably make his review public if he reviewed my paper, he did not, hence he is not the reviewer, and it's more likely that it's dr. Y instead. Bayes theorem and all the like. So, if we follow this argument, making *any* review public is harmful for the blind review process and should be avoided.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/06
| 707
| 2,959
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have recently heard a few independent rumors about massive collusion amongst reviewers in major AI/ML conferences. The way this works is that a large group of program committee (PC) members start a chat group (on WhatsApp/Telegram etc.) and share their assigned papers; other members of the group flag papers that are theirs and get the "insiders" to score them higher.
To make things concrete, Alice and Bob start a chat where both share their assigned papers. Alice sees that Bob's batch contains one of her papers, and asks Bob to write a glowing review of that paper.
Are these rumors substantiated? Has anyone else heard of this going on? If it is as widespread as I was led to believe, what does this mean for the review process in these conferences and what countermeasures can we take?<issue_comment>username_1: These are rumours and hearsay, as long as you do not have proof. If you have proof, it is a *major* scandal.
It is highly unethical to share papers sent to you for review unless you are permitted to delegate, in which case, that has to happen with discretion. Effectively, you are to treat a submitted paper as non-existing outside the purposes of the review/selection process (and I do not consider review trades/deals as legitimate).
I would not be surprised if there are *some* people who do that; if caught, they are likely to be officially blacklisted as reviewers. As far as to say this is a systemic approach, I am not aware of any evidence for this in strong conferences, in fact, all my personal experience points to rather the opposite. The reputation loss for a good conference would be irreversible. A single substantiated leak of such activity supported on a near-systemic level would be fatal and possibly irrecoverable.
Caveat: AI/ML has very recently experienced an explosive growth. It may be that, together with ensuing increased competitiveness, this has washed up some individuals of questionable integrity which instigate and/or take part in activities as described by OP. If that is the case, this is the time to act and nip these activities in the bud.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The top AI/ML conferences like NIPS have something like 2500 reviewers. There will probably be some bad apples in there who engage in the sort of behavior you describe. However, I would be shocked if this is happening at a large scale. The conference organizers would take action if they were aware of any such activities.
It sounds like you have no evidence of this. Frankly, it sounds like a typical conspiracy theory. Perhaps someone wishes to explain why their papers never get in but those from X, Y and Z always do, and decides that X, Y, and Z must be colluding. The true explanation will be a lot more mundane -- it's probably just that certain groups and people have more experience and have learned the "tricks of the trade" needed to publish papers.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2019/02/06
| 600
| 2,692
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am interested in a tenure-track position at a university with 9 months hard money and 3 months soft money during the summer (by this I mean something between a liberal arts college and an R1 research institution). However, I'm concerned about my lack of teaching experience. I was a TA for some lab courses in grad school but that's about it. Now as a postdoc, would mentoring a summer undergraduate student help my application in the "teaching" qualifications that hiring committees look for?<issue_comment>username_1: If this is all you've got that go ahead and put it in your applications. However, you'll still look very inexperienced in teaching in comparison with applicants who've actually taught classes.
The question is about teaching experience and positions in the US at institutions that are somewhere between liberal arts colleges and R1 universities. The question doesn't mention the discipline, and this could be important.
I've chaired several tenure track search committees in mathematics over the last few years at such an institution (my institution is a "School of Mines".) We get hundreds of applications for every tenure track position and everyone we've hired recently has had significant teaching experience, typically including working as a TA during graduate school and then doing additional teaching of classes as part of postdoc or visiting assistant professor positions for one or more years.
In my experience, new tenure-track hires in other science and engineering disciplines tend to have somewhat less teaching experience than in mathematics. However, I'd say that most new hires at my institution have at least one or more semesters of experience teaching classes.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If this is in the US, and maybe elsewhere, it would be a positive item in your cv. I'll note that many, perhaps most, people in various fields who are able to go direct from graduate school to tenure-track positions have very little actual teaching experience. Whether such a direct move is common in your place and field depends on many things. I know that a typical fresh doctorate holder in Europe is likely to have quite a bit of experience already.
This varies by field, of course, and is possibly changing over time. As with any other application, make your case. No single thing will necessarily be the "slam-dunk" nor the door-slammer. You need to build a complete picture that points to your success and your willingness to learn and adapt.
But the postdoc itself and the teaching experience are both positive factors. Different institutions will value them differently, of course.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/02/06
| 4,581
| 18,105
|
<issue_start>username_0: I found that a Ph.D. student, recently graduated, plagiarized over a dozen passages from a book I based on my own Ph.D. dissertation of some years ago.
Their dissertation is on the Internet, which is how I became aware of the plagiarism. I am in the US, I should say, while the student’s university is in another country (not a third-world country, as someone asked, and it is one with rules similar to those in the US about plagiarism).
In most instances the student cited me as a source at the end of sometimes long, closely paraphrased passages. I believe this still constitutes plagiarism in the form of "excessive paraphrasing."
As UNC-Chapel Hill [notes](https://guides.lib.unc.edu/c.php?g=9028&p=45252), for example:
>
> Even if you cite your source, paraphrasing can still be plagiarism if all you do is rearrange the author's words, delete a phrase or two, or insert a few synonyms and claim the passage as your own.
>
>
>
When I reported the student to their dissertation committee chairperson, nothing happened. The chairperson did not even report the matter as required to the administration.
Dissatisfied, I took the matter to the university's director of student ethics, who told me I had a strong case not only for plagiarism, but for unprofessional conduct. The director assigned a random professor to investigate, who to my surprise absolved the student of wrongdoing. The only reason given was lack of evidence of intent to deceive.
Again dissatisfied, I took the matter to the president of the university, who agreed to hear my concern. Once I revealed the nature of that concern, however, the president no longer responded to me. Even the president's assistant, whom the president had included in the discussion, no longer responded.
I have been careful not to come across as a loon (between the president and his assistant, for example, I sent a mere four emails, only two of which were follow-ups saying "I haven't heard from you: can you confirm receipt?") In short, I think I have responded as any rational person might in such a situation.
I should add I am an experienced scholar widely known in my field. (Granted, it's a narrow field.) But because I am no longer affiliated with a university, I have no one to represent me. (My publisher did contact the student formally and threaten legal action, but, again, only if the student should publish the plagiarized text.)
I was told by an attorney friend there is no point involving attorneys because there is no material loss on my part. If, however, the student publishes the dissertation as a book, then an attorney could be involved, even if the loss involved is negligible. (We aren't talking <NAME>, after all, but obscure academic works.)
My question is: at what point should I give up seeking justice? (I would have been content with the student merely rewriting the paraphrased material – but discussions never reached the subject of remediation. That's all I really want to achieve, and I think having been caught and having to revise the text would have been punitive enough for the student.)<issue_comment>username_1: You seem to be confusing two things. Copyright is about words. Plagiarism is about ideas. If you have something copyrighted (almost anything you write and publish) copying your words is possibly a violation. The other paper may be have overstepped the bounds of copyright here.
But if they credit you with the underlying ideas behind the words, then it isn't plagiarism and is probably why people stop responding when you explain what happened. If the other person says or implies "these are my ideas" when, in fact, they are yours, they have plagiarized and that is true even if they use *none* of your words to express the idea.
But if you are credited, it just isn't plagiarism. A reader of the other work seem to be able to go to your work to find a more complete context of the idea and the original words.
You may, however, have a copyright claim or not, but it is a completely different issue. It is possible, also, that in publishing a book, you gave your copyright to your publisher. In that case it is up to them to make the claim.
---
Note that I'm not saying that what was done was ok, just that it better to be accurate in a claim of wrongdoing than to be inaccurate and confuse things.
And to be honest, I'm not close enough to the problem nor do I know enough to be able to say definitively that there is wrongdoing here or not. So I reserve judgement on that.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: As you know, there are two separate issues with plagiarism:
* Claiming ideas as one's own
* Claiming words as one's own
You have a legitimate concern about the second -- if this student is going to directly use your words, he needs to use quotes. Attempts to get around this by making one or two insignificant changes are not appropriate.
That said, I can understand why the president of the university didn't want to get involved -- as academic crimes go, this one is quite minor. I agree that the "lack of intent to deceive" ruling was erroneous, which is unfortunate; getting the student to re-write the content, with no other penalty, would have been a far more appropriate outcome.
>
> At what point should I give up seeking justice?
>
>
>
I think it would be appropriate to reach out to the student (I would have started here, personally), their advisor, and the university's ombudsperson (in that order), just asking them to rewrite those sections and to not do it again. If they refuse, it would probably take a lawyer to get them to listen -- but you don't have any damages (not even to your reputation), so that seems a bit excessive in this case.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: There are two kinds of plagiarism:
* **of ideas / scientific plagiarism** (fully solved by a citation of the original work). username_1's answers here and [on a followup question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/124555/why-is-plagiarising-words-such-a-big-deal/124566#124566) have some good insight into why this is such a big deal (e.g. for future scholars wanting to know the scientific context in which something was written).
* **of the wording**. Taking credit for the wording doesn't hurt the scientific value of the work (and thus is less serious), but still makes the author look like a more skilled wordsmith than they are. (Unless they do it badly/clumsily; see [@Ben's answer on the followup](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/124555/why-is-plagiarising-words-such-a-big-deal/124559#124559).)
Aside from plagiarism (taking false credit), this also violates the <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_rights> of the creator, specifically the right of attribution of your wording. Some countries give legal weight to the moral rights of the creator beyond just the usual fixed-term / dollar-value copyright. (And if the work was published, could also be traditional economic copyright infringement)
---
Citing and then slightly paraphrasing instead of quoting with quote marks implies that the idea is from the cited work, but the wording is fully *original*. If that's not the case, it's a violation of the moral right of attribution of the original author *for the wording*, as well as plagiarism.
And if published, also becomes an issue of traditional copyright violation and suing for damages. If that's not the case, and only the moral right of the author have been violated, I'm not clear on what if any legal penalties there might actually be. And it's still plagiarism, which is a separate thing.
The student has violated your *moral right* of attribution for your wording of the explanation. *This* is probably a large part of what's bothering you so much, not (just) the plagiarism.
===========================================================================================================================================================================================
Perhaps you didn't get anywhere when contacting people if they weren't clear you were *not* talking about "scientific plagiarism" (lack of citation), which is the much more serious issue that would definitely warrant contacting people up to and including the head of the university.
In hindsight you might have had better luck if you could start fresh after reading these answers, but at this point I think the ship has sailed on getting the passages actually quoted, or more fully rewritten (at least as an erratum). Or at least an apology, which might have been all that was feasible given the restrictions on (not) modifying university archives after the fact, even to fix errors.
(I wrote the rest of this answer before looking into moral rights as something separate from copyright and plagiarism.)
---
Plagiarism of wording is a different kind of offence from copyright infringement: the victims are people that are tricked into being impressed by the person's ability to express ideas with words, when in fact it wasn't actually their word-crafting ability that resulted in the clear explanation found in the work they wrote.
In copyright infringement, *you* would be the victim, and suffer damages from someone else profiting from your creative work. (Presumably instead of you, this is the main point of copyright law.)
Since they cite the work they're paraphrasing, they're not trying to hide the source. Anyone who looks will see that their wording looks like yours, but yours must be the original because they cite you.
---
The student *has* done something wrong, but it's hard to find any way to say that they've wronged *you* directly. Their writing doesn't diminish your reputation, it just makes you unhappy with them for trying to take advantage of your work to achieve their goal (getting a degree?) with less effort than they should have needed. i.e. trying to cheat *the system*, not cheat you.
Keep that in mind when pursuing "justice". It's obviously more personal to you when someone passes off your words as their own, with only minor rephrasing, but in terms of any academic or legal consequences this is probably not too different from pursuing a random stranger for littering in a public park. Or maybe for running slightly inside the lines in a race (which you *weren't* competing in) at a sporting even. Or pick any minor offense where society / the public is the victim.
---
I'm talking about plagiarism of wording like you discuss, not of ideas / scientific data / results. Again that's similar in that the original source isn't damaged in a legal sense by the plagiarizer, but it does much more damage to science as a whole than passing off someone else's wording as your own.
---
**To help separate plagiarism from copyright infringement, consider a case of someone trying to pass off a piece of old public-domain work as their own.**
It's still plagiarism even if *nobody* knows who wrote the original passage. e.g. an anonymous work, or something like a folk tale / oral tradition.
Let's take Shakespeare's writing as an example (and pretend that it wouldn't be recognized right away by someone). They aren't harming the bard. (Well you could imagine slight indirect harm if they end up associating Shakespeare's phrasing of something with clumsy un-enjoyable work, so people enjoy the original less when they read / hear it.)
But even if they directly harming Shakespeare's reputation, that's not what plagiarism is about: it's about taking undeserved credit. It's not solely up to the person who's words were copied to enforce anything, it's up to *anyone* who notices or is made aware to call out the plagiarizer. If the plagiarizer is working on behalf of anyone (e.g. a speechwriter), they might be fired for making the person giving the speech look bad.
(Or before publishing, up to their editors or anyone else to stop them from trying to commit accidental or intentional plagiarism.)
In your case, the people you contacted should have got the student to rewrite or actually quote the passages. I think you've done your part by calling attention to the plagiarism. If you want to *publicly* call attention to it in some way, that would be the last step that would be worth taking. But honestly it does sound like pretty minor plagiarism, and making too much of a stink would (unfortunately) be more likely to make you look petty and vindictive in some people's eyes.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: *Since my comments were not addressed and have now been deleted, I will post an answer.*
I don't really know what you are hoping to achieve here. I suspect the university also doesn't know what you are hoping to achieve and that explains why they aren't responding.
You say you are seeking "justice", which is a vague and ominous term. You later clarify that your goal is just to have the student rewrite the offending passages, but that you never discussed this with the university.
Generally, once something has been archived (such as a thesis being accepted by the university library), it cannot be edited. To do so would undermine the integrity of the archive. Errata can be published, but the original item remains. My own PhD thesis contains some typos that I would like to fix, but I am not allowed to.
I have heard of a story of a PhD thesis that became crucial evidence in a large lawsuit. Even the typos were scrutinized in court. A librarian was flown around the world to swear to the integrity and availability of the archive. This stuff matters.
Hence I think your desire to have the passages rewritten is not realistic.
It may be physically possible for this to be done, but that does not mean it is allowed.
Thus I can only interpret your quest for justice as a desire to see the student's degree revoked. I don't see what other action the university could take. That is a very drastic step and not one the university would take lightly.
It sounds like the university conducted an investigation and concluded that there was insufficient grounds for degree revocation. *That does not mean that they absolved the student of wrongdoing,* only that the wrongdoing was not sufficient to merit that punishment.
While I do not know the details, it sounds like the plagiarism was on the minor end of the scale. The original source was cited. The passages were paraphrased, rather than direct quotes. Your original question stated it was "over a dozen passages", which sounds like it is only a small part of the thesis.
Potentially the student didn't know that this is not allowed. Such misunderstandings of academic ethics are not uncommon.
For a degree to be revoked, there needs to be much more than a minor mistake or misunderstanding.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: You've unfortunately equated justice with a conviction rather than with recognition of wrong
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are two issues with that PhD candidate (call him X)'s thesis:
1. Did it contain inappropriate excessive paraphrasing?
2. If so, is X culpable (legally/in a disciplinary sense)?
It seems you've demanded that (2.) be answered positively, and mostly ignored (1.) - so much so that you haven't even mentioned whether the investigator found that the thesis did include excessive paraphrasing.
>
> I have been careful not to come across as a loon (between the president and his assistant, for example, I sent a mere four emails, only two of which were follow-ups saying "I haven't heard from you: can you confirm receipt?")
>
>
>
Perhaps, but it seems you may have come off as a revenge-seeker.
>
> In short, I think I have responded as any rational person might in such a situation.
>
>
>
1. People are not rational; or rather, it's a problematic concept.
2. Many "rational" people would have behaved differently; some would not care about the excessive paraphrasing at all.
>
> I should add I am an experienced scholar widely known in my field.
>
>
>
Then it reflects poorly on you to pursue this too far - regardless of whether you've been wronged or not. This, as opposed to someone whose sole significant contribution has been thus plagiarized.
>
> My publisher did contact the student formally and threaten legal action, but, again, only if the student should publish the plagiarized text.
>
>
>
(Balk.)
>
> I was told by an attorney friend there is no point involving attorneys because there is no material loss on my part.
>
>
>
You needed an attorney friend to tell you that?
---
Bottom line:
>
> **My question is: at what point should I give up seeking justice?**
>
>
>
**At *this* point.**
You've not damaged your reputation so far, except perhaps mildly with the president and his assistant. But if you continue pursuing this - you probably will.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: To answer your question: "**now**".
You've been thoughtful in the process. And your question is well written-rings true. I buy that the plagiarism was blatant.
Unfortunately, it is a fact that academic "policing" can be weak in many aspects. You've done the responsible thing to bring it up. This is better than just turning the other cheek (would bug you if you hadn't done it). But obsessing on it, given a process has run is not worth it either. At this point, will just distract you.
Hopefully just having the process run on the miscreant has put a scare in him.
Unless there is some serious ongoing situation of continued theft (future behavior versus you), I would not pursue it further.
The obvious ways to pursue it further are legal (expensive) or social (e.g. blog posts, Youtube videos with you reading the passages, etc.). Personally I wouldn't bother. Think you have done enough and the ongoing danger (of new thefts) seems low. Also the impacts are really not that serious financially--not like plagiarism in personal training and nutrition writing. It's not like the guy is becoming a rival to you based on his writing. Not even in a journal. (Note, I'm not excusing the sin.)
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/02/06
| 1,896
| 8,126
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a starting graduate student in math. Without a doubt I'm not a genius or even that smart, and that creates a serious problem: I often lose my nerve while doing research or studying other people's paper. I feel that some of those people (if not most) are just too good and I crack under the pressure to produce works of similar quality. I know the right thing to do is to be "brave" and power through and see where I end up. But this issue of "cowardice" has severely hurt my productivity. Do successful researchers have same problem or are they just totally engrossed with their work and do not care about anything else? How can I somehow be more disciplined with my emotions?<issue_comment>username_1: I think that you may experience what can be characterized as [Frustration](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frustration).
>
> frustration is a common emotional response to opposition, related to
> anger, annoyance and disappointment.
>
>
>
As you're reading scientific papers, you're on higher level of scientific work than is expected from graduate student - I did not read too much papers during my MSc.
And it depends also what is expected of you by your colleagues, so compare whether your frustration is not combined with [Imposter syndrome](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impostor_syndrome) mentioned in comments.
E.g. Authors usually spent several months or years to produce some results and to write a paper. So understanding the paper may take also some time to readers. Other problem is that some papers are so brief thus it's rather a problem of the authors if they can't explain their scientific problem or solution to somebody outside their domain niche.
I have been experiencing frustration personally many times during my MSc, PhD and my current postdocs projects. When it happened I gave myself a time limit. So during that time limit it's good to consult the problem with somebody else. If I don't make any progress and frustration continues after the time limit, I give up and move to somewhere else.
The limit and tolerance to frustration is very subjective. Nobody should expect you to grasp all problems and in short time. My oppinion is that mental health is more important than scientific achievements.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: There are a number of strands to your situation:
1. The normal fear of being "found out" after stepping up a grade in education
2. Over-awe at the academic work of others in your field
3. Learning to "read" papers written in academese
4. The usual morale cycles that all people in all vocations feel
5. The need to refresh, recall who we are and what we are trying to do in life
1A. Almost everyone (even the most cynical) starting graduate study has an initial fear of finding the going too much for them. This is a natural and even rational reaction to their new situation. You say that you're not a super smart person. Fine. (Same here!) But you got to be *selected* as someone adequate for graduate school by professors who have been through it. That means that your selectors thought you had what it takes to succeed here: the mind, the will, the interest, imagination, energy, stamina, perseverence and so on. Now, you have to start looking back at your own journey, appreciate your achievement and start believing a bit more in yourself. In the beginning it's going to feel like blind faith as you haven't been here in graduate school before. But that's just a new location. Math is still math, exploring is exploring, reasoning is reasoning and good honest work leads to progress in this environment as in all others before.
2A. Most of the work in your field will have been done by more experienced researchers: for that fact alone they *should* be on a higher level. But the best of ideas are essentially simply ones that apply existing principles to new observations/situations/problems, or at least *uninvestigated* ones. Of course, some efforts work out well, more moderately so and others lead to nowhere too useful. But you just have to keep trying to apply the best in your own nature to understand more of nature itself.
None of us can really think like someone else - unless it so happens that they look at the world much the same way as we do. So we always have to find approaches that are the 'natural' ones for us - regardless of how many eyebrows are raised by others commenting on our efforts. For this reason - and not for any reasons of vanity or conceit - we have to find our own approach and follow it at our own natural tempo. Finding one's own perspective on the research topic is really the most important aspect of graduate study, more important that success (i.e. showy results) or failure (not so showy results) in the research itself. So stop comparing yourself with others. Just get your head down and work on steadily in your own way.
3A. I don't know ANYONE who hasn't got frustrated at poorly written academic papers, especially those in the scientific field. When we finally get what the author is trying to say, we think: Christ - is that all they mean ? It could've been said so much more simply! And it so often could. Even in the old days, an academic's reputation depended a lot on the quantity of papers put out rather than the quality of each. With little new to say, those authors often tend to dwell on obscure but ultimately irrelevant side detail. Today's university researchers are under even more peer pressure so expect no less of head-scratching at their published work. There is also a lot of **protectionism** in academic life, i.e. published work intended to suggest to us how important and impressive the conclusions are without revealing *anything* about the true perspective that enabled such insights. Personally, I found this aspect of university life the most depressing. I hope your department has few of this ilk.
You must also realise that while many papers will be recommended to you at the outset of your research, only a small few of these will be vital. The rest will be like postscripts to the important ones or sometimes a sort of copycat paper from a 'rival' researcher in the same field. Some will be specious, some honest but wrong and some nonsense. You'll need to develop a method of processing papers efficiently before they are studies in depth. Most colleges provide a sort of intro-to-research type of course that should cover efficient paper analysis.
4A. However good we are at our jobs, there will be times when things will just happen awkwardly, sometimes even several things not working out as they might at the same time! That is just as true in research as in all other areas of life. We all know people whose first client was impossible to please or whose married life began with a lot of misfortune. The thing with random misfortune is to just settle down our emotions and then resume our work at a careful pace. Eventually things have to come right. Really bad days when *everything* seems to go wrong can happen. In these times it might be no harm to go for a few beers and a good night's rest.
5A. Most students became very cynical after the first few months in college. After 4 years of a primary degree, it might be better for your own emotional balance to spend a year or two in the real world of work before doing graduate school. You have decided to go "straight through" and that is your choice. But don't underestimate the effect of the years of effort on your morale and work-life balance. Of course, you want to do well for your own sake, perhaps for the sake of your supportive parents too. (If you have a good relationship with your parents, try to call them every so often - you'll feel better after it and as they know your nature best, they may be able to advise you best) But watch the needle on the morale fuel tank. Take time out periodically to refresh yourself. How to do this depends on your own needs and what ever activity or company will recenter you. But try to do it regularly as morale always tells in the end and since campus life only seems to cater to it in a very limited way.
Upvotes: -1
|
2019/02/06
| 2,960
| 12,702
|
<issue_start>username_0: I received an offer for five years of guaranteed PhD funding. However, various sources have been prognosticating another recession for sometime soon.
Between a science-hostile administration and a recession; I would be worried about funding to NSF and NIH.
Does a (university) department guaranteeing funds to their students mean that those dollars already exist in their bank account? Even five years of a stipend is not much compared to the greater cost of research in my field. Is there any chance a few years of slow awards could affect graduate student funding?<issue_comment>username_1: I'm pretty sure that no US agency would be permitted to reserve funds for five years. Appropriations are for one year only. A serious recession (a la 1929) would disrupt more than the funding, of course.
On the other hand, the agencies are normally pretty conservative when they make such commitments. But there may be a different president and will be a different congress by the end of that period.
And if a grant is made as a *lump sum* it will be paid out in one year to the university who will then administer the grant and guarantee its terms are met. Most US government grants are, in fact, administered this way, as are many private grants. The university charges the grant a fee (overhead) to cover administration costs. At that point the university holds the funds. But I have no information on how prevalent lump-sum grants are.
You can find [more information here for the NSF](https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/gpg/nsf04_23/5.jsp).
If they wind up "short" on funds they will most likely just not award new grants, rather than cut off older ones. So it is pretty secure, but not absolutely secure. They will almost certainly have some money, but note the "hedge" words.
But my advice is to live your life making the best decisions based on current evidence rather than trying to forecast economic events too far out. If you refuse an award, thinking that it might end before your needs do then you are unlikely to come out ahead.
I will also note that in the worst case, universities will also most likely try to fill in gaps in funding as best they can, but, again, with no absolute guarantees.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Large universities that are offering guaranteed funds often don't guarantee where those funds will come from, simply because they cannot: the money doesn't exist yet. In my graduate program, this is what guaranteed funding meant:
1. Your first year was covered on a T32 training grant from NIH. This allowed you to rotate in different laboratories without those labs needing funding for you. The NIH provides these grants specifically for this purpose. If all the training grant slots were filled, some students would be admitted directly to a lab that was able to fund them starting their first year.
2. After rotating, you would join a lab. This lab would basically need to have funding for you, or else you would have to teach. It is important for students and their PIs to talk about funding, since some labs have new grants or several grants and can pretty much slot out a PhD student's entire time in the lab; others have funding expiring soon and the student and advisor need to have plans if that funding falls through.
3. At any point, most students would apply for outside funding, and some would get it. Even though funding was guaranteed, applying for and receiving grants looks good for your resume.
4. Students were required to TA at least one semester; many would TA more if they were interested in teaching or to cover breaks in funding in their labs. Usually these would be negotiated with the students and students could time their TAship to coincide with a low funding period in their lab if necessary.
5. In rare cases, students in labs that failed to secure funds continued their research with funds from another lab, perhaps changing their research project. The program would consider these hardships when granting the PhD degree, and it might result in a thesis that's less cohesive - that's just part of life.
Note that most of these steps didn't really involve the guarantee, it just involved there already being money around the labs that make up the program to fund students. **Guaranteed meant that the program would be your advocate and would find you funding of some sort if other sorts fell through.** They would find a way to get you a TAship if you couldn't get an RA. They would ask someone else to give up their TAship for you if they could get funding from their lab. They would find a way to stretch funds from one part of the budget to another to make sure you graduate. They would use training grant money for you to finish your final semester. The money wasn't in a pot set aside for you at the outset, but in the fungible world of money, the university was committing to support you. Guaranteed did not mean you could work in any lab of your choice and work towards any research project of your choosing, but it meant that lack of funding would not be an absolute reason for you to be unable to continue in the program over your first 5 years.
**Every program will differ in terms of what types of support are available: TAships, RAships, PAships, fellowships and other funds. Funding guarantees are important, but so are the sources of those funds, and this should be an open conversation throughout the application process.**
As raised in the comments, there are situations where even 'guaranteed' funding can be revoked, since the guarantee almost certainly comes with basic strings attached such as continued progress in the program, not violating a code of conduct, etc. That said, this sort of guarantee from a reputable university program is **putting their reputation on the line** to get you funded. They will only break this promise if necessary or justified. No employer is likely to ever provide you a stronger guarantee.
I started graduate school around the last recession; ultimately, the recession and associated funding cuts meant in some of the years after me the program admitted fewer students than typical over a couple years, but no one went unsupported.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: **From a practical standpoint, the key thing is to figure out how stable the funding is at a given university department and lab group.** Some universities are plush enough with Federal funding and implicit undergrad subsidy of research that they can/will take care of you regardless of if your prof runs out of money. A few won't or will expect you to teach for the money.
Note, this has always been the case, regardless of overall government outlays. In other words the variability of paramater X, of how much science funding there is in the nation is a lot less important than the more granular variability of funding at your advisor/department level.
**Talk to students in specific groups and departments and ask them about funding, how precarious it is, etc.** (Yes, current stability may not mean it is always that way, but if you already hear occasional issues or the lack of them, that's helpful to know.) By and large, I find the hard sciences much more stable and well funded than the soft sciences or liberal arts. If you are at a top 25 R1 department school in a hard science, the likelihood of funding issues is low. But you will find some differences from school to school (or advisor to advisor) on how plush they are.
Every 4 years there is a Presidential election. Every 2 years House and 1/3 Senate. And every year a new budget bill. And about every 5 years (plus or minus quite a bit) we have a recession. So it's really impossible to predict what the situation will be in the future. All that said, overall government funding of R&D is much more stable than what you are implying in the predicate of your question. (Now...selling bulletproof vests and Humvee armor...that is a very boom and bust business, pun sadly noted.)
**Finally an important financial question which you should push for, that affects you much more than grant stability: ask and find out typical times to finish the Ph.D.** My advice is to prioritize advisors and departments with a reputations for getting people done in less than 5 years. 4 years used to be nominal in the US, but now is considered fast. You don't want to be a grad student for 7 years. You're not really "studying" after your first year or two. You're just a poorly paid employee with none of the rights of an employee (albeit with more ability to goof off or spent long times on projects that interest you).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: As I am an administrator, I will offer a more specific view on the pressures of how to fund a student within the context of a portfolio.
Your funding will most likely be classified as one or more of the following funding sources, subject to change at any time:
* Sponsored
+ Federal
+ Non-Federal (industry or foundation)
* Gift
* Non-sponsored ("hard money" or university funds)
+ Endowment
+ Operating budget
Institutions typically have a way of paying students such that there is a pattern. E.g., the expectation may be that the operating budget will pay for first and second years in addition to anyone who is a teaching fellow (teaching fellows are often doing research as well, and may end up "split-coded", i.e., two funding sources). Then the PI is responsible for years 3 and beyond. How the PI pays for the student is their own responsibility. This may entail startup funds (which may be provided by the endowment) or sponsored funding. They may push you to get a fellowship (GRFP or F-series for NIH)
These funds are subject to different funding issues. If you are on federal sponsored funds, it is possible for a project to be terminated. It's not common, but it is a possibility. If you are on DOD funding, this can be because the sponsor doesn't want to continue the work. DOD tends to **obligate funding** in small increments so that they have this option at the moment they want. NIH obligates funding annually pending progress on the project. NSF is harder to predict. It ranges from one year to the entire project (usually maxed at 5 years).
NIH funding tends to be awarded but cut in certain ways. E.g., NIH has [stopped funding inflation](https://grants.nih.gov/grants/financial/fiscal_policy_faq.htm) since 2012. The salary caps for PIs has not been increased as expected, because they are actually part of the Executive Schedule, and tied to the United States Code that sets federal salaries for the executive branch. You can see how political it will be to increase an NIH PI's salary--many other political roles would be increased as well. This is not the case at other agencies.
In terms of the size of budgets, NIH tends to have larger budgets because of their focus on healthcare. Meanwhile, NSF is frequently cut because they focus on basic research, which does not sell as well to the general public. Think of it this way-- everyone may support the development of lasers (applied research), but few people understand and support the funding of work pertaining to the physics of molecules (basic research). This happens to be the crucial work that results in the possibility of laser development, but such research is harder for the public to understand and support. Politicians run on researching the cure for cancer not describing string theory.
Unfortunately for basic research scientists, there is rarely a major payoff (program income or royalties) from such discoveries. Even when the basic research enables applied research, the profits are made from the applied research and those folks keep a lot of the profit from the endeavor. Furthermore, academia tends to avoid applied research in general as a matter of course. This is one of the reasons that PIs may provide basic research for an industry sponsor who works with DOD on an applied research project. This structure is becoming much more common, particularly for PIs who are otherwise locked into NSF.
If you end up on endowment funds, be advised that the existence of those funds are more volatile. The PIs who were obligated funding by the institution will be first in line to receive remaining funds and new programs will be the first to be shut off.
There is no such thing as a "guaranteed" funding source really, it's more that the university is diverse enough that they feel comfortable guaranteeing your support. Unless you are worried about the overall financial health of the institution, you should focus on your PI's ability to procure funding. You can actually look them up in NIH or NSF's systems to see what they have received.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/02/07
| 665
| 2,748
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently a first year graduate student in mathematics in the United States. After having completed my requirements for a master's degree, I'm considering moving to a different program, based on reasons I outlined in a previous [question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/119543/moving-to-a-different-phd-program-in-the-united-states).
My question should one necessarily work on a master's report/thesis to boost one's application to enter a different PhD program?
I can probably get a master's degree without having to write a report/thesis as I have already passed some of the qualifying exams at my school.
So, to what extent would having completed a master's thesis help me in switching programs? My interests are a bit broad, and interdisciplinary, so I'm, as of yet, broadly interested in a couple of areas, and not a single, specific area of research. So, I would like to apply to schools that have research groups in at least 1-2 fields of my interest.
Any suggestions on how graduate committees in math or STEM fields view the issue of masters thesis or reports.<issue_comment>username_1: Since the doctorate is about research, having some solid evidence of doing that successfully is a plus. You can change your main focus to another subfield after writing a master's thesis, so don't worry that it will limit you.
But my main question back to you is what you will be doing in the meanwhile if you don't do the thesis. Will it be at least as positive an influence on admissions committees and potential advisors? It seems doubtful, but possible, depending on your situation.
An MS isn't really required for admission to the PhD in the US, but a positive record that predicts success certainly is. Do whatever you can to build that record.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: 1. Definitely get the "en passant" masters if possible (masters that you just submit a form for, based on your coursework). At least you have something. The same would apply if you are in same spot for a degree program. But it's even more important if you are shifting schools (hard to go back for the certificate if you moved on already).
2. I think most places will look at you based on your old record. If it is competitive, the master's thesis is not so important. For example if you are moving towns because your spouse got a job, etc. If instead, you are trying to "move up", some record of work would be helpful. Ideally publications (even small LPUs, but peer reviewed somethings). But a thesis is next best.
3. Obviously the amount of effort involved affects choice to write. If you have a topic and think you can jam out the document quickly, I would be more likely to spend the effort.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/02/07
| 1,398
| 5,710
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm passionate about getting a PhD in Math for a career as a research mathematician and then as an educator working at a community college.
I got A's in community college. I transferred to our local University and for my 1st semester got a 3.67 taking science courses and 300 level math courses. The next semester I got a 4.00 taking more science and math courses. The next year I started exhibiting symptoms of bi-polar and my grades tanked pretty hard. After that I muddled through, graduated with a total GPA of 3.5 and started on a long journey of learning to live and thrive with bi-polar and depression. However, I did probably the dumbest thing ever. I convinced myself that getting a C.S. masters was a prudent idea and proceeded to re-enroll at our University and fail a bunch of CS classes. Now my overall GPA (despite already having graduated) is 3.19. Since then I went into the workforce, decided I really just want to get my PhD in math and teach a community college and have been pursuing that for a year now. In working toward that goal I took an independent study course with one of my professors to refresh my linear algebra and got an A. Then I took graduate level analysis (B+) and graduate level applications of linear algebra (A-). I'm currently in the 2nd semester of graduate level analysis and feel like I've gotten the hang of graduate level course work (I'm confident I'll get an A in this one).
So despite having early success in math (A's in the Calc series and A's in several 300 and 400 level courses) I have what looks like a really really confusing transcript because I tried CS, actually hated it, and go F's in two of those classes. To add to my transcript/GPA concerns I have C's in the undergraduate analysis courses from when bi-polar threw my life off the rails and around the same time got a D in diff-eq (which I retook for an A) and a C in combinatorics.
Now that I'm looking to apply for grad school in Fall 2020 (possibly out of my small state if the program is good) I don't really know how to communicate what probably seems like a very confusing academic record. For what it's worth I have 1 math professor that will write me a good letter of rec, a retired math professor that will write me a good letter of rec, and the P.I. from my internship at a big name research institute that might write me a letter. So at least I have that. But damn, my transcript looks like something that will hurt me without explanation. How do I explain it? Is it possible? Should I reconsider my path? I'm very dedicated to this path but I worry that despite my passion current and ability to pass graduate level courses it won't be enough. Any suggestions on how to explain my transcript would be so wonderful =)
TL;DR - I got good grades at my local Uni in nowhere USA. Then I got bi-polar disorder and so did my grades, then I graduated, then I tried CS and got even crappier grades still. But now I'm doing well and getting better grades in grad-level classes but have no idea how to explain all of this to grad programs I apply to =/<issue_comment>username_1: 1. A research level math degree is not needed or probably even beneficial for teaching in pre-college schooling. Instead of more subject matter schooling, you should be getting training at teaching.
2. If you need more math, it will be an ed degree (or more hopefully) a year or so to get a certificate. The sooner you get into teaching the better. Rambling through more degree programs is avoiding where the rubber hits the road. But even though ed cert programs have parts that are a little daft (pop psych and questionable edufads), the do have one powerful learning area: substitute and trainee teaching. So you will be at the coalface.
3. For school jobs, nobody will care about your varied past. They have people of all walks of life going into teaching. It is more about what have you done lately.
4. (Not meant to cut, but serious direct advice.) If your requests for help or information are anything like this question (verbose, rambling, long paras), you will get little help in the real world. A big part of being a good teacher is being an efficient communicator. Make a little more effort--I bet you can do better.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You need to focus. Why do you think you need a PhD in mathematics? If you plan to be a serious researcher, how do you plan to balance that with working in your under-performing school district? What specific area of math is your intended focus? Are you trying to get into a top 5 program or any program? That also makes a difference. If you can show that you are focused today and have doable plans with a PhD, telling your story won't be as difficult as explaining a low grade in an entry-level math course such as differential calculus. You will have a hard time living that one down. Figure out why you earned a D and how that changed your approach to understanding math. You might want to consider applying to a MS mathematics program and state your intention to seek the PhD at that institution.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Without knowing much about the American realities, I suspect that low GPA will hurt your chances to go to a highly-ranked fancy school, but you will still be a strong candidate for a mid-ranked one, given that you took extra classes and a research internship. First, since you are in touch with some math professors who consider you a good student, talk with them about wanting to do a PhD. They may give you advice or maybe even refer you to someone who is looking for a PhD student. Second don't be discouraged by the first few rejections that you'll inevitably get.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/07
| 703
| 2,991
|
<issue_start>username_0: Someone copied my solution to an assignment without my knowledge, and now I'm accused of directly assisting them by allowing them to copy my work. I was given a formal written warning.
How do I prove that I did not give permission to anyone to copy my work?
I do not know the person. My lecturer held separate interviews with me and the unknown person.<issue_comment>username_1: 1. A research level math degree is not needed or probably even beneficial for teaching in pre-college schooling. Instead of more subject matter schooling, you should be getting training at teaching.
2. If you need more math, it will be an ed degree (or more hopefully) a year or so to get a certificate. The sooner you get into teaching the better. Rambling through more degree programs is avoiding where the rubber hits the road. But even though ed cert programs have parts that are a little daft (pop psych and questionable edufads), the do have one powerful learning area: substitute and trainee teaching. So you will be at the coalface.
3. For school jobs, nobody will care about your varied past. They have people of all walks of life going into teaching. It is more about what have you done lately.
4. (Not meant to cut, but serious direct advice.) If your requests for help or information are anything like this question (verbose, rambling, long paras), you will get little help in the real world. A big part of being a good teacher is being an efficient communicator. Make a little more effort--I bet you can do better.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You need to focus. Why do you think you need a PhD in mathematics? If you plan to be a serious researcher, how do you plan to balance that with working in your under-performing school district? What specific area of math is your intended focus? Are you trying to get into a top 5 program or any program? That also makes a difference. If you can show that you are focused today and have doable plans with a PhD, telling your story won't be as difficult as explaining a low grade in an entry-level math course such as differential calculus. You will have a hard time living that one down. Figure out why you earned a D and how that changed your approach to understanding math. You might want to consider applying to a MS mathematics program and state your intention to seek the PhD at that institution.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Without knowing much about the American realities, I suspect that low GPA will hurt your chances to go to a highly-ranked fancy school, but you will still be a strong candidate for a mid-ranked one, given that you took extra classes and a research internship. First, since you are in touch with some math professors who consider you a good student, talk with them about wanting to do a PhD. They may give you advice or maybe even refer you to someone who is looking for a PhD student. Second don't be discouraged by the first few rejections that you'll inevitably get.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/07
| 626
| 2,907
|
<issue_start>username_0: According to the Global Library Statistics the United States consists of 3793 academic libraries with more than 7 million users. They are visiting their university library like other people the postal service. That means, the users love the library-industrial complex, profit from it and stay there quite often. Most (perhaps all) of the libraries are organized as a non-profit charity organization, that means, the taxpayer is paying the loan of the librarians, the energy costs, the rental fee and the acquisition of new handbooks, journals and CD-Roms, while the students who are reading the information are paying nothing.
Most of the students who are visiting a university library are rich. But they are paying no fee if they are sitting with their notebook in the library and get access to the WLAN connection for browsing in the online-repository. They don't pay a single cent, if they are reading a printed book or if they borrow something. On the other hand, all the libraries are producing large amount of costs. The rooms are provided for masses, the books have to be bought, and the academic journals are subscribed for a special fee. How can it be, that such a large and important business isn't organized as a private company, but is seen as a governmental obligation? Wouldn't it be more efficient, if a capitalistic approach for book lending and local internet-access in the academic library would be used?<issue_comment>username_1: Many academic libraries have access control. They do not let people enter without permission. Some resources are granted free to everyone who requests permission, others are limited to paying students and staff.
Very few people who are not students or staff make use of the resources at academic libraries that are available for free. Collecting payment from those people would not be cost effective when the resources are already available for purchase from the publisher.
Universities often receive subsidies from governments. Offering free resources to the public is one way of indicating to the public they are getting value for their tax money.
Also, capitalism is not always efficient.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: username_1's answer raises some good points, but I think the main problem with *"a capitalistic approach for book lending"* is that it'd incentivize the libraries to mostly stock very cheap and popular books, that they can lend repeatedly. Yet the two primary uses I see in academic libraries are precisely the opposite - making expensive or rare books available to poor students (they're usually not rich!), and providing access to specialized books and research journals. By their very nature these don't exactly have a broad audience. Having such materials somewhere is useful to researchers, students, and the public. Hence the library is usually funded as overhead in universities.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/02/07
| 1,174
| 4,839
|
<issue_start>username_0: This is probably more of a request for an advice than a pinpoint question.
Nevertheless I'm interested in hearing the take of others on the topic.
*Background:*
I have graduated in Germany, 2 years ago, with an excellent master's grade (converting to GPA: 4.0)
in theoretical physics (c.f. [Alleviating Dunning-Kruger effect without running into impostor syndrome](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/45866/alleviating-dunning-kruger-effect-without-running-into-impostor-syndrome))
My work has no practical applications but I liked the theory and math. It took a while to
get started looking for a PhD position, but I've been looking for one for ~ 1 1/2 yrs,
first for publicly listed ones, then actively suggesting research topics myself.
Unfortunately those who were interested in my suggestions had no funding available.
Since my former adviser had no real external relations he could not suggest anybody to
me to check for an open PhD position and I've been looking on my own.
*Status:*
1. Over the past months I have found one position in Austria where the topic fits to a T.
It will be very mathematical and concern fundamental research (light-space-matter) with no immediate practical
applications and possibly no immediate experimental verification (unless I can find
collaborators to perform some experiments).
2. Simultaneously I got an offer for a PhD at a large research association in Germany (Helmholtz society)
in a field I am not familiar, but am interested in. I got the offer after expanding my criteria
though. This position would require a very nice mix of theoretical physics,
mathematics and talking with experimentalists to compare theoretical predictions
to experimental results.
*Problem:*
The position in Austria fits perfectly to my interests, although I have (and always had) doubts as
to whether I can handle the math. BUT funding is definitely available only for 1/2 year. Afterwards
the continuation would be conditioned on a) the adviser being happy with my work and b) whether
further funding will be available.
The position with Helmholtz does not fit perfectly to my physics interests. The funding and
additional benefits are available for 3-4 years and I have no doubts that I can handle the topic.
Its major "Pro" (apart from job security) is the active collaboration
of different research fields, something I've been trying to foster during my M.Sc. (in vain I think).
I can not guarantee, that I will be able to supply the funds (self-fund a part of the PhD) should
the funding run out, so my ideal position becomes quite a risky option. Given the assurance
of availability of funds I would take that position without a second thought, but
I very much want to avoid having to stress myself out after 6 mo. looking for a new position - again.
*Query:*
Is it advisable to choose a PhD position where the topic fits, but the financial security
of the position is questionable?
Or would it be more prudent to select the more secure position even at the cost of it not
being a perfect fit?
How easy/hard is it to get a post-doc position in a topic which is not perfectly aligned (still physics though)
with the PhD one has done?
*Complication:*
I might be able to secure some funding through an ongoing collaboration
on a different topic (a pet project), but that will definitely not be 1 FTE (maybe 0.25-0.5 FTE).<issue_comment>username_1: If you are anything like the numerous phd students before you, myself included, your interests are very likely to change as you are exposed to different ideas from new colleagues.
The Helmholtz position sounds like a great place to do a PhD. Firstly, you get funding. That is important. Secondly, you get a large group of colleagues where you will be exposed to new ideas and ways of doing things. You might find that your knowledge of things like gradient descent and differential equations fits perfectly with machine learning. You might discover you have a love for programming when scripting simulations.
You might even be like a friend who decided to leave theoretical physics and pursue finance in New York.
And there is nothing to stop you from pursuing your interests during your phd career or even in a postdoc.
As for your post-doc position, it depends on the position. Sometimes a PI wants a post doc with a very specific set of skills and knowledge. Sometimes a PI wants a post doc with a lot of potential who is also hungry and hard working. Sometimes a PI wants a post doc with a proven research production stream.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Helmholtz definitely sounds better. Funding, multiple fields, you know the math, etc. The Austria one sounds like a stretch...avoid. If anything the Helmholtz position also sounds like you will have better job prospects after, also.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/02/07
| 721
| 3,109
|
<issue_start>username_0: I resubmitted a manuscript to a journal (listed in political science as well as in International Relations and Economics journal rankings). The editor's decision was minor revisions. The email says that after resubmitting, the final decision will be made by the editor's team asap (asap=as soon as possible). My re-submission was more than 6 weeks ago.
I was wondering how long I should wait until I approach the editor and ask about the decision without being rude and impatient?
My question is also spurred by the fact that I am PhD student who writes a cumulative dissertation and thereby, accepted (or even published) manuscripts are important ;)
Any experiences, advices or recommendations are very welcome!<issue_comment>username_1: After six weeks you can probably ask, but don't ask repeatedly. Just explain that the paper is important to you as a component of your dissertation. You don't need a long explanation or a plea for exceptional treatment.
Depending on the journal, six weeks may be an instant in time. But it is long enough that it is reasonable to ask. If they are overly busy, however, your question may take a while to answer.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Thats just the nature of journals sometimes. You never know what is going on that might delay the editor's decision. Is it within the time frame of a major conference? Is there another editorial issue that is taking up time? Did one of the editors have a major life event? Or any other possibilities that might cause a delay.
To give a recent example of a journal in my field:
The journal decided to request submission for a special issue. The subject of this special issue caused a little bit of an uproar. This led to some amount of turmoil as the editors needed to deal with the uproar from senior members of the editorial board. This led to delayed decisions on some manuscripts.
If push does come to shove though, you might be better served having your adviser reach out. During graduate school, I had a colleague who was in a similar situation as you. Our mutual adviser, a prominent member of the field, was the one who reached out to the journal to find out what was going on. With a little pushing from our adviser, things starting moving forward with the manuscript.
In other words, I would not worry too much. Focus on other writing would be my advice.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: If the decision letter implied a decision will be made quickly, and if the revisions you were asked for are truly minor, six weeks is way too long. I'd ask for an update after 2 weeks.
I note that the decision letter said the "editor's team" is the one making the decision, which makes it sound like the editor's decision was actually "accept on resubmission regardless of what is submitted". It's possible the journal's staff aren't aware of this and are waiting for the editor to make a decision; meanwhile the editor isn't looking at the manuscript anymore because he thinks he's already finished handling it. Either way, I'd write in to ask.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/07
| 1,208
| 5,014
|
<issue_start>username_0: In a faculty interview, when asked about how to prepare for lab equipments and how to search for funding, how to answer, esp for postdocs having no experience in these things? This is spoken in a context of an engineering deparmtent whereas I do theory work only.<issue_comment>username_1: In addition to user username_2's suggestion, I advise that you be honest about your abilities. Faking it will possibly be noticed and will possibly come back to bite you later. You are better to say that "I have a lot to learn about those" than to try to sound like you have a skill that you don't.
If the application is to a large department then there will likely be opportunity to learn from other colleagues and this will be noted. It may be more critical for very small departments where the skills of individuals are more critical, not being shared.
You can also speak about a "plan for learning" how to do the things that will be expected of you but that you don't yet have the experience for.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Fortunately, as a post-doc you should have access to two people to discuss this with. The first would be your PhD advisor, and the second your post-doc advisor. In most cases (yes, this SE gets many bad stories, but there are many more good endings), these people will want to help you continue in your career.
You PhD advisor is a professor, so went through this exact kind of interview at some point, and has likely seen it from the hiring side as well. If your post-doc is at a university, well, you get a second view of that process. If your post-doc is in industry or a national lab, it is highly likely that they either applied for tenure track positions at some point, have friends who did so, or have had other post-docs do so. Further, to get their positions they went through a slightly different interview process, but that still sheds light on how to approach an interview in general.
I have always been interested in helping anyone who worked for me to fulfill their goals. Perhaps they don't work for me anymore, but they are 'my' people forever.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Look...these people are hiring you to do these things. As a natural scientist PI, you will be the leader of a group of people and have significant responsibilities (getting $$$ funding, using it, managing people, etc.) It isn't quite as bad as running a company since you have a lot of systems to rely on (e.g. department's accountant). But it is a real position of leadership.
The department is aware you are not a served PI. But they are expecting you to get it done. Go research it. Have some interviews (make a list of questions, make a list of people to talk to\*), develop a set of insights from the interview work stream, form a plan. Obviously as you execute the plan, you will learn more (no battle plan survives contact with the enemy), but the act of planning will make you more likely to succeed and learn while executing.
The interview question is completely reasonable. If you want to be the next Sean McVay, you need to show that you have put some effort into thinking about how you will run things as head coach. They know it is a step up. But they want to see that you WILL step up. You're not a student any more.
Personally, that you haven't researched already or that you have to have an Internet Q&A tell you the obvious "go figure it out" is a ding for me. Now if you HAD researched it and made some targeted questions that would be good.
**Edit:** Oh and the "lab equipment". *Ai yi yi!* You ABSOLUTELY need to have a plan for what equipment you need/want, how much it costs and how to get it. Heck, at a good R1 school, they compete for you (as a top candidate) based on how many hundreds of thousands of dollars your startup package is. If you don't know what equipment you need, how the heck are you going to have a working lab set up? Figure out what area of research you will do and what is needed to do it. I wouldn't exactly hand them a bill (wait until you get two offers to play some negotiation upwards games), but realistically, you need to make a plan for how to set up your lab. What do you need and what will it cost? This includes things like fume hoods or special utilities (gases, 3phase power, etc.) that may need to be installed for you, not just benchtop equipment.
\*Advisor, department chair, department accountant, and recent person who got hired. Can look at both current place and where you did your grad degree. But before you talk to them (a) make a list of questions (modify and change it as you run the interviews--you will find some new questions and not need to ask other ones--this is information gathering, not a marketing survey); (b) have already done the personal work (as best you can) to develop a research plan (what area of work; what types of experiments; what are the needs in equipment, manpower, $$; what is the time phasing (e.g. building apparatus).
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/02/07
| 1,232
| 5,081
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm highly interested in going to grad school in electromagnetics (eventually a Ph.D.) but for various reasons, most of which are my fault, and some aren't, I graduated with a horrible GPA. In short, my transcript sucks.
My initial attempt to get around this was that if that I do extra-curricular research that is impressive/relevant enough, it will at some point outweigh the GPA and let someone consider working with me.
I volunteered at a professor's lab for a year (not interested in his field, but it was the best opportunity I found). I studied on my own for an average of 4hrs/day on online grad course material for about 2 years and can say that I now have a somewhat solid understanding of the field, comfortable reading and understanding published papers, wrote my FDTD solver, as well as other self-study projects that are directly relevant to the field. Left my full time software job after 2 years to fully devote myself to this cause because I didn't want to waste more time.
After almost 3 years from graduation, I started contacting potential supervisors but never heard back positively (aside from a professor stating that her work is Chemistry and not EE based and stating that my background is "super interesting" which might be just a compliment.)
My question is, will this approach get me anywhere? I'm confident that my background in the field will consistently get better the more I keep doing this, but what if it is a dead-end as far as graduate admissions are concerned?
EDIT (with GRE information):
My GRE scores are slightly above average, 158 quant. and 156 verbal.
I did pretty awesome at my job, in fact I was called the "brightest person in the company" by my supervisor, and the "smartest person in the team" by a VP. That team including two fellow classmates that graduated with distinction.
However, I quit because I felt I was wasting my life doing something I didn't like. I tried getting a job exactly my field of interest (electromagnetics/optics) but I wasn't successful.
The push for grad school is because I believe my horrible grades are not a reflection of my ability, and are at least partly due to mistakes that I have learned from. The other part is rampant cheating and serious unprofessionalism on part of some of the professors, but I don't like stressing that part as I believe owning my mistakes is far better than blaming others.
I truly find myself in doing research work, contributing to the field I like, and I'm willing to do whatever it takes to get there.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Grad school with a 2.62
>
>
>
You may need to accept grad school is not in your future. At least not in your near future. Exactly why do you want to go to grad school? Have you considered starting a company working in a field you're passionate about?
If you really want to go to grad school, here is what I'd do.
1) Stay at your current company and get raises and promotions. Be sure to stay in touch with everyone who praised your work.
2) Make sure you have a very concrete reason why your GPA will be a lot higher. Having a few good semesters won't cancel out years of bad grades.
3) Get your company to pay for it
4) Make sure your GREs are AWESOME!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Poor grades aren't just an indicator of lack of ability. It also means a lack of preparation. I would worry that you'd be in over your head in grad-school courses, because you didn't learn the fundamentals as an undergrad. You have picked quite a difficult area too.
The good news is, in your area of interest there is plenty need for experimentalists who operate the hardware and build things, even if they didn't learn a thing in Calc III or whatever. So you really should be able to find such jobs in a research lab. If you haven't found one you need to keep looking. Though if you are restricting yourself to a certain location, plus insisting on a research job in specific area, your chances of getting it are nearly zero no matter who you are and what your grades were. That's just how the job market works. You need to be flexible somewhere and keep at it. Applying to hundreds of places is quite common.
A job as research assistant or similar in a research lab will set you up nicely for a grad school application, with research experience to talk about as well as a recommendation.
Another tip is you can often take classes through an open university program at your local public university. Rack up some good grades there.
By the way, in my opinion working on projects independently is generally a pretty bad way to learn a subject. The tendency will always be to follow a path of least resistance to getting things working. You start out trying to do "A" but veer into doing "A-prime", seemingly the same thing (to a novice), but actually much easier because you already know a lot more of what you need. And you never will get past the deep divide that blocked you from "A" without being dragged kicking-and-screaming through it by the inflexibility of a real class.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/07
| 369
| 1,595
|
<issue_start>username_0: Recently my paper got accepted in a journal. After that we submitted the final version with all corrections. Now I found an error in the way I calculated some type of numerical error. I don’t think correcting the numerical errors will change any of the conclusions of the paper.
What should I do in such a situation? Is it necessary to submit an erratum to the journal?<issue_comment>username_1: The first thing to do is to contact the editor and ask for advice. Follow it. The second thing to do is to check the conclusions of the paper to assure yourself they they are still ok. The third thing to do is to prepare an erratum note in case it needs to be sent.
But the editor may have a solution if you are fast enough.
But if the conclusions are compromised you may need to ask if the editor can pull the paper while you go back and rethink everything.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: If your paper hasn't been accepted yet, write to the journal's editor as soon as possible. If your paper has been accepted, write to the journal office as soon as possible.
Chances are you'll be able to make this change before the paper is published, but you still want to make this known quickly. The editor will care if the mistake needs to be re-reviewed. Similarly, the publisher will care if the revisions change the layout. The first round of typesetting is the most laborious; if the revisions e.g. change the positions of figures, they might have to start work again from scratch.
The longer you wait, the more likely you'll have to write an erratum.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/02/07
| 1,187
| 4,630
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was accepted to a PhD program, and the two professors I mentioned in my application have reached out to me to discuss research. Now I am wondering what is the best way to gather information on them. Is it considered odd to cold email a recently graduated student from the program? Or current students? I'll likely be in the same community as these people for awhile so don't want to be considered strange ...
Basically, almost all the PhD advice I've come across stresses the importance of talking to an advisor's students. But how do I contact these people? I will be visiting the school but am not sure I will have time to both meet with all of the faculty I'm interested in and their students.<issue_comment>username_1: This is an opinion and you may get opposite opinions, of course. If it is weird, it is only a little weird. I think it is something worth doing, actually. "How is Prof X to work with? Does s/he provide a lot of help or only a little. Any thing I should be aware of?"
There is very little worse in doctoral education than having a poor or abusive advisor. All you really need to know is that they treat students appropriately, even if they are (very) demanding.
You can find a lot of horror stories about advisors by searching/browsing around this site.
But just keep it informal.
I don't recommend cold calling professors, but would treat calling students differently.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It's a little weird but understandable why you want to do it.
If you could sidle up to it a little, I advise that. Start with current students and do the discussions one on one (and not written, telephone or in person). Ask a set of general questions (field, department, university, town) and include the advisor relations question(s) as a subset.
If you contact previous students, I would send a general email (thinking about doing research in X subfield, like to get your perspective) and ask to have a conversation. [If you know there number, I would go direct to a phone call...leave a composed, short voicemail. If you get them direct, just ask for a time to talk to them (so it is not sprung on them to consume their time immediately.] Then same advice for current students as before applies. Ideally, you may have some point of contact with the old students (shared network, same undergrad, etc.) to make it a little less cold. But given you are not hitting them immediately with the questions, just the request to talk, I don't think a cold outreach is unreasonable.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Is it considered odd to cold email a recently graduated student from
> the program?
>
>
>
This is sometimes encouraged by the professors themselves. When I was applying for a PhD, a professor told me to contact his current student should I have any question about the lab, the school, the city and so on.
Back to your question, I think it's good to contact former PhD student. If they had a very good or very bad experience, they would be very eager to tell (or complain to) you.
In many countries, e.g. US, UK, the PhD theses are publicly available for download. And you can have some information from the Acknowledgements in their theses.
* Did they thank their advisor passionately?
* Did they thank their advisor for "always being available for discussions" or "allow them the freedom to do their research", or just "introduce the problem". You know the implications.
* Did they thank other people in the lab, in particular fellow PhD students?
* ...
If there is [no acknowledgement](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/23521/phd-thesis-without-acknowledgements), that's the worst.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I feel the other answers are not stated strongly enough. Yes, it is weird, but you should absolutely do it. You can use this method of cold-emailing:
>
> Subject: Your work with Prof. X
>
>
> Dear Dr. \_\_\_\_,
>
>
> I am contacting you because you were a student of Prof. X. I am
> considering joining the group of Prof. X at \_\_\_ University. I would
> like to get a PhD in (specialty) and pursue a career in (whatever
> industry). Do you have any advice for me?
>
>
> I will keep your advice confidential.
>
>
> Thank you in advance
>
>
> Your name
>
>
>
Generally when I do this I get a prompt response telling me how wonderful Prof. X is. If you get other results, do not work with Prof. X. While you are doing your cold-emailing, take note of the jobs Prof. X's students have. Are those the jobs you want? If not, find an advisor who can help you get those jobs.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/02/07
| 4,155
| 17,096
|
<issue_start>username_0: Plagiarising the ideas of others is obviously a big deal. You are stealing the hard work of others and misleading your peers by pretending it is your original work.
But why is plagiarising words and paragraphs considered a big deal? I mean, isn't the point of academic effort to transmit ideas and knowledge? Who cares what specific words were used to transmit it? It's not like we are writing poems here: the words themselves don't matter, the underlying ideas do.
For example, say you are writing an article, and you need to add a short section on some background information. Your original source for this information is some book by a guy called Juntao, in which he writes
>
> It is well-known that the K-Group is hyperdifferentiable and pseudo-geometric. It can further be shown, given certain assumptions on the continuity of the underlying complex manifolds, that the associated Einstein-curves are super-composites and universally dense in the field of measurable spaces. Indeed, this was shown by Hilbert and Plato in their seminal work on uncountable and analytically algebraic left-Sylvester Deligne graphs.
>
>
>
Say you need to provide this information in your paper. What’s the problem if you just copy it verbatim? I mean, I could write it in my own words, easily. But why should I be forced to waste time on that? Why is it a problem if I just use the above formulation?
As long as you refer to the original material, such as by ending the section with
>
> For more information on this material and proofs of the stated theorems, we refer to the works of Hilbert and Plato [1840]. A complete summary of the material can be found in Juntao [1998].
>
>
>
then everything ought to be fine, isn’t it? And yet, there are question like [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/124492), where somebody wanted to "seek justice" just because somebody else stole a few sentences of his.<issue_comment>username_1: Per your example, you are not, in fact, "forced to waste time" finding another way to express the idea that another author had. You can just copy the passage down verbatim, but to do so without putting it in quotes and citing it is plagiarism. If you write a publication that has no quotes in it, you are essentially claiming that you wrote the entire thing yourself. If you have copied text verbatim, that is false. You are taking credit for someone else's work, which is rather frowned upon in academia.
Authors should be deliberate and unambiguous in their language, so finding the right words to express an idea isn't always a trivial task. A lot of work can go into a sentence that is succinct, precise, and understandable. Your choices are to either find different words to express that idea, or give someone else credit for having done the work already.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_2: If you want to use Juntao's exact words, put quotation marks around them and cite the exact source (next to the quotation, not a couple of sentences later). Otherwise, "[y]ou are stealing the hard work of others and misleading your peers by pretending it is your original work" [<NAME>, this question, but in a different context]. You may not realize it, but Juntao might have put quite a lot of work into this passage, not only looking up the relevant background information but also making expository decisions like choosing to mention "certain assumptions", giving their general character, but not stating them explicitly. Juntao deserves explicit credit for that work, not just a generic citation for a "complete summary".
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: ### If you present the words as your own, then plagiarizing the words is equivalent to plagiarizing the idea.
When you submit written work, putting your name on it implies that you are responsible for its content.
>
> But why is plagiarising words and pharagraphs considered a big deal?
>
>
>
If the work contains someone else's written words, and you don't cite the original author, then you are effectively taking credit for that written idea. Claiming credit for someone else's idea is plagiarism, and is typically a [punishable offense](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/60995/why-is-plagiarism-so-harshly-punished) in academia.
If you want to save time by include someone else's quote verbatim, then there are standards for quoting and properly citing the text.
>
> Why is it a problem if I just use the above formulation?
>
>
>
However, if the majority of the written content is copied from another author, then this suggests most of the ideas and thought process behind the writing isn't your own either. It may not even demonstrate that you understand the content that you've quoted. So if you claim credit for material that is mostly copied from someone else, it can at least seem lazy.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Having been plagiarized before, I found three things irritating:
1. Plagiarists seem lazy. Instead of writing something in their own words and adding their own knowledge to it, they simply copied what I and others wrote and stitched it together into a semi-coherent whole. When I write formally, I spend a lot of time to get the words right, and I don't think it's fair to simply copy my work. (Particularly when they don't credit me for the work.) If you get the same reward (a publication) for copying as you do for producing something original, that does not seem to be incentivizing the hard work that produces valuable research.
2. Plagiarism at the sentence level seems to lead to hard-to-read writing. One sentence from here, one sentence their own, another half a sentence from somewhere else, etc. Mix in inconsistent vocabularies, the use of a thesaurus to trip up plagiarism detection software, and rearranging sentences to trip up plagiarism detection software. That's a recipe for bad writing. To be honest I think making plagiarized writing good would take more time than writing something original in the first place. Also, I think the opportunity cost for someone who is not a fluent speaker of the language they are writing in exceeds the time savings from plagiarism. (My impression is that many non-fluent people who plagiarize do so because they don't believe they can write as well as a fluent speaker. But this tends to not work well, and doesn't help them learn the language as much as writing would.)
3. Plagiarists sometimes don't seem to understand the passages they copy. This might be because plagiarism seems to be correlated with poor reading skills. A plagiarized sentence says X is true and then later the authors argue "not X has already been established..."
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_5: Plagiarism aside, we expect authors to write background sections in their own words because they are supposed to *know* the background information. If you copy and paste someone else's paragraph, it comes across like you might not have bothered to verify the information in it. Ditto if you start with someone else's paragraph and fiddle with it until it looks original.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Coming up with the right words to express an idea is also work that authors deserve credit for.
However, the reason why copying words is such a disproportionately “big deal” is that **copying words is common, easy to detect, and hard to deny.**
It’s common because it is the result of laziness. There is software available to detect copying automatically. And, once the copied passages and their source are identified, there is irrefutable evidence.
This results in a lot of people being punished for copying words and most people are very careful to avoid doing this. That makes it a big deal.
Of course, ease of enforcement is not a *good* reason for something being a big deal. But, unfortunately, that is the reality of the world.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: I'm not sure the other answers address your question directly: why is it important to cite and give credit to the original source of words rather than just copy them into our own writings?
1. Putting ideas into words is very hard work and requires deep understanding. Contrary to what you've written, the wording also matters a lot: the whole point is to *communicate* the ideas! So originators of wording deserve credit also.
2. The normal required/accepted practice is that the author does not plagiarize, i.e. all words have been written by the author except where quoted and sourced. Given this, plagiarism is misleading or dishonest to the reader who assumes words are original. (This wouldn't apply if it were normal to plagiarize, but it isn't.)
3. It is very useful to the research community to have this norm of "no plagiarism" because it is easier to evaluate a paper and its contributions, for reasons that many others have been posting.
4. In cultures such as the USA where many of the cultural norms of research are set, plagiarism of words is viewed as ethically wrong (presumably for reasons related to the above). So it is a bad idea to plagiarize when writing for people who feel that way even if they had no rational reasoning.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: In scientific work there is more to plagiarism than just crediting people for the work that they do. But first, an aside in the difference between copyright infringement and plagiarism.
Suppose that I find a publisher (unlikely) who will let me take an early edition of Goethe's *Faust* and publish it under the name username_8 St. Magnus, with no indication anywhere that it is from Faust. I can do that legally, since the work is not under copyright, though some recent editions may be. I don't use quote marks or anything, but even if I do, it is plagiarism. Plagiarism, but not copyright infringement. I'll be condemned (well St. Magnus, anyway). But I can't be sued.
Suppose, alternatively, that in writing a new book, that I take a chapter (not the entirety of the work, but a substantial part) from a recent novel of, say, <NAME> and incorporate it into my own work. Suppose that I'm clear, using quotes or whatever, and giving proper citations of the original. Since I cited it (quotes or not), it isn't plagiarism. But whoever owns copyright to the original will likely object and I'll be sued, almost certainly, for copyright infringement. So, copyright infringement, but not plagiarism. This would also be the likely outcome if I make small changes or paraphrase parts of it.
In the latter case, if I do the same thing but *don't* give a citation. Then is is both plagiarism and copyright infringement and I'll be both sued and condemned.
But, suppose that what we have is scientific writing instead. Note that scientific papers have a context, usually expressed in their own citations and their bibliography. There is more here than just who wrote it, there is the complete scientific context in which it was written. A scholar reading the work, sometimes need to explore that context directly. If the paper makes that impossible, by plagiarizing another, for example, the chain is broken. St. Magnus says the buck stops here. But really it doesn't. If I just copied from <NAME>, then a reader of my work has no easy way to find the original and thus explore the context expressed there.
That is what makes *scientific plagiarism* special.
If it were only about attribution, then *self plagiarism* wouldn't be a thing. I'm the source of the words, even though I used them before. But if I don't cite myself properly on the prior use, others are cut off from the complete context.
Also, if were just about attribution then putting it in quotes and providing an incomplete citation, say, just the author's name, then it wouldn't be plagiarism either. But most would consider such an incomplete citation to be wrong for *some* reason, whether related to plagiarism or not. Ancient authors are often quoted this way, of course, but not living (or recent) ones in scientific literature.
To avoid plagiarism, or self plagiarism, you need to cite and you need to be clear about what you are "capturing" from the early work, just to help other scholars find that original context when needed. You can do this in many ways, but you need to be clear about it. Putting a few words of others in the middle of a sentence that I otherwise write is a situation that makes quote marks especially useful. For a paragraph, I might want to indent instead, with the citation immediately following (or at the beginning). But it has to be clear.
However, if I cite properly, avoiding plagiarism, but still copy "too much" (a value judgement) then I'm still open to a charge of copyright infringement. Any copyright holder can make the charge and file a suit. It is then up to others (courts, juries, ...) to decide whether I overstepped the bounds.
But note the important difference. It is lack of citation that makes it plagiarism. It is giving the impression that the words, ideas, whatever, are mine, and not those of the originator. It is the appropriation that makes it wrong, not the lack of "quoting".
That said, quoting formally, can help you make it clear what is yours and what is not and that clarity is important.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_9: >
> But why is plagiarising words and paragraphs considered a big deal?
>
>
>
I am a scholar who writes not because a university says I must to advance, but because I enjoy writing for its own sake. So much so that I consider myself above all else a writer. So when my words are plagiarized - and it's happened more than once - it feels tantamount to someone breaking into my house and stealing a prized possession - something deeply personal. When I write, I don't merely slap words on a page, but I revise them time and time again, perhaps 15 or 20 times or more before I have molded the text into a form I like, and for which I feel pride of craftsmanship. You say "It's not like we are writing poems here." Perhaps in your field that is true (I don't know), but it's not the case in mine. I am not literally writing poetry, but what I write has a certain lyricism that is art. (Whether or not it's *good art* is for others to decide.) This might sound maudlin, but it's nonetheless how I and others no doubt feel, and may help you to understand why some, like me, consider plagiarism a big deal.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_10: The problem is that the goal of science has slightly shifted from generating knowledge to generating papers over the last few decades (**publish or perish**). While these two goals are not mutually exclusive and the former implies the later (the reverse sadly isn't true), generating papers has a lot to do with writing. Hence, people get mad if they see someone copying their written words because writing has become an (if not the) essential part of their work. Take it as one of the many expressions of the current crisis in academic research.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: This [article](https://www.nature.com/articles/ngeo305) might help.
The gist of it is that getting 'noted and quoted' is big deal in academia.
While there is some wiggle room of distinguishing "important contributions" from "used two words in the same order" and everything in between its hard to summarise this in a number, so most of the time it gets dropped.
The result of this is anything that makes a difference between getting a citation or not is a big deal (even if it contributes very little). Add to this the complexity of what makes a useful citation and it becomes politically costly and often untenable to sort out the nuances. It's not an ideal situation1 but it's really not that bad and it has upsides (see other answers).
---
1 I once found myself in the situation that opening few lines of an introduction I wrote for a paper turned out to be similar another recent publication. It was analogous to your example (stating widely know results of the field) and really there are only so many sane ways of saying it. It wasn't a huge problem but I felt, as you seem to, that it was a waste of effort to sort. Perhaps ironically part of the problem was I didn't want to change to using their version verbatim an cite it. One of the differences I didn't like was the attribution of the actual work was missing in the other paper (as the results where old/obvious).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_12: I feel like it is pertinent to point out that, in most cases, scientific publications are meant to build on existing work. Plagiarising words and sentences verbatim, without being able to bring an original spin is simply not publication ready.
Essentially if it is a very basic tenet of your field then you will never need to mention it, you may simply cite a standard book and move ahead to present your work. There are word and page limits as well.
I believe this question arises mostly while writing reports and other "unoriginal" documents.
If you are aso student then, think of this as a learning experience, not a broken part of academia.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/02/07
| 781
| 3,404
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm searching for postdoc positions in CS and sending my CV to here and there trying for different opportunities. However, I do not know how to present my under-review works. For instance, should I add them in my CV as under-review papers and mention the conferences to which I submitted?
Then, should I also include the pre-prints in my postdoc applications?
Also, these conferences have double-blind review processes. Hence, I'm not sure whether to include these works in my home-page or not. I like to add them to my CV and profile as they are extracted from the last part of my Ph.D.
Besides, would they (postdoc employers) take these works seriously knowing that they have not been published yet?<issue_comment>username_1: The same way you would deal with it in citations: "in preparation for J. Op. Man.", "submitted to...", "in review at..."\* "in press at..."
\*For this one, I would probably just say submitted to, for a citation--no need to get into the minutia of if review process started or not. But for your CV worth taking credit for being a little bit down the path.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: As somebody who hires post-docs regularly, the common thing to do is indicate them on your CV as submitted. Giving a current title is good. Where is not as important.
For your on-line profile, I don't look at those - that is what the CV you submitted is for.
Look, I've been there as a graduating PhD with fewer publications than I would like. I will ask you about how your to-be-published stuff is coming, particularly since the interview isn't going to be the moment you submit your application. I will also ask your advisor how things are wrapping up, including the submitted articles.
Further, I realize that not all articles end up in the place they were first submitted.
Don't lie about what is actually submitted. Be prepared to discuss how things are going on the articles. Be prepared to talk about them. Realize there are probably a few more coming in the future (field dependent, I know).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Although generally I would recommend against including anything not fully accepted to a CV, I would say it mostly depends on what stage of peer review they are. When evaluating candidates I personally tend to ignore anything that is not with a final decision.
* If you have submitted an article to a journal and has been through
one round of reviews and you are relatively confident that it will
get through you may want to include it, marked as "under revision" or
something similar.
* If you just submitted an article to a conference or journal and you have not heard anything back, I would suggest against including it at all. Anyone can have a couple of articles submitted to a journal by tomorrow afternoon - they might have no chance of getting accepted but they are still submitted, so I see no value in including them in an application
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: The other answers address the "should you include" issue. The "how should I present" part is also important. The main thing is that you should never list works which are not accepted by a conference/journal under the heading of "Publications." Even if they are labeled "Submitted" this creates an impression of dishonesty or exaggeration. List your submitted and preprint works under a separate heading in your CV.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/02/08
| 1,369
| 5,683
|
<issue_start>username_0: At my current rate of taking classes I will be able to graduate from college with a B.S. in math from a top 50 US school in mathematics (according to U.S. news) in a total of 2 years with around 3.7-3.8 GPA. However, I am interested in pursuing a PhD within mathematics. If I do graduate within 2 years it will be somewhat of a "bare" degree, i.e. minimum requirements (3 quarters of Analysis, 1 quarter of Algebra, 1 quarters of Complex Analysis (at the time of application) and 2 more quarters of Algebra and 1 more quarter of Complex Analysis by the time I actually get my degree).
Reading this [post](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/19248/does-rigor-thoroughness-of-undergraduate-program-matter-for-graduate-phd-applic) it seems that the extra rigor is extremely valuable, and sticking around for another year or two would greatly help my application.
However, is applying still worth a shot? If I was to apply and get rejected would that negatively impact my application if I was to apply the next year or next two years? Would applying for a masters degree be worth it in this case, and then switching over to PhD later?
I do want to attend a top graduate program, and I will be talking with an adviser soon (I came here first to get an idea regarding this situation beforehand and not go in blind). So thank you for whatever feedback you give.<issue_comment>username_1: **There is a good chance the admissions committee will not even see you've graduated in 2 years**
There are a couple of questions here, let me address them.
1) It's likely worth staying the full four years and doing undergraduate research with a professor. This will put you in a much better position when letters of recommendation need to be written
2) Generally applying and getting rejected won't affect subsequent applications.
In general, the only advantage to graduating early is you get to make money sooner. If you're not careful, it can actually put you at a disadvantage as you'll likely have less work experience. You've enrolled at a university to learn, not plow through it as quickly as you can.
Slow down, take fewer classes (and make all As in them). Intern during the summers to both make extra money and gain experience. Finally, college (at least in the U.S.) is also about growing as a person. Take some time to get involved in extra-curricular and clubs.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: My advice is go for 3, not 2 or 4. Same applies if your Ph.D. is going fast. People have a hard tme taking 2 years seriously. But the 3 years shows credible acceleration. Even if you could be done in 2, just enrich during 3.
I gave a more detailed post earlier with several ideas on what to do during year 3 undergrad for similar question, but can't find it now (was during a previous username_2).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Having been on the graduate committee of the departments I am/was in for the past six years, and having looked at around 500 applications over that time, I've got something to say about this:
* The time it took you to graduate doesn't matter. 2 years is fast, and if you've got good grades, then you're clearly quite good and that speaks to your case.
* If you're only doing the bare minimum of classes, then that raises questions about your preparedness. That's no different than the many applications we see from small liberal arts colleges whose math departments are so small that they can't run anything other than the standard set of courses. The question then always is how such candidates will do in advanced classes, given that they don't have as much background in the different branches of mathematics as applicants from larger schools. There is also the question of the level of courses you've taken: Many applicants take graduate classes in their last year as undergraduates, and if they do well there, that is definitely a plus on their applications.
* You can always apply. If you get rejected, that's ok, and it won't be a stain on your file if you come back better prepared next year. But you'll have to have an answer to the question of what happens if you get accepted into a program of lesser quality: Are you going to take it, or hold out for something better next year. Declining an offer definitely will look bad if you try again next year, but of course there is also no guarantee that you'll actually get accepted at a better program next time around. So there is a risk involved in all of this.
At the end of the day, your best approach is probably to consider what happens if you graduate now, get accepted into a good program, and then find that you're not adequately prepared. Grad school is fast-paced, and you're thrown into the same pot as all of the other students, many of whom will likely have taken more (and more difficult) classes than you had -- in many cases, first year graduate program classes. You'll struggle -- I'm pretty confident saying that because essentially *every* graduate student struggles, and the question is only to the degree with which they do.
You can get ahead this curve a bit by staying for another year at your current institution, taking advanced courses, maybe a graduate course or two, and doing well. Your file is going to look better for it, and you'll have better chances of getting into the good graduate programs. On the other hand, your file is not going to look noticeably worse just because it took you three instead of two years to graduate -- your competition will have taken four years. The only real downside I can think to staying for a third year is the money you will have to pay for tuition and cost of living.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/02/08
| 1,159
| 4,983
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am going to submit my journal paper in 2 weeks. Besides, there is a workshop whose deadline is in a couple of days. I am going to submit a brief version of my potential journal paper (12 pages) in this workshop (4 pages).
In the workshop website it's mentioned that "Please note the papers will not be published in a proceedings but will be made available via this website."
Now I'm concerned about one thing. As the workshop papers will be made available via this website, I assume they will be considered in the similarity check for my extended journal paper submission.
Will not that cause my journal paper to be considered as plagiarism (or self-plagiarism)?<issue_comment>username_1: **There is a good chance the admissions committee will not even see you've graduated in 2 years**
There are a couple of questions here, let me address them.
1) It's likely worth staying the full four years and doing undergraduate research with a professor. This will put you in a much better position when letters of recommendation need to be written
2) Generally applying and getting rejected won't affect subsequent applications.
In general, the only advantage to graduating early is you get to make money sooner. If you're not careful, it can actually put you at a disadvantage as you'll likely have less work experience. You've enrolled at a university to learn, not plow through it as quickly as you can.
Slow down, take fewer classes (and make all As in them). Intern during the summers to both make extra money and gain experience. Finally, college (at least in the U.S.) is also about growing as a person. Take some time to get involved in extra-curricular and clubs.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: My advice is go for 3, not 2 or 4. Same applies if your Ph.D. is going fast. People have a hard tme taking 2 years seriously. But the 3 years shows credible acceleration. Even if you could be done in 2, just enrich during 3.
I gave a more detailed post earlier with several ideas on what to do during year 3 undergrad for similar question, but can't find it now (was during a previous username_2).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Having been on the graduate committee of the departments I am/was in for the past six years, and having looked at around 500 applications over that time, I've got something to say about this:
* The time it took you to graduate doesn't matter. 2 years is fast, and if you've got good grades, then you're clearly quite good and that speaks to your case.
* If you're only doing the bare minimum of classes, then that raises questions about your preparedness. That's no different than the many applications we see from small liberal arts colleges whose math departments are so small that they can't run anything other than the standard set of courses. The question then always is how such candidates will do in advanced classes, given that they don't have as much background in the different branches of mathematics as applicants from larger schools. There is also the question of the level of courses you've taken: Many applicants take graduate classes in their last year as undergraduates, and if they do well there, that is definitely a plus on their applications.
* You can always apply. If you get rejected, that's ok, and it won't be a stain on your file if you come back better prepared next year. But you'll have to have an answer to the question of what happens if you get accepted into a program of lesser quality: Are you going to take it, or hold out for something better next year. Declining an offer definitely will look bad if you try again next year, but of course there is also no guarantee that you'll actually get accepted at a better program next time around. So there is a risk involved in all of this.
At the end of the day, your best approach is probably to consider what happens if you graduate now, get accepted into a good program, and then find that you're not adequately prepared. Grad school is fast-paced, and you're thrown into the same pot as all of the other students, many of whom will likely have taken more (and more difficult) classes than you had -- in many cases, first year graduate program classes. You'll struggle -- I'm pretty confident saying that because essentially *every* graduate student struggles, and the question is only to the degree with which they do.
You can get ahead this curve a bit by staying for another year at your current institution, taking advanced courses, maybe a graduate course or two, and doing well. Your file is going to look better for it, and you'll have better chances of getting into the good graduate programs. On the other hand, your file is not going to look noticeably worse just because it took you three instead of two years to graduate -- your competition will have taken four years. The only real downside I can think to staying for a third year is the money you will have to pay for tuition and cost of living.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/02/08
| 1,851
| 7,393
|
<issue_start>username_0: Today in the lab we had a birthday, I had participated, but not so much as I feel anxious in crowded areas. I felt very shy and that's true, so I withdrew from the party after 15 minutes and wished everyone well.
Later, my PI informed me that he is extremely pissed off and did not like the fact that I am a very shy person. I am supposed to select a potential supervisor; the one whose work I am interested in also has also a shy person. The PI (head of the lab) informed me that he cannot assign two shy people to work together (me and the prospective supervisor) as he thought we are going to fail to make significant work.
The ugly truth is that I am an indeed shy girl for many years and I lose many social opportunities, likely marriage opportunities because I don't interact so much as other girls. However, I look very confident in voluntary works, teaching and giving talks.
I know it sounds controversial, however, I began to lose my self-confidence and esteem although I had a strong character.
The question: How I should react towards this?<issue_comment>username_1: This answer will only focus on long term strategies that might help you avoid such situations as you move forward.
To succeed in academia you can't really *seem* to be shy and certainly not seen to be less of a contributor because of it. No matter how good your ideas are, if they don't get considered then you have very little impact.
However, that doesn't mean that you can't actually *be* shy, or introverted. Many successful scientists are very introverted and even some are quite far out on the autism spectrum. Shyness isn't a defect or a flaw, it is just a personal tendency. Introverted people, in fact, often are extremely productive as they gather internal strength from reflection, consideration, and thought.
But the trick is to learn to *act* as if you have a different set of preferences than you actually do. You can *act* like an extrovert naturally would even while remaining an introvert. You play a role in public situations that lets your thoughts and needs get notice in the deliberations and conversations.
But it is a skill that can be difficult to learn. I know, and I did it. The "face" that I show to the world has evolved over time. I once suffered from an "inability" to speak up when I should have and it cost me extra years in a doctoral program. But after that, I learned how to play the role so that my ideas weren't ignored by those with a bigger mouth.
In fact, you aren't limited by your shyness unless you let it overcome you. You *can* look people straight in the eye and explain your ideas to them. You don't need to defer to louder people.
One person, a friend, who is very prominent in the CS community and is a marvelous public speaker is naturally, and in person, extremely quiet and has some characteristics of autism. But he taught himself to do what needed to be done to have his ideas accepted and to act in public in a way that seems to others to be comfortable, even if it is not. One of his tricks was to join an acting group in which he learned how to "put on" a role and act within that role.
Some people just freeze when confronted. Other people explode into inappropriate behavior. Both of these need to be avoided. Practice is what you need to overcome them if you tend to do that. Preparation for meetings, with notes on what you might want to say can help.
Finally, let me note that people reading your several posts here probably don't think of you as a shy person. In your writing, you are able to say what you want to say. Some of that is the anonymity that the site affords. In a sense, you can hide the "real you" behind a certain invented persona. The trick is to learn to do that same thing in person. Invent a persona for yourself and act in the way it suggests, hiding your "real self". Yes, I do the same thing here as username_1.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The situation is hard to evaluate without knowing exactly what the PI told you. I feel, however, that the problem here is not necessarely that you are a shy or timid person, but that you did not respect a unwritten social convention.
>
> Today, in the lab we have a birthday, I had participated, but not so much as I feel anxious in the crowded areas. I felt very shy and that's is true, I withdraw from the party after 15 minutes and wished everyone the good.
>
>
>
Birthday parties or other celebrations are often moments where links between colleagues are created. In some cultures, leaving off after 15 minutes could be considered rude.
>
> The PI ( head of the lab) informed I cannot assign two shy people to work together ( me and the prospective supervisor) as he thought we are going to fail to make a significant work.
>
>
>
This is a very strange thing to say to a prospective student, but, as research involves communication, the PI might fear that two extremely shy person could have problems with that essential part of research.
From your own account, you seem anxious in social events but you say that this is not a problem in professional event. You could ask for a meeting with the PI and simply explain that; ideally, you would provide proofs by the things you did that professional communication is not an issue.
However, I would suggest to be careful. If you found the PI rude now, you might want to find another lab.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: End of the day, you need to buckle down and do good science. Run experiments. Write them up. Publish. Be a little motor that churns and works and moves forward. Not one that is always asking questions. [This is the answer to "what should I do?" Which is the actual question part of your story.]
P.s. On the marriage concerns, this site is very persnickety about off topic posting. Personally I think there is nothing wrong with your wanting a mate. I feel ya. It is a natural human biological drive. Our hearts are programmed for it. All that said, I doubt you will find reflective advice in many corners of the Internet. But if you want killer advice, I recommend joining a running club. The odds are good. And the goods are...good. [And I would avoid the "somebody was mean to me, what do I do" in any discussions with potential suitors.]
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: It's one of the more disgusting facets of our society that Type B people want to be left alone, but Type A people are rabid in their efforts to change Type B's into Type A's. I don't like noise but I'm told that I "don't like to have fun." Something is wrong with me because I'd like to be able to talk to the person I'm with rather than have a band screaming in my ears all night. And they NEED to fix me. What I consider fun isn't. Only what they consider fun.
This bigotry is subtle, pervasive and devastating. If your shyness is the result of an emotional disorder, all the more crushing and ostracizing this is. And probably no place is it so concentrated as academia (as you can witness on this stack exchange daily.) "You play by our rules or you don't play at all." Type A's are bullies, and that's exactly what this PI is doing. Either be just like him, always agree with him or he throws a tantrum and somehow it's YOUR fault.
What to do? Say, "You're trying to bully the wrong person," and walk away. Repeat as needed.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/02/08
| 1,456
| 6,434
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have recently had a paper rejected with 2 Accepts and 1 Reject from a CORE A\* conference. I did understand the risks of being rejected when I made the submission, the problem is that I got back some set of reviews that are not applicable (let alone constructive) to my work. The 2 Accepts qualified the work as being solid and that it exhibits a high novelty degree, while the rejection was based on some misunderstandings on the reviewer's behalf, which led to "Syntactically complete work but with limited contribution" and "Novelty unclear" rank. Unfortunately, the 2 accept reviewers did not argue enough to support the paper, and the PC chairs considered that one reject outweighs the two accepts, so the outcome was a negative one.
Now, my question is: how likely is it to send back an email to the PC chairs and explain why we think the rejection feedback is not applicable to our work as it is based on some claims that we don't make in the paper (and that the reviewer thought we made) and get an answer back? Could submission outcomes change if they notice the reviews are based on incorrect claims? Or is it more likely to be ignored?<issue_comment>username_1: You can argue it, and might be successful. But you might also *not* be successful. The PC may believe the third reviewer has more weight to bear. For a conference, however, I think your chances are slim, just because of the time factor.
Ultimately, however, it is your responsibility to be clear enough in your writing that such misunderstandings don't occur. I'm not judging here, and don't know the details. It is possible, of course, that you know more than the reviewer in this case. I doubt that you would lose anything by arguing your case, but you would also do well to try to parse out exactly what the objection was. It may be that you will learn something from understanding it that will help you improve the work even if you fail at having the decision reversed.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In good conferences (and I would certainly assume this to be the case in an A\* conference) decisions are *not* made solely and directly by the PC Chairs, and definitely not only by looking at the scores. What usually happens is that after each assigned PC member submits their reviews, a discussion phase among the reviewers is triggered. In some conferences this happens in a long face-to-face meeting of the majority of the PC, in other conferences this is done offline through the reviewing system. All controversial papers (and a paper that gets two +2's and one -2 would certainly qualify as controversial) will be discussed - usually the PC chairs will ensure that both sides of the argument are heard, and then the reviewers and the PC chairs jointly arrive at a common decision (other PC members are also free to chime in, but in practice this only happens in face-to-face meetings in my experience).
Typically, there is little trace of this discussion in the reviews or notification letter, so it is difficult for you as an author to say if the two +2's did not have good arguments to fight for your paper, did not feel like they wanted to "champion" the paper despite their positive reviews, or were ultimately ignored because the reasoning of the -2 was more convincing. However, for a CORE A\* conference I would *assume* that this discussion happened, that the PC chairs are quite aware of the difference in opinion regarding this paper, and made a conscious decision to reject the paper despite the positive reviews.
Hence, writing them is highly unlikely to change anything. For a large conference, PC chairs typically get multiple such requests each year, and I am not aware of even a single case in my community where the decision was retroactively changed. The standard answer for all questions on this site that fall into the category of *"What can I do about this (from my perspective) unfair reject?"* applies: move on, and try another conference and journal. Fundamentally, academic reviewing is a stochastic process, and even the best submissions can be rejected unfairly.
---
However, there still *is* something to learn from this experience. It's a difficult thing to do, but you should try to figure out *why* the -2 misunderstood your paper (and why apparently your paper did not give the +2's sufficient ammunition to fight for it effectively in the discussion phase):
* Was the contribution not clearly enough described? Note that "we had a strong contribution" isn't sufficient for an A\* conference, it also needs to be *very obvious* that you have a strong contribution. A paper can, in fact, be rejected if the detractor makes a convincing case that your paper can easily be misunderstood (even if the champions manage to convince them that they indeed misunderstood).
* Did the paper get the wrong reviewers? One common source of unfair rejects is if the paper at first glance (e.g., from title and abstract) appeals to the wrong group of PC members (e.g., a paper looking like it has a strong theoretical contribution will primarily be reviewed by theory-minded folks - if it then turns out that the actual work is very practical, it will end very unfortunate, with reviewers misunderstanding the paper or simply not being interested enough to actually fight for the work).
* Was there some other issue that may have led to a normally tempered, sane, and competent person to vote for -2 (and, apparently, fight for a rejection - because the more normal case when +2 +2 -2 reviews come in is that the -2 gives in quickly and the paper is accepted)? Scan their review for this - maybe there is something that you would consider a minor threat that they consider backbreaking, or maybe you missed some related work that they consider crucial.
However, after all is said and done, your paper has in fact convinced two thirds of its reviewers - resubmitting a slightly improved version of the paper to a similar (or even the same) conference has in fact a very high chance of success.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: If it is a conference (not a journal), do not waste your time. Get over it ad think of another venue. Unfair judgements, misunderstandings, happens all the time. The only way to overcome it is to improve your apper and make clarification that does not allow this misunderstanding to happen again. Then submit it in another venue.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/08
| 807
| 3,355
|
<issue_start>username_0: For someone who is doing his PhD in a US institute (STEM filed), how likely is it to be employed (as a post-doc for example) in another country (which is not my home country, in general) ?
For example, for a PhD student, it should be much more easier get a job in an environment that you know; for example, the school that your are doing own PhD, or some other instituted that you are familiar (possibly in US also), but, in general, is it **common** for such a student to get employed by an institute in Europe or elsewhere?<issue_comment>username_1: I wouldn't think there would be discrimination either in favor of or against a PhD from any particular place. That isn't how people make decisions about who to hire. Instead, they will look at what you have done and whether they find it "interesting" and "deep". You can produce such work anywhere and it will be valued everywhere.
In any application, whether for a degree or for employment (a) there will likely be a lot of competition and (b) you need to make your case. These things aren't decided by plugging things into spreadsheets, but by people looking at your output and your perceived potential to contribute.
That said, you may need to make sure that you speak the local language and are comfortable in the local culture. If a job involves teaching, for example, not speaking the lingo may be disqualifying - at least in some minds. But even in a non-teaching position, you will be expected to interact with others in the institution. Don't take a math postdoc in, say, Italy just because you want to begin to learn Italian.
I recognize that I answered a slightly different question: How *difficult* is it... I hope that serves your needs.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I don't know about common but certainly not uncommon--had several friends that did.
It will help a bit if there is some small connection (e.g. your current advisor and new one, a collaborator even once removed, previous members of lab group, etc.). After all any time you hire someone this can be helpful. But maybe even a little more when you are bringing someone in from overseas.
Of course, many people still come/go based on blind opportunities (replying to posted positions) so go ahead and apply for them.
In addition, I urge to pro-actively reach out to some people in the field that you would like to work with. When doing so, find some potential points of commonality other than just "I want a gig--got one?". Something along of the lines of
---
"<NAME>, I wanted to reach out and introduce myself.
I noticed that you are one of the few French researchers in density functional theory for industrial materials. I am very interested in moving into this topic. (Have worked previously in an analagous but different area: Hartree Fock calculations of pharmaceutical materials.)
In addition, I would find it a pleasure to experience France at your institute on the banks of the Seine.
Do you have any current positions open or do you foresee any coming open? Could we have a conversation about your research?
Sincerely, <NAME>
---
You will need to figure out the visa situation when things get serious but I don't think Turkish citizen (guessing based on your profile) will be hard for a temp science position in EU.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/02/08
| 725
| 3,210
|
<issue_start>username_0: My co-authors and I are preparing to submit a major project manuscript. Unfortunately, we have just learned that one of the persons involved in the project has committed major scientific ethical violations related to the project, but not directly impacting this paper.
The scale of the ethical violation is quite large (think: non-consensual and dangerous medical experiments) and is directly connected to their work on the project. It does not, however, affect the validity of this manuscript or their contributions to it in any way.
Many of the co-authors, however, no longer want to be associated with this person in any way, and are likely to withdraw their names from the manuscript if this person remains an author.
Would it be reasonable to remove this person from authorship based on their ethical violation, essentially as a form of community shunning?<issue_comment>username_1: I think this is a question that requires legal advice, not ethical advice before you would make any such move. If the person has a valid claim for authorship and you don't honor it, you may, possibly, become liable. I don't know if that is the case where you are or not, but you should protect yourselves.
The ethical consideration is more complex, but I doubt that few would condemn you for shunning a person for violations such as you suggest, especially since the violation was on the same project that supported the publication.
Since the violation is, as you say, directly connected to the project, you should also examine whether the work itself is so tainted that it should be abandoned. This is a radical step, of course and would have both negative and positive impacts on the other participants. I won't guess at the proper resolution of such a consideration, but think you should probably give it serious thought and discussion. And of course, you may have to balance that against the possible good that might come from what was learned in the study.
If this study was undertaken in the US, I wonder what happened to the IRB and what they might have to say about a resolution. The same would be the case in other countries with similar ethical oversight of research.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Personally I think you cannot do it, and I wouldn't even speak in terms of "reasonable" or "unreasonable". If someone makes a contribution to your work, that person is your co-author, deal with it. If a person wants to remove his/her own name, its their private decision, but I can hardly imagine doing that for other contributors without their consent.
When I engage in research with other people, I consider it a sort of binding contract: I do this for you, and I expect you to put my name on the front page. If you don't want to deal with me anymore, it's OK, but *next* time, not *this* time.
Furthermore, while I don't want to overthink it and portray pictures of possible dystopian future, I believe such ways of "community shunning" are very dangerous. Maybe today you have a valid reason for it, but you'll open a Pandora's box: first we retroactively remove people for their flaws, then for their views on sensitive topics, then for their thoughts.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/02/08
| 1,759
| 7,609
|
<issue_start>username_0: I would like to consider physics (theory) or math. I have two questions, but in general I would like to understand more about the following.
* If a researcher joins the faculty of a small (not top-research) university, will his/her administrative or teaching responsibilities be much greater than those of a researcher at a top university?
* If so, does this hinder his/her research development to an appreciable degree? Or perhaps this is not worth worrying about, and a good scholar will find a way to produce good research regardless of circumstances.
Any perspectives or evidence would be appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: This depends on what the researcher was hired for. If (as usual) a researcher was hired for equal parts of three tasks (teaching, research, service), then YES they will have less time for research than someone hired for research only.
But note: Most scholars wind up at much lower-rated programs than the ones where their training occurred. And those lower-rated programs have few (or none) of the vaunted research-only positions.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, you will have a heavier teaching load at most small universities. Such places usually have teaching as their primary mission. Teaching is usually required at large US universities as well, unless you are completely grant funded. But that isn't the only issue.
At a small institution it is much harder to develop a synergistic core of researchers. Even if there are, say five math faculty, they are not especially likely to have the same research interests or be focused on the same field.
Things are a bit easier in the last couple of decades with advances in communication, but you still aren't likely to see deep research seminars in a topic of interest to you at a small place.
Also, note that in the US, most faculty are actually working at smaller, primarily teaching, institutions than large research universities. If you look at, for example, the list of colleges in a given state, say New York, you will find only a few large institutions and many, many small ones. It is a bit complicated since some private research institutions are actually fairly small. In those, the mission is primarily research or it is balanced.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In the extreme case I'm acquainted with, some teaching-focused Universities give most professors 4/4-4/3-3/3 loads (that is 3-4 3-credit classes to teach every semester, with sometimes an extra class requiring to be taught in the summer/interim periods), more or less zero research funding, no lab, few to no graduate students, and very few or no TAs/graders for the classes they do teach. The key factor isn't really size-alone, though, as a bigger R1 can have similar conditions to a smaller R1.
As a direct comparison, I've known professors a teaching institution to teach a 200 student introduction class with no graders or assistants whatsoever (about all they get is access to an office that will process Scantron bubble sheets for them), for a subject that in an R1 University would have had 4 graduate students and half a dozen or so graders assigned. At the same time, the R1 professor might have a 2/2 or 3/2 load, with the occasionally teaching buyout/buydown so they could teach less in some semesters, or get extra credit to prepare teaching a new class; professors at teaching Universities much more rarely have any class reductions, and often preparing a new course gets no extra consideration - prep is just part of the job.
In the extreme, the teaching workload at a teaching University is so much greater than at a research University that the only answer is "yes, this absolutely effects research output". As a specific example from a few fields I'm familiar with (especially computing, math, psychology), in a single field where R1 faculty would be expected to average at least 3 publications in notable peer-reviewed venues every year, professors at a teaching University may be expected to produce a total of 3 papers over 5-7 years to be able to obtain tenure. The average acceptable research output of a teaching-focused University would not be sufficient to allow most faculty to survive a 3-year review in good standing at an R1.
These are the extremes, comparing a high-production large (40,000+ undergraduate students) R1 University with a smaller teaching-focused University (<10,000 students, only a few graduate degree programs), as I have personal experience knowing faculty working at both types of institution. There are lots of institutions in-between, however, and I am not familiar enough with the recent experiences of community-college faculty to comment there (for those not familiar with the term, this usually means institutions that focus on 2-year degrees, usually do not offer any 4 year degrees, and basically never offer graduate degrees).
For instance, the group of Universities sometimes called R2 Universities - and some liberal arts colleges which still have high research expectations - often fall somewhere in the middle of all this, in terms of research production and teaching loads/support. Variation among this group, I'm told, varies widely, and some R2s seem to aim to be R1s and offer better support, some offer less support yet demand more research anyway, etc. YMMV, in other words.
I should note that while teaching loads and average research outputs are closely tied, they are not a universal rule. A few professors I've known have still managed to produce consistent influential research programs at teaching institutions - however, the ones I know about ended up leaving or gearing up to try to leave such institutions for others that would provide them more research support and lower teaching loads. There is a strong opt-in factor, as well, as professors who want to do a lot of research generally refuse to even apply to teaching-focused positions, where as professors who will apply to such positions often either care less about churning out publications or end up deciding that they would rather focus on teaching and training than writing pub after pub.
Note that funding for research itself varies extremely between institutions. Some people don't actually need much funding beyond salary for their research, so of course in some fields this doesn't matter much. But in other fields the difference is extreme. Between institutions within the same field the startup packages that can be used on equipment and hiring (post docs, students, services, etc.) by new faculty range from $500k+ to $0 (yes, zero). I received more research funding and assistance as a new graduate student than most of the professors I know at a teaching institution got when they started as faculty.
Finally, the last big difference in small and large was very well pointed out by username_2 in another answer. In a large University I know a half-dozen people who have interest about a specific narrow sub-topic in my field - at a small institution, I could find no one who had experience in my sub-field at all and no one had even heard of the largest conferences in the field. This can make local collaboration difficult, which depending on your topics and work style can hinder your productivity overall as well.
In the end, the places that produce the largest amount of research (by any measure you care to use) do so for many, many reasons that can be hard to parse out or replicate outside of those places - but teaching load, funding, and administrative support are big factors no matter how you look at it.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2019/02/09
| 474
| 2,087
|
<issue_start>username_0: What are common techniques to grade/mark assignments efficiently? Is it better to focus on one question and go through the pile or do them assignment after assignment? Or are there other techniques and tips people have?<issue_comment>username_1: When marking 150 plus exams, I go page by page so the information I have to consider is small and focused instead of doing a 10 or 12 page paper all in one...
I find that so much faster and as I finish each page I enter that page total into my excel sheet so I can see, when finished, how the questions “behaved” as well as the final students grades.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The other big thing I have found to be helpful is to have very detailed instructions (to and from myself) as to what qualifies as partial credit. You haven't mentioned your area, so I don't know how much this applies to you. As a chemistry and physics instructor, my standard practice for long-response question was to ask students to show their steps from the the information in the question to the answer (i.e. show their work) Typical things I would assign credit for were:
* Identifying the proper variable for the proper piece of information
from the problem (and explicitly stating it)
* Explicitly stating the equation they were using
* Explicitly stating the transform of the equation to show how it was solved (or multiple equations were combined)
* Explicitly stating the answer, with appropriate units, and
significant digits.
As for how I would go through the stack, it was usually by page, section, or question, depending on which made the most sense. For me, by page was only if everything on the page was a simple right wrong check. By section or question was based on how test items relied on each other; if there was a section of questions based around a hypothetical lab and its results, I would grade each student's section, complete all of those sections, and then move onto the next part of the exam. For my typical long responses, I would grade one long response at a time.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2019/02/09
| 798
| 3,465
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have spent 4.5 years on my PhD, writing my thesis, with just one average publication. I am 30yo with no work experience and don't want to go to industry. I have been looking at several postdoctoral positions and it seems every postdoc position needs representative papers showing proof for the work. Will I be able to get a postdoc and pursue academia?<issue_comment>username_1: A strong recommendation by a (ideally known - at least to your postdoc mentor) PhD supervisor should compensate and may even outweigh publications. That person might also explain why you have not published - for example due to null results which are just hard to publish in some fields, but nevertheless can be the result of good scientific work.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Your question is very much field dependent. In some fields it is acceptable to go without a single publication for your PhD (I believe this is true for some subfields in economics, literature and math). However, you are expected to produce according to your community's standards: for example, in the economics/maths examples above you are expected to have at least one or two working papers/papers under submission containing solid results that were discussed in some workshops. In the literature domain, I understand that there's a lot of focus on teaching, written essays and book reviews etc. (I get this knowledge secondhand, I'm far from a humanities faculty). In my field (CS/AI/ML) you wouldn't be allowed to graduate with one average publication, and would most likely not have been allowed to go 4+ years into your thesis, unless there were *very* unusual circumstances (you mention industry, so I'm assuming you are at the very least in a STEM discipline).
So, the question you should be asking yourself is: *am I comparable to my peers in terms of my PhD accomplishments?*
If you have a lot of amazing work that just needs a bit more time, you can either
1. Ask your advisor to graduate in another year to let these results come to fruition under the umbrella of your thesis OR
2. Put them up on ArXiv (or the equivalent) and list them there. This is not ideal, but at least it shows that you weren't idle.
From the perspective of a postdoc host, I would most likely pass on an application that's clearly lacking in publications, even if it is backed up by glowing references. I would be more inclined to accept one that is backed up by preprints, if they contained amazing results that are vouched for by people whose opinion I respect. Postdocs should be people who are able to support their own research thread without very close supervision (they should be more independent than grad students at the very least), so you should prove to me that this is indeed the case; this is a tall order without proof that you can actually publish peer-reviewed work in good venues on your own.
I'm sorry to offer an answer you most likely don't want to hear, and I wish you all the best!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It depends mostly for which positions you apply: some postdoc jobs attract a lot of applications (prestigious institution, high salary, cutting-edge research topic, etc.), and some really don't: it's not so uncommon to see certain postdoc positions not filled by lack of acceptable candidate. Because this level of job is very specialized everyone with a PhD gets a chance, assuming you are not too picky about where you apply.
Upvotes: -1
|
2019/02/09
| 4,079
| 17,233
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am from Computer Science (CS) doing microscopy imaging applications, mainly in software side.
Recently we submitted a paper to *Scientific Reports* on a new algorithm. My own human blood cells (a few tiny drops of blood) were used in the experiments. The experiments are extremely trivial.
However, our paper got quality checked, from the Journal Editor:
>
> Authors reporting experiments on humans and/or the use of human tissue samples must confirm that all experiments were performed in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations. Additionally the article file must include a statement identifying the institutional and/or licensing committee approving the experiments, including any relevant details, in the “Methods” section. Please check that the information provided in the methods section is unambiguous using the following requirements:
>
>
> * A statement to confirm that all methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations.
> * A statement to confirm that all experimental protocols were approved by a named institutional and/or licensing committee.
> * Must include a sentence confirming that informed consent was obtained from all subjects or, if subjects are under 18, from a parent
> and/or legal guardian.
>
>
>
Briefly speaking, we need a bioethics statement that says, the blood in the experiments is approved by the University and the donor (which is me).
However, we are from CS and the University bio-ethics committee asked us to build a bio-safe lab before providing such license to us. This is time-consuming, costly, and far beyond our scope. Worse, there is no available human blood cells in the University for now. And I do not want to delay the paper submission.
My questions:
* How can I by-pass the bio-ethics statement? Would there be any law issues? I am the donor and I approve any usage of my own blood. Why would there be an issue?
* What are the proper, canonical, professional way of handling this?
---
**Updates:**
Declarations:
1. >
> Why not use public datasets?
>
>
>
I am not doing machine learning, and our microscopy is specially designed. So I cannot use datasets from other groups.
2. >
> Are you looking for retroactive permission?
>
>
>
No. We are applying to IRB for a new license. (That said, my previous experiments are *unknown personal behaviors*, and it has nothing to do with the group and the PI)
3. >
> Can you use other samples, e.g. animal blood?
>
>
>
I do have other samples. Besides, I have tried mice blood but their red blood cells are x4 smaller and beyond the hardware & software limits. I would like human red blood cells to be in the paper because in convention it is the one to demonstrate the method, and its donut shape helps illustrating one of our major arguments.
A summary for today's talk with IRB (what they really need):
* **Biohazard**: PI, the donor, and the person who is handling the blood, will have to take biosafety training, which is simple and online (I suppose).
* **Bioethics**: The donor's confirmation for the experiments. (Actually, there is much more to discuss; but we skip this part)
* **How the blood is obtained**: IRB does not care whatever interaction between the donor and the person analyzing the blood; they are only responsible for safety of all the persons involved, and that if the donor is from the University, make sure he/she is volunteered. Consequently, we can get the blood from:
1. Our lab. Additional equipments are required, lancets etc, as long as it qualifies as a bio-safe lab. (the IRB guy does not know the exact items; but can tell there is another committee to deal with...) Now it involves **biohazard** again.
2. Other groups with professionals.
3. Local hospitals.
4. Commercial vendors.
Now it is much clearer. I opt for **Commercial vendors**. Here will be my next steps:
1. Finish the biohazard training.
2. Submit the IRB form and get their permission. (only biohazard issue, not bioethics)
3. Get commercial blood samples (under $100).
4. Re-do the experiments, and submit the paper again.
In such a way, only the biohazard part is *cared* by IRB. Bioethics, blood acquisition, IRB does not care. And this is the fastest way to get it done.
Thanks everyone reading and helping me.<issue_comment>username_1: This is a much bigger deal than you seem to think it is.
>
> What are the proper, canonical, professional way of handling this?
>
>
>
You (or your research group) should seek to partner with someone with practical experience running experiments on human tissue, which does not have to be from your University. As long as you are running experiments on human tissue, someone in the pipeline needs to have knowledge of the ethical way to do it, *and be able to properly document it*. If your group is working alone, you have to take that burden on yourself (which is how I interpret the the response from the university's bio-ethics committee.) If you partner with someone, yes you will have to 'spread around the credit', but you won't have to be the ones to ensure that your tissues are handled ethically.
From your questions, it seems to me that you / your group is familiar with the equipment (enough that you were able to get the sample and correctly image it), but it is not clear to me that your group is set up to actually collect the sample in a professional way. You've mentioned CS, so I assume that your facilities are not set up to collect specimens, but rather to analyze the images. (Are you set up to safely *handle* and observe them? I can't tell from the question.)
It also seems to me that your research is focused on what happens once the sample has been given to you (From calling it a 'trivial experiment', an extremely trivial experiment, a 'few tiny drops of blood', etc.) This says to me that you have no experience running professional experiments on human tissue. That lack of experience is causing you to think that it is unimportant. I would bet that you have not been through Ethics and Compliance Training; you should start there. Yes it will consume time (and therefore money). But isn't the upfront cost of getting properly trained a better price than not being able to have your work published in a decent journal (which is where you currently are)?
One way that may help you think about why this is important: You believe everything is on the up and up because you were there. How do you prove this to someone who wasn't? Where is the paper trail proving you gave your blood with your explicit consent? Was it obtained in a sterile manner? (Prove it.) Was the sample harvested ethically and safely? (Prove it.) \*
>
> How can I by-pass the bio-ethics statement?
>
>
>
I am not about to answer this question. I **do not** suggest you try to do so. Any legal issues would likely come from the tissue source sueing (so, I don't expect you would sue yourself). BUT the questions to your reputation could be something you have not thought about. If you are willing to publish results without a bio-ethics statement (even on something as "extremely trivial" as this), your audience will start to raise questions that will haunt you.
>
> And I do not want to delay the paper submission.
>
>
>
*Whether you want to or not doesn't really matter.* You have to put publishing this work on hold, until you can find somebody with the proper training to work with you, or you meet the requirements of the university so that your group can collect and handle samples professionally. I suspect that there is a very real chance that you will have to treat this work as a rough draft and repeat it on a new sample (one that comes with the appropriate paperwork).
\* And, just to be clear, my 'prove it' comments aren't challenges; they are the questions I don't think you are qualified to answer. What medical training do you have? What training in bio-ethics do you have?
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: First, I'll assume that you don't and can't bypass the statement. The journal isn't going to go along with that.
Second, while this may be an edge case, the line needs to be drawn *somewhere* and it has been decided that the line is drawn in the most conservative place so that you don't need to make judgements in every case. The reason for conservatism here is the potentially harmful result of getting it wrong - from HIV to Ebola.
Third, there are issues that you aren't considering. While it is your blood and you certainly give permission, there are protocols for handling blood that treat it, properly, as a bio-hazard. Researchers (and medical personnel) who deal with this a lot know the risks and take proper precautions. But you haven't, apparently, indicated that you took those precautions yourself, thinking of them as trivial.
Fourth, it seems like you didn't deal with your institutions IRB (or equivalent) or you would have been told of these issues and how to avoid them. You may be able to go to them now and get the appropriate authorization for what previously happened, but I would guess they might well object.
Finally, I suggest that you abandon the current paper for now, redo the experiment under proper protocols and then re-write it (copying essentially everything from the current version) and then re-submit it with a complete accounting of the experiment. User Anyon suggested using another lab (after getting ok from IRB). Another option would be to (with IRB permission) elicit help from a physician or medical lab to aid in obtaining specimens and dealing with any waste.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: I can think of one (possibly) entirely ethical way to bypass the more onerous demands of the bioethics committee: don't use human blood.
You are working on microscope imagery, rather than immunology or any other functional issue, so any blood cell of approximately the right size ought to be acceptable. I would try contacting a local vet to see about collecting a sample.
It would still be necessary to consult with the committee, since they may well have guidelines for animal experimentation, but presumably the guidelines will be much less demanding, since in general you don't get cross-species infection issues.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: It is possible for an IRB to make a determination that your research, though it involves humans, does not rise to the level of human use that would require a whole protocol. I've gone down this road when trying to do 'experiments' that involve students using a web interface and having their activities recorded. It takes a few months and costs several hundred dollars, but it's probably the best case scenario for you.
That said, I do not know if you will be able to get such an exemption when you are drawing, storing and processing blood. Regardless of whose blood it is and whether they gave consent, there are legitimate concerns about infection. In this case, you may need to hire a group that does this kind of work and already has approved protocols in place (or find an extant dataset from such a group that you can use).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I'd say this (given the comments).
While I have not encountered such a situation, I'd suggest that because you are a Computer Science-trained person and *not* a trained biomedical researcher, the board did act *very* unreasonably by demanding that you, as such, and presumably with knowledge of your credentials if the institution is even half worth the salt of whatever accreditation it is supposed to have, undergo an even *more* technical and expertise-requiring, and thus introducing even *worse* possibilities for screwups, project of building your own bio-lab by yourself. Given that, I can absolutely understand and totally sympathize with (see my username tag) your plight. Personally I would not entrust that task to anyone but a real specialist in that area, i.e. a trained biomedical researcher. Using facilities is one thing. *Creating* a facility yourself is kind of like, to use a computer-related analogy, amateurs writing their own crypto, I'd think, and the actions of the board like that seeing you were not using proper encryption for secure communications and then demanding that as a response you should go and fashion your own ciphers and programs instead of trying to help you get properly-built stuff.
That said, you cannot expect the journal to lower its standards. While the risk from this is no doubt very small, nonetheless the precautionary principle is always exercised, as the other answers have alluded. As I mentioned in another comment, one could imagine a situation in which one (not saying you do, so don't freak) had an undiagnosed bloodborne infection (many do not immediately produce symptoms, e.g. Hepatitis) and then inadvertently spread it to a lab assistant or other person who contacted the blood. The journals are right to be concerned with the improper procedure used just as you are to be annoyed with ham-handed management.
If the experiment is truly trivial, then I'd suggest that you should not necessarily be too shy about repeating it (plus you may discover that in the course of doing so you could do something even better with a second think-through). The real problem though is getting management to approve, and I'd suggest your focus really should be on finding out why they'd make that demand and to find an alternate solution that will provide the facilities and/or handling required to meet the ethical guidelines correctly without you having to be pushed even further beyond the limits of your expertise.
Moreover, I'd also wonder why you'd need to rush this paper. Is there something of significant negative consequentiality that will happen if you do not submit it "on time"? (e.g. if you fail to deliver by the "desired" time is it going to jeopardize your position, or something else that would *seriously* affect you and/or others under your trust?) If that is the case, then you might want to take that up in the disputes with management as well and tell them that you are seeking to humour their concern that the experiment be performed according to proper ethical protocol yet also that you have an important reason you need to get it done as soon as possible.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: My apologies, I have not gone through the other answers. However, here are some practical tips:
1. There are independent Human Ethics committees that you can apply to who can then rule on them.
2. You can always ask for a waiver if the blood sample is going to be provided by the principal investigator in an investigator initiated experiment.
3. You can simply contact the nearest teaching hospital attached to a medical school or any biomedical research facility, talk to researchers there to collaborate with you on this experiment. Many would be happy to collaborate across disciplines, institutions, etc. Many journals even reward transnational studies.
4. You need to mention in your ethics committee application if this is a non-traditional method or if the method itself is experimental so that they can rule on various aspects of the experiment apart from the ethical part - biosafety, etc.
Hope this helps.
Added: On Independent Ethics Committee: <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5839245/#cre292-note-0016>
COPE Statement: <https://publicationethics.org/files/Full%20set%20of%20English%20flowcharts_9Nov2016.pdf>
Pay attention to : What to do if you suspect an ethical problem with a submitted manuscript.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Your results are not publishable.
---------------------------------
I think the others are beating around the bush too much.
You didn't deal with procedures for handling human samples. You didn't document your consent, you didn't have any procedures for adverse findings. Could you even prove it was your blood?
Your IRB will not approve you retroactively, a) because they don't do that and b) as far as I can tell, they shouldn't have approved your procedure anyway.
It would have been easy to get approved a priori, and I'm sorry your training in CS didn't prepare you for this, but if you really need this paper ASAP, you need to forget about getting your sample approved and figure out how to get one you can work with.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_8: I understand how requiring an approval and protocol for a few drops of your own blood may sound like a bureaucratic overkill, but it really isn't. Imagine you badly hurt your finger or catch a bloodborne disease in the process. Since this would've happened in your lab while you were performing your research duties, it would effectively constitute an occupational accident with all its consequences. If you could prove your adviser / head of lab / etc. knew you were doing experiments with your blood, yet didn't provide you with training and equipment required to do it safely, you'd likely have a legal claim against them, or the institution.
So yes, there are potential legal issues with your approach, and you'll have to fulfil the requirements for experiments with human tissue, or do your experiment with something else.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/02/09
| 1,028
| 4,357
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am looking to one job opening for a Lecturer position in a university (mostly dedicated to teaching but expanding its research capabilities), which asks me to submit a "proposal of academic plan". The application is actually in Spanish, and the above is a literal translation of "*propuesta de plan academico*". The job opening has no further information on what the latter means, as if it were self explanatory. I could well contact them, but first I want to see if this is something very obvious to you.
What do I think it would be? Not sure. A bit of research agenda perhaps, combined with prospect teaching courses, and perhaps personal development as academic, e.g. training, network building, etc.
Any ideas?<issue_comment>username_1: I suspect that even if the TERM is not defined, that knowing the JOB will help you make a proper submission. Is it a postdoc or lecutureship or tenure track? Even if the job description is scanty (but why would you invest time in a detailed submission for a job that you don't know what it is), you can make some guesses based on the school, group, etc. Is the school a teaching or research university?
So, I really don't understand coming at this thing with a "can you explain this term to me" versus giving more context, clues. This is both you might answer the question yourself or how we might help you.
Also, I would reach out say you are interested and ask for guidance.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: From what it seems like, the phrase itself is fairly open-ended and vague. I would write up a document talking about what you:
* Are wanting students to take away from the course.
* What kinds of times and office hours you might want to schedule.
* How you plan on getting the students involved.
* How you plan on structuring the course (work, office hours, etc.)
I also agree with what username_1 said. Definitely reach out to the university anyway.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I understand that you should explain what are your plans in academic terms: if you have the intention of taking a Master or teaching or whatever.
My academic plan is: finish writing my article and using it to help me to get my Master degree.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: I was hoping somebody with more experience would answer this, since I am also currently in the process of applying for my first Lecturer position. You say you are applying for a positions in Spain, so take care that my experience (and the guidance I received) was targeted at applications in UK universities.
I would assume your *academic plan* is what UK universities refer to as *(X-year) research plan* (typically, they would ask for a 3-year or a 5-year research plan with the application). They broadly want to know:
* that you are able to plan ahead for 3-5 years and plan your own work (now that you are moving away from a "supervised" postdoc position to a Lecturer position)
* broad ideas or topics you plan to tackle in those 3-5 years. No specific details, just 2 or 3 broad research ideas, where you show that you plan to tackle relevant and interesting problems (well, that's what you have to convince the interview panel of)
* how you plan to fund your research activities, get students and other resources. At least for UK applications, each of the 2-3 research topics presented should be bundled up with a plan to get it funded. Again, while you don't oblige yourself to apply to specific grants they want to see that you are familiar with the system of obtaining funding and know how you are going finance your support research staff.
* all of the above specifically in the context of the position, team, department you are applying for (so, it should be re-done for every application you are doing, highlighting the points pertinent to the specific research group you are applying for).
**Edit:** (I understand that Spanish is spoken outside of Spain as well, so this might not apply fully, but, according to my Spanish colleague):
* he said he would interpret *"propuesta de plan academico"* as not *only* a research plan, but rather a document that would also explain how your research activities will benefit your teaching performance and student engagement, and vice versa (i.e. how your research can benefit from your teaching activities).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2019/02/09
| 516
| 2,194
|
<issue_start>username_0: I graduated with a B.S. in Electrical Engineering back in May. However, due to some extra credits I also have a general studies degree, the diploma for which simply states "Bachelor of Science" and nothing else.
For resumes and general discussion is it appropriate to say what subjects contributed to the general studies degree? And how would should I describe it on my resume (right now it just says "Bachelor of Science").
For example, I took psychology and math courses that contributed to the general studies degree, so is it accurate to say that the degree is "a general studies degree focused on mathematics and psychology".<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, you could do that, especially if there was a "named" concentration. I doubt that it is necessary, but wouldn't be unusual to list it. But somewhere in your CV you should probably indicate that you have studied specific things.
But don't make it seem like you have a math degree (or even a "minor") unless you actually do. the descriptive phrasing you suggest seems appropriate.
There are a lot of ways to include such information in your CV, but it is best to include it somewhere.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: My advice:
\*B.S. Electrical engineering
\*B.S. General studies (math, psychology concentrations)
List them both, with the EE first--it is the one you would list if you could only list one, right?
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: If you are applying somewhere where mathematics or psychology is relevant, and you have a substantial amount of credits therein, then I recommend listing:
* B.S. in electric engineering
* B.S. in general studies (with m credits mathematics, p credits psychology)
I would presume that studies in mathematics would be favourable in most engineering contexts, but psychology might not be particularly interesting, so you might want to include math most of the time but consider omitting psychology. But sometimes it might be the other way around, or both or neither might be relevant.
Indicating the amount of credits is more specific and takes no more space than the alternatives, which is why I would prefer it.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/09
| 672
| 2,925
|
<issue_start>username_0: Two months ago, I submitted a paper to a journal. Within two weeks, editor in chief gave me: "Invitation to Revise". He himself read the manuscript and provides some comments.
I worked on his comments during the past two months. Today I finished the revision and submitted the revised version of the manuscript in the journal submission system. Eight minutes later, editor-in-chief emailed me that the paper did not accept, please see the comments to the editors and reviewers at the end of email.
There were two lines of comments, telling me could you please submit the manuscript to our new special issue, with a link.
When I look at the web page of their special issue, I found out that their special issue submission, will start some month later and its deadlines are much later. I don't have so much time, to wait for this.
What can I do? Is it useful to email to EIC?
When I don't have the right to submit the manuscript to two journals at the same time, what prevents EIC and editors from acting unethically?
Especially, when they have all the powers?
EDIT: In response to comments, the question is:
Is there anywhere to complain about the behaviors of editors of journals except themselves?<issue_comment>username_1: Usually, papers submitted to a special issue are promptly published online. They may not receive an issue number until some time later, when the issue is complete. In this situation, there is no more delay to publication than any other submission. Nobody cares about the delay to the issue number.
You should check the journal's policies, and if necessary, ask the editor about the intended timeline. If you do not like the timeline, take your paper to another journal.
Here there is no indication that the editor has acted unethically. It is fine for the editor to ask you to submit your paper differently. Editors might even think they are helping you by directing you to the special issue, because maybe people interested in the topic of the special issue will read your paper.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: It's probably just supply and demand. Your paper isn't good enough to make it into the regular editions, but he is going to lower the bar a bit to fill out the special issue.
I have seen this. It's not nefarious. In a way the regular/special difference is like the difference of journals with different importance, exclusivity.
In terms of what you should do: I would lean to moving on to another journal. And upgrade the paper based on the reviews. Now, if the editor could tell you the paper was good to go (for the special), that is different. But it sounds like this is not the case or else he would have just told you that at the time. Being invited to enter another uncertain outcome of his would not interest me. Yeah, you will have new competition at new journal, but at least you are moving on. How I would prefer it.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/02/10
| 1,690
| 6,704
|
<issue_start>username_0: **TLDR: Professor apparently only takes at most one look at a student's answer to determine correctness, doesn't award full marks kind of unfairly (clarifications below), is offended by hearing the question in the title, and grade reviews end up taking up to 5 hours due to complications I try to make clear here:**
Last Thursday, our professor lets us know he'll be in his office doing grade reviews for everyone so that we have a fair grade, see if everyone agrees with his correction and all that stuff: I'm the first one in and I start reviewing my answers to the first and easiest items on the exam... and I find that the professor could have been a little fairer.
After disagreeing with a few marks taken off because of small stuff, I ask:
*- Then you think it's justifiable to take points out of the exam because of things as small as this?*
*- Watch your tone! If you want a 10 right now, just walk out of my office right now, don't speak to me again and I'll give it to you!*
And then, before I even had a chance to say anything at all, he crossed out my 8.2 and wrote a gigantic 10 where the 8.2 was before. When I had a chance to say my piece, all I did was apologize and try to emphasize as much I possibly could that I meant no disrespect at all, I was just trying to gauge how rigorous of a standard I should expect so that any mistake I made in the past wouldn't be repeated.
After a while of my apologies, he said:
*"Alright, forget about it, let's just start over and pretend it never happened"*
A while after that, I was still pretty anxious, so he gave me some time to calm down and my grade went from 8.2 to 9.6. I guess what I'm looking for in an answer is advice on what I could have done better so that I don't mess up like this in the future.
>
> **Some helpful background but not absolutely necessary**: A colleague of mine had an initial grade of 9.3, after the review, it was 9.9. The reason was that in his answer to a problem asking for a proof of a certain statement, he actually stated and proved a much more general result and said the initial statement was just a particular consequence of that result - the professor didn't like that and thought a 10 was undeserved. Another colleague mentioned a story of grades going up so far as 9.5 after the review (with an initial grade of 1.5) in another exam of some other course he gave on the past. Yet another colleague shared that his initial grade was 3.8, but he managed to convince the professor that a lot of his other arguments were right too - his grade would then go up to something between 5.5 (the bare minimum for a C is 5) and 7, and in order to avoid that the professor took points of another unrelated answer which had initially been awarded a full mark, said "alright, you got a 5, it's good enough" and left it at that (my colleague was the first one after me in the office and heard what had happened before because the door to his office was open, so that's why I think he didn't argue anymore). Finally, I and another colleague whose grade went from 8.3 to 9.3 agreed that a general impression of his correction was that he just read your proof once and if he didn't agree that was it (where it also happened to him that he proved more general results than asked and the professor didn't like it or hadn't read the arguments carefully). All in all, the review started at 2 pm and ended some 4-5 hours later and a lot of people got their grades up.
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: 1. That is an annoying rhetorical question with very little substance to it. Of course he thinks it's justified because (a) he marked it that way and (b) he verbally commented in your session that this was how he did it. If you have an argument to make, make it. But that question in header is bad news. (You asked for that specifically to be evaluated, here.)
2. There appears to be a very lawyerly habit of students nowadays to assume that it is normal to agitate for better grades via argument. I don't remember that when I went to school. If there is a mistake, fine, bring it up. But debating points of partial credit? Huh? That is just strange. Suck it up man and learn from it and get the question perfect next time.
3. If your presentation during the discussion is anything like this question (in length, and in narrative versus upfront), that's also bad news.
P.s. SE mods: he asked for an evaluation of tone and such, so this is on topic to the quesiton.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It's quite difficult to catch the tone of what you said from a written recollection, but:
>
> So you think it's justifiable to take points of my proof for *this*?
>
>
>
(emphasis how I imagine the professor perceived it) is indeed not very respectful. Next time, try something like this:
>
> I'm sorry, I understand that I should have given a more detailed reasoning about why [...] but it's just such a small and obvious part of the proof -- isn't it a bit harsh to take off Y points for this, what do you think?
>
>
>
Keep in mind that if you do this often you might still get a reputation as "that kid who tries to argue every tiny point even when they already have a pretty good grade" but if you are reasonable about getting told "no" it shouldn't be much of a problem. Still, you have to weigh your chances of getting an increased grade against the chances of being perceived as annoying or needy.
However, the professor's response in this case is completely unacceptable. Giving you full marks based not on your performance on the test but based on you getting out of their office is a gross violation of academic standards (even if they later rescinded this "offer"). Honestly, the whole thing that transpired here sounds like both sides messed up. It sounds like the professor (rightfully) immediately regretted "offering" you full marks.
So many people getting their grades increased sounds like the professor should invest a bit more time in designing a clear grading model and then consistently apply it. The way they currently have it set up pretty much guarantees having to argue every little point with every student. Even if what you said is inconsiderate and perhaps rude, they had themselves set up for it.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: He offered a 10 if you don't speak and you spoke? Step 1, know when you're arguing against your own interests.
Step 2. Try asking how / what questions instead of why questions.
* Why always comes across with an implied "I know better".
* Instead try:
+ "what could I have done better on this question to get maximum marks".
+ "How does this answer fall short of being correct"
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/02/10
| 5,332
| 22,451
|
<issue_start>username_0: At best, the PhD thesis is read by:
* The author
* The examiners
* The supervisor
* The author's parents
* The author's roommate / spouse / fellow students in research group
Or less than 10 people in total. What, then, is the point of writing it? Writing a complete PhD thesis is a time-consuming process, and that time could easily have gone into taking more courses, doing more research, supervising more students, and so on. Of course the PhD student has no choice but to write one, because the programme typically requires it. However that still begs the question as to why the programme requires it in the first place. if the thesis is so useless that so few people read it, what's the point of demanding a thesis as a prerequisite for graduation?
Somewhat related: [What is the point of a PhD thesis whose content already exists in published papers?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/66545/what-is-the-point-of-a-phd-thesis-whose-content-already-exists-in-published-pape) Still, even if there are more readers because a thesis provides a gentle introduction to the field, it seems more sensible to me to just write a monograph and leave out the thesis.<issue_comment>username_1: For simplicity, I am going to let your premise that (virtually) nobody reads a PhD thesis stand, even though that's debatable and also a bit field-dependent. There are still a number of reasons for it to exist:
* It's arguably more of a "writing to learn" task anyway. Students don't produce theses for the sake of the thesis, but to learn how to do research and write it up properly in a long, coherent book. Even if no single person outside the committee reads the thesis ever, it was still a good learning experience for the student.
* There is a lot of history around the concept of a doctoral program requiring developing in new thesis (in the original meaning of the word), writing it down in a book (the dissertation), and defending this new thesis against the local learned community. Even though nowadays many fields don't communicate new research ideas through long books anymore, there is still enough historical appeal to the idea that few programs want to get out of it entirely. The entire process of writing and defending the dissertation also has some appeal as a significant milestone event, which nicely demarks the end of an era for the student - he is no longer a student, but a complete member of the academic community.
* In many countries there is a legal angle to this. At least in Europe, a PhD program is usually legally defined to conclude with the production of a doctoral dissertation of some kind.
* In the age of "stapler theses" (which consist of a synopsis and a collection of previously published papers in verbatim), the entire affair is fairly low-cost anyway. My last students rarely spent longer than 2 or 3 months on the actual "thesis writing".
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The main skill that students should learn during their PhD and demonstrate to graduate is producing, describing, and defending scientific results.
Thus, when a PhD student wishes to graduate, they have to present some work that justifies this degree.
This work is, broadly speaking, the thesis.
Technically speaking, this can just be a bunch of peer-reviewed papers, and cumulative theses (a.k.a. stapler theses) are more or less exactly this, but the student is usually required to write an introduction and conclusion as a framework for their papers.
However, there are many reasons why a student cannot provide these or published papers do not reflect the entire work of the PhD student in question:
* The field may have very long peer-review times, e.g., pure mathematics.
* The field’s publishing and hiring culture favours one big paper in a highly ranked journal comprising everything, e.g., biology.
* Scientific communication in the field mostly happens in form of large monographs (which a thesis can be).
* The PhD work is only a piece in a huge project and is not suitable for being published on its own.
* Some parts of the PhD work have not (yet) been published when the student wishes to graduate.
A thesis gives PhD candidates the opportunity to graduate in these cases.
Note that in most of these cases, the writing work spent on the thesis is not wasted on a few readers, because the material will be reused in peer-reviewed papers later¹ or the thesis itself will actually be read by more people.
So from a certain point of view, your premise is wrong: The thesis will be read by more people; it’s just not in form of the thesis itself.
This still leaves the point of why PhD students are forced to write an introduction and conclusion to a cumulative thesis, but then:
* This is not a lot of work (I did this in a few weeks).
* It may spur the student to see their work in a broader picture.
* It is the most useful information for the thesis committee. (Depending on how the committee is formed, they clichéically only read the introduction and conclusion.)
* It does train scientific writing on a level not seen in regular papers.
---
¹ though these are usually not read by that many people either
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Riemann, Gauss, Grothendieck, Serre, Scholze, and various other mathematicians throughout history produced absolutely fantastic doctor thesis that shaped entire fields.
Riemann's, for example, marked the beginning of the study of Riemannian Geometry and of Riemann surfaces.
In his master's thesis, <NAME> delineated the KKT conditions.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Back up a bit. **A PhD thesis is meant to describe research that was explicitly conducted to advance the state knowledge in some relevant manner.**
The extent to which it is *not* read is a failure of some sort to reach that ideal:
1. The state of knowledge was not sufficiently advanced.
2. The advance is not sufficiently relevant (yet).
3. The advance has not been adequately disseminated (yet).
To be clear, *failure* above refers specifically to the readership size question. There can be other measures of achievement that contribute to the "success" of the PhD thesis: Candidates may have gained
1. knowledge
2. research skills
3. credentials
that will serve them well throughout their career. But make no mistake: A PhD student should strive to make contributions beyond the benefits received. Ideally, the thesis will be read by more than those with only a personal interest in the candidate, whether by cover-to-cover reading or selective consultation for details elaborating on earlier publications of preliminary/intermediate results.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: "No-one ever reads a PhD thesis" is a big assumption, one that I would think says more about what *you* think a PhD thesis is about, and less about what it *actually* is about.
I have read many PhD theses in my time. I find them to be a very different resource to papers. Often a PhD thesis is a very good read if you want to get a good overview of a particular field, explained in relatively simple language, and introducing and building up a complex subject relatively from scratch in easily digestible logical blocks, rather than assuming most knowledge is known to the reader.
Similarly, a PhD thesis is also more likely to go into some depth / proofs / exhaustive experiments that are typically omitted from journal publications on account of space and conciseness.
As a bonus, a PhD thesis is far more likely to be accessible to the general public than its respective papers, as the latter typically tend to be behind paywalls, whereas the former is typically accessible on-demand for free from their respective universities.
Finally, if you are lucky, your PhD thesis may form the cornerstone for an entire field, far more than a single paper might.
Having said all that, one factor that skews one's impression of how often theses tend to be read, is that it is still more likely that subsequent authors reading the thesis will cite the relevant papers generated from it instead, since they are more relevant in the context of a *citation*, therefore giving a wrong impression about how useful PhD theses are when one is exploring the literature in the first place.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_6: Please think of the mathematician <NAME>'s 1950 Princeton thesis on harmonic
anaylsis. This single thesis made him world-famous. Thesis is an intellectual start for
many academics,a sort of ladder to the higher world of thought and approach.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: At least in my field (physics), the PhD thesis is a pointless ritual that deserves to die. It continues to exist only for historical reasons.
A bunch of answers have quibbled with the statement that nobody reads a PhD thesis. Although I have sometimes read people's theses in my field, I would have preferred it if the relevant work had just been posted on arxiv.org as a series of preprints of papers (as has been the custom in my field since ca. 1998 for anyone who wants their work to actually get read).
Basically what should happen IMO is that all schools should allow a "stapler thesis," i.e., PhD candidates who have published 1 to 3 papers in a field should be allowed to get the degree. One paper would be for the case of a groundbreaking result. Three papers would be more normal.
Usually a thesis contains one or more introductory chapters laying out the theory for a nonspecialist. These are handy if there are one or two members of committee who are not familiar with the candidate's subfield. But it's absurd to go to the trouble of writing all that material just for the benefit of one or two people. If it's really a good intro, better than anything else out there in textbooks or review articles, then it should be publishable as a stand-alone paper in a journal that publishes that sort of thing. In my field, that would be Am J Phys for a short paper, or Rev Mod Phys for something longer. But in most cases the same material has already been covered in a publication such as a textbook, and the thing to do would just be to walk over to the relevant committee member's office and hand them that textbook to browse before they dive into the thesis.
It's possible that the thesis still makes sense in some fields. For instance, a sociology thesis might in effect be a long monograph, and I believe it's still customary for people in sociology to publish monographs (maybe even expected for tenure at some schools?).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: One aspect of this being overlooked is that often times broader issues in a particular field of study - issues perhaps years down the road - will drive retrospective research into what others have thought or written about in the same field. A research work in one decade might prove to be a foundational, essential work in another. Think of it as a loose analog to lawyers and judges seeking legal precedents, but in a more academic context.
Granted, this may be an exceptional case, and surely there are many PhD dissertations sitting on shelves, untouched since their completion, but I think most dissertation efforts were undertaken with a sincere effort to research something of value; there's really no way of knowing at the time it's written of its relative future worth.
As an example, many years ago, I read a good portion of a PhD dissertation on "tri-state" or "indeterminant-state" computing - but it was written about 40 years ago. Right now, quantum computing explores variations on almost precisely this very concept. That makes the dissertation I read borderline prophetic, as it was literally decades before any notion of quantum computing existed.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: In the hard sciences, I really don't see the value of the exercise. Seems like more benefit from learning to publish and publishing real papers. If anything, it can be the opposite of value as there are people who write a thesis and don't have independent papers. Although maybe sweating the thesis is away to put the weaker students through something (some exercise) before you give them the union card. In some European countries it's actually even explicit that the thesis is just 3 published papers (without even an effort to synthesize them).
However instead of worrying about changing society, my advice is to just deal with the situation. Do your best on papers. And for the thesis just get by (it is pass fail after all). Note that does NOT mean to let obvious errors or typos or poor writing get by. It should still be good professional work product, like a technical reort in government or industry.
So:
* Don't kill yourself on the lit search.
* Don't go learning LATEX if you don't already use it.
* Don't use some super complicated Word template that is hard to manipulate.
* Don't use some complicated drafting or graphing program if not familiar with it already.
* Do fit in unpublished work so it is "somewhere" but don't kill yourself to finish up every thread by doing more experiments. Assuming yu have enough in the main material, the point is just to somewhere put down stuff so not lost to lab group. But don't kill yourself on this...it's a nice to do.
* Same as last bullet but also use opportunity to document any little tricks of methods or apparatus that might help the group. But again...this is a niceness you are doing...not the main point.
* Do get it done fast and get out of there. Try to avoid a lot of editorial criticism.
P.s. I actually do think theses can be useful looking at a field or a research group especially when coming up to speed (or for members of same lab group). Get a feel for what is going on. Some between the lines given. But my impression is still that most people don't know this trick or do it enough. Also, I have definitely seen people omit citing prior work from theses.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: This is very field-dependent. In some fields, theses are read.
However, my experience in computer science is that the thesis is pointless, aside from being a degree requirement.
Your premise is optimistic. I am confident that, apart from myself and my advisor, no one has read more than 5% of my PhD thesis. And my advisor probably only read about 15% of it and skimmed the rest (based on the feedback he gave). I remember that, during my defense, one of the committee members had printed out the first ten or so pages of my thesis and was quickly reading the abstract before I started speaking.
My thesis has accrued precisely zero citations in three years, while the papers that went into it have gotten hundreds.
This is a bit disappointing, given that I put some effort into my thesis. I improved and simplified some results and included more detail and exposition than in the corresponding papers. That was a waste of my time.
My experience seems typical for computer science. The culture is that no one reads theses and they are a waste of time. But, again, this may be different in other fields or even in other countries.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: The purpose of a PhD thesis is to demonstrate that the author can do all of the following:
* Organize a large project
* that makes an original contribution to scientific knowledge;
* have the persistence to carry out such a large project;
* know the state-of-the-art in the field well enough to recognize an original contribution;
* have good enough communication skills to explain, diagram, and present the results;
* have the scientific rigor to present the results honestly, without "lying with statistics"; and
* provide valid citations for how the project builds upon existing work in the field.
A typical organization looking to hire a PhD is looking to fill an Associate Professor position or a senior scientific researcher position. The position typically is responsible for organizing a line of scientific research, obtaining funding, and presenting results that are worth the funders' investment.
Several posters on this thread have suggested "stapler theses" be used instead. Such theses do not demonstrate the ability to organize a large project, nor the persistence to carry it out.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_12: Until about 100 years ago, the PhD degree did not exist in many advanced academic environments. It postdates, by far, rigorous academic research in any subject. It has become the entry-level qualification for an academic career, I suggest, as a crude mechanism to weed out people who like the idea of an academic career but who lack the basic abilities to prosper in such a career.
Likewise, to be licensed to drive a car one has to take a test. The test does not really relate to generalised ability to drive, but it signals that you can't just sit in a car and drive it.
Some people can drive well, even if they have never taken a test, and some people can be brilliant academics without ever having to write a PhD thesis.
The answer to the question "what is the point of the PhD thesis..." is that writing it is the test you have to pass if you want an academic career. It is a different question to ask why is the PhD a basic requirement for an academic career.
For some research students, those who are not interested in an academic career but who are very interested in their subject, however, the requirement to write a thesis is a kind of realty check on their research. Without the need to write a thesis I could flatter myself that my work is ground-breaking; writing a thesis sets a bar, maybe not very high, that distinguishes reality from vanity.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_13: Much of the point of the dissertation is to demonstrate that you really understand something, which isn't really a function of journal articles or conference papers. In mathematics, anyway, the best thing about doctoral dissertations (and some master's theses) is that the good ones have thorough reviews of the literature and complete expositions of foundational material. In many cases, it's the only place to find details that are too basic for journals and too specialized for textbooks. So even a dissertation that isn't great from a research standpoint can be extremely useful for its exposition and bibliography.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_14: 1. The point of hard work is to get good (at something).
2. People will usually by nature be lazy.
3. Therefore it is (usually) necessary to find a way to trigger this hard work somehow.
Course requirements and theses and (ultimately) using the fear of "dropping out" are some ways to try and make this hard work happen.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I would like to offer a different perspective in my field i.e.meteorology and earth sciences. I actually find Ph.d theses very useful. Majority of the theses that I have looked at do contain the software (numerical Fortran routines) that solve a particular problem in atmospheric sciences usually in the appendices. In some universities the thesis is then digitized and placed in a online repository where can it be downloaded. In some cases one can actually search for these Fortran routines and then obtain the searches in a google search. In my field(and related fields) the thesis committee and the thesis advisor make it mandatory to include the software in the appendix. I have seen this in theses originating from the USA as well as from Europe and Asia.
So the cumbersome issue of contacting the author of a peer reviewed research paper and asking him/her for their software is completely eliminated.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_15: This question is based on a false premise, namely that nobody ever reads theses. This is a bit of a meme among grad students, but it's just that: A fashionable whinge. It's not actually true.
I've read plenty of theses, occasionally they will have some data that I need, I've even cited them. The biggest reason that I don't do it more is that usually the content of theses in my field is also published in papers, and it's better to use the original report.
In humanities theses are expected to be original works, and often people publish them as books. I've actually read many such books, often without realizing it was a thesis - the topic was just interesting to me. I found the book in a library, where it was bound with a professional cover, so presumably it was published by a real publisher. Not necessarily a best seller, but I'm sure more than 10 people read it. Some people must have even paid for it.
Similarly, many people stick to the topic of their thesis and keep reworking it into books and papers along the same line. In that case people may not have read the thesis, but the writing they did consume has its foundation in the work that went into the thesis.
There are plenty of people who graduate without publishing much. If such a person were applying for a job, certainly being able to look at their thesis would be valuable.
But to ask about readership is to miss the point. The thesis is an exam. Do you complain that writing papers for a class is pointless because only the instructor will read them? The thesis is exactly like an exam. It's your final exam of PhD school. You need to pass to show that you have learned enough to graduate. It might seem absurd to have an exam hundreds of pages long, but then again, big degree, big exam. You're not really required to make it hundreds of pages long, in any case.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_16: The premise is not valid. I have read hundreds of theses and dissertations when conducting research and regularly cite them in my work. One issue is that many theses and dissertations are collected behind various digital walls (Proquest, University repositories, etc) and are not easily viewable in a free and open way on the internet. It surprisingly still takes a library visit or special request to get a hold of them. I personally posted my 2012 dissertation on the web myself and now have a reasonable number of citations to it. I get questions and comments on a regular basis about the document and its contents to this day. Maybe we just need simply make the documents accessible.
EDIT: Just wanted to add that having a goal to write a theses that people do want to read, can also help. Writing with the expectation that no one reads it will likely diminish the quality and attractiveness to readers.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/02/10
| 1,691
| 6,781
|
<issue_start>username_0: 15 years ago I was young and dumb, now I'm not as young. No way around it, I did poor in college. My grades were abysmal and were part of a period of my life that has long since passed. I'm now at a point in my life where I'd love to go back to school and earn the degree I never did, but I've got my past mistakes looming over me.
Even if I start in a community college and get a perfect 4.0 for everything I'm enrolled in, my previous transcript will bring down my average. Completing a bachelor's is going to be far more of an uphill battle than it would be even just for an adult going to college while juggling a full time career and family. Is there any process to either ignore college work after a certain number of years have passed or a method to have them expunged?<issue_comment>username_1: That's not necessarily the impediment you may think. The institution where I taught would not accept nor transfer credit over ten years old. Pick one or two colleges you might attend, visit their admissions offices, and *ask.* There's a good chance you can start fresh.
There are two things to keep in mind. Your transcript from your old institution will still be there, and you will be asked for it when you apply for any degree program. It may lessen your chances of admission, but probably not because fifteen years is a long time.
The other is that you should be honest about your education history on your resume. Once again, fifteen years is a long time. Do well now and no employer will even consider that ancient history.
Go for it!
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Where I teach, not only would the age of the old courses lead to transfer problems, but our school also has the idea of academic bankruptcy, where newer courses (with some restrictions, almost none would apply to you) can be semi-erased. They remain on the transcript, but are not counted as part of the GPA. So I would say go for it, and as part of the application process check with the appropriate people there to see (a) if those old courses will be considered at all, and (b) if so, whether they have any equivalent of our academic bankruptcy.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: My own undergrad history was fairly lackluster, to be honest. (Without comparing grades, I don't know how it relates to "abysmal", but that's not the point.) When I was thinking about getting a graduate degree, I started by taking classes without being formally part of the degree. (In fact, I did that for both grad programs, now that I think about it.) The nice thing about this is that they'll often let just about anyone sign up. Maybe you need to talk to a professor first and have them champion you a little, but it certainly isn't anything like as complicated as applying for a degree. Most universities are happy to have someone paying the bills for a class. (So, there is that expense, and the extra time.)
Once you have taken a course or two at the university you are interested in, you have a transcript *there*. Assuming you do well, you can now use that as part of your application process. If you strike up a relationship with the professor(s) of the course(s), you might actually have someone to use as a reference. If you have evidence that you are now a better caliber student than you were as a ~20 year old kid, that also gives you something to talk about to the admissions interviewers.
So, even though you may not be able to expunge old grades, you would have a pathway to start fresh at a school where your old grades won't be part of the transcript.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: There is basically a "statute of limitations" for "old" grades. In most colleges, it's something like 10-12 years. Your 15 year absence from undergraduate work is outside that period.
That means that you can get a "fresh" start in a community college or four year undergraduate program. When applying to graduate schools, you will be supposed to submit your old grades, but they will be mostly discounted. What matters now is what you can do "now."
Even if your grades were say, 8-10 years old, just within the "statute of limitations," they would be heavily discounted. Graduate schools know that people can change, especially from one life phase to another. You have passed the "life phase" criterium.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: The simple answer is "sort of". Your undergrad GPA can have a tendency to follow you for years in that it is often on the resume. That said, a new program can give you the chance to start anew. For example, I got a 4.0 in grad school and a 3.3. in undergrad.
It's actually unclear if you want to finish a bachelors, improve the current GPA on your resume, or go to grad school. And why? Let me answer based on a few possibilities:
1. Never got your bachelors: Don't worry about the GPA...transfer credits as much as you can and get the college degree.
2. Don't like the GPA on your resume. I advise to leave it on if 3 or higher. Just develop your career and resume based on what you do now. Sure a pedegree from CalTech is nice but at the end of the day, if you are doing things in industry, people care about that way, way more. Especially for someone of your experience.
3. Want to go to grad school, finished bachelors with low GPA. (Why? And in what field? It probably won't increase income. Not I'm not saying not to do it...but just think on why.) All that said, if you want to, it is very doable. If you can show that have the aptitude (good test scores would help here), than people may look past the poor college performance. They will figure you partied a lot and grew up now.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: For completeness, and not because it is a big deal for gilliduck, some schools have a formal process for calling a mulligan on your academic performance.
At the schools where I've taught that have this is is called "academic bankruptcy".
The basic deal is that you draw a line and say "nothing before this counts". So you are starting over, this presumably this time you have a better idea of why you are there, what you want, and how much effort its all worth to you.
Now this is a little strange and at least some place that have this concept will, none-the-less, list your old classes on your official transcript. But they don't use them in the GPA printed on the transcript and they don't affect your degree.
---
I also know of at least one place that will let you apply an academic bankruptcy to a transfer application.
That is, you fill out a form that says "I got bankruptcy in such-and-so term", and they check that with the registrar at your previous school and then only count your post-bankruptcy performance in determining your transfer eligibility.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/10
| 420
| 1,875
|
<issue_start>username_0: Some journals expect the Discussion to have the following structure and order (with some flexibility):
* summary of results
* strengths and weaknesses
* interpretation/context/comparison with previous studies
* implications
This makes sense: discuss the study strengths and limitations before interpreting the results and discussing their wider context and implications.
But how about putting the "strengths and weaknesses" after "interpretation/comparison", or even at the end after "implications" (and before the conclusions)? It this less logical/convincing?<issue_comment>username_1: I think this mainly depends on the journal, and of course the specific study in question.
While the first order certainly does make sense, the second approach coule also be viable for certain studies.
An example would be a study where a somewhat small sample was conducted, and the results show a significance of some kind. You could go on and discuss the reason/interpretations for the significance, and later mention that to quantify/verify the effect, further studies with a larger sample size should be carried out.
Again, this is highly dependend on the study and the format, so if a journal specifically asks for the first approach, you might want to follow their guidelines.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Personally, I have seen a reasonable amount of diversity (in same journals) in how discussion was organized. As long as it flowed, nobody kvetched. Even to the extent of if you want to do Results and Discussion separate or same section (I always preferred same, but if I had a need wouldn't have worried to vary the pattern).
P.s. If you could tell us the journal and the field, it would help. Also is your question/concern based on actual experiences of being asked to revise org structure or more conceptual of a concern?
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/02/10
| 859
| 3,677
|
<issue_start>username_0: There are two types of programs (maths - Turkey) that I can apply for MSc : With and without thesis. I agree that writing a thesis is a writing task to learn and important but I can also learn how to write when writing a paper.
But also I believe that writing a thesis (i.e. a book!) is very time consuming and instead I prefer spending that time on producing research papers. My question is that would it better to have published papers than having a thesis in MSc when applying for PhD or quite the reverse, Master-with-thesis program is more valuable for PhD application for a Canadian universities?<issue_comment>username_1: This depends on where you are and what are the traditions of the places you would intend to apply to for a doctorate. It would also depend on the field, which you state as mathematics.
However, the advantage of the thesis is that you get some direction in creating it, but probably less direction in the writing of a set of papers.
The other thing is that a thesis comes with a fairly definite end point. You write it, someone reads and approves it and you are done. With papers, it is much less definite as you then depend on getting the papers accepted somewhere. Depending on your field and the publishing venue this can take a long time. There are questions here that suggest that eighteen months in review happens frequently enough to be alarming.
Note that a thesis normally ins't "a book" though in some fields (not likely math) it could be. In the sciences rather than the arts or humanities, it is normally a scientific study of some kind with a written summary of methodology and results. In mathematics the thesis could either be strictly (theoretical) mathematics or an associated philosophy or historical study. If it is a theoretical thesis then you need a *suitable* problem to work on. Moreover you need to be able to make progress on that problem in some way. Finding a problem can be difficult (hence the advisor) as some are too easy, some are too hard, and some are just right. But you aren't normally expected, as a master's student to come up with your own problem, though this varies by place.
I'm also going to guess that the non-thesis option isn't designed to leave you a lot of time to write independent papers. Normally it would be filled with coursework that has its own (time consuming) requirements. Most places, the thesis option would imply a bit less course work and more "quality time" with an advisor or research group working on some problem or study.
You can be successful with either. You can also be successful if you do the non-thesis option and *don't* produce any publishable research along the way. Acceptance into a doctoral program can be achieved through a variety of paths, as long as they predict success in scientific/mathematical studies and research.
You don't, in fact, need to prove that you don't actually need the guidance of a doctoral program just to be admitted to it. You aren't there to prove to people that you don't need to be there.
Finally, let me note that scientific/mathematical writing *isn't just writing*. You need something to write about. That is the research part that needs to precede any writing that explains the methodology and results. If you don't do that, then you have nothing to write about.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I advise to pick the non thesis program. You can still produce work and publish. But the thesis is overrated. Also I have seen it trip some people up who spend too much time on it.
Keep it simple and don't ask for a hurdle you don't need. You can still learn all the math you can.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/02/10
| 909
| 4,158
|
<issue_start>username_0: I saw some research papers still present in good and reputed journals even though they were proven wrong by other papers. The subject is cryptography.
If a paper is proven wrong, it does not contribute a valid result to the corresponding topic. What is the reason for keeping them intact, which can cause issues for newbies?<issue_comment>username_1: Without knowing the specifics of the papers you are referring to, it's difficult to respond exactly. In general, however, there is more than one way for a paper to be "wrong", and most "wrong" papers should not be retracted.
The thing is, a paper typically contains more than just a single assertion. When you say that a paper is "proven wrong", it sounds like you are referring to the high-level conclusion, e.g., "Cryptographic protocol X is secure against replay attacks." Then somebody else comes along and shows that actually, there is a way to do a replay attack after all.
Such a refutation, however, often does not actually invalidate any of the actual technical methods or results presented in the original paper. Instead, it will more typically involve showing that they were insufficient in some way for supporting the high-level conclusion. For example, the problem statement might have been formulated too narrowly, or the authors might have drawn a conclusion that was stronger than their evidence actually supported.
In such a case the conclusion of the paper may indeed be wrong, but everything else is indeed correct. Careful phrasing by the original author may in fact mean that the conclusion is even still technically correct (e.g., "According to this formulation, cryptographic protocol X is secure against replay attacks."). In short, the results stand but their implications are much less than the original investigator may have believed.
Bottom line: many refutations may be understood as changing our interpretation of results derived using valid methods, while retraction is generally reserved for invalidating flaws in the methods themselves.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: In many fields, and probably especially cryptography, the evidence of an incorrect result can be very relevant either:
1) to reduce the effort in a “wrong” or incorrect or less-fruitfull direction,
2) to provide an impetus towards a solution or a solution for another direction or method.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Think of the history of scientific papers as being something like an informally maintained [*blockchain*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockchain). The integrity of all depends on the continued presence of the old things whether they have been superseded or not. Even if they have been superseded for errors. The reason for this is that things get referenced in newer work. The new things may be corrections or may, in fact, rest on a shaky ground. But future researchers need to be able to resurrect all of the contextual history of ideas and their expression so that science can advance without needing to start over whenever something is found wanting.
In fact, if an old paper is made to somehow *disappear* and a newer one covers the same ground, but correctly, then the newer authors are, arguably subject to claims of plagiarism since they "used" some of the old words and ideas that they weren't able to find by searching the literature. There are likely old versions of the (incorrect) paper cached in various places. Better for the old paper to remain in place so that references to it, especially correcting references, remain valid.
In some fields, having access to old, incorrect, papers can be especially valuable to a student. If the superstars of a field go wrong in proving something important, it is useful to know *how* they went wrong. That way, similar errors can possibly be avoided in the future. In analysis, for example proofs that contain lots of conditional clauses with quantifiers (for every, there exists, ...) can easily get out of control and hard to follow. Many of these have actually occurred in the literature. It can be fun to find them, and not so easy, in many cases, to correct them.
Upvotes: 4
|
2019/02/10
| 1,680
| 6,958
|
<issue_start>username_0: I want to know what my current grade in a particular class is. The professor says she refuses to tell us our grades. The syllabus mentions the same policy.
Is this normal? What should I do?<issue_comment>username_1: There may be an actual reason for the policy. In particular your professor may take more into consideration than can be captured in any intermediate "average". For an example of what can happen, I once took a physics course that had five exams, the last being the final. My grades for the exams were, in order: F, D, C, B, and A. My "average" all along the way was pretty dismal. The final grade I was assigned (I won't say earned, I guess) was A. I was a happy camper. The prof actually had a reputation as being very strict.
Without knowing more it is impossible to judge whether the professor is being rational or not.
For what it's worth, the reason for the first F was that I "crammed" and stayed up all night before the exam. Well, one reason, anyway. It was open-book, also.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You sound like you are very concerned about your past grades. Students who pay a lot of attention to their past grades tend to believe they cannot control what they learn, because it is a fixed number. Psychologists call this an "external locus of control." External locus of control can reduce the amount of effort students put into learning.
Students who pay a lot of attention to what they need to do in the future in order to learn have an "internal locus of control." They believe their decisions determine what they will learn. These students tend to put in more effort and study more efficiently.
It is a legitimate pedagogical approach for professors to refuse to discuss grades with students. When doing so, it is important to guide students to thinking about things they can choose to do which will help them learn. This can help students view their futures as being something they believe they can control by making good choices. Such beliefs lead to good choices.
Of course, it's possible your professor does not want to discuss your grades because they do not know what they are.
Regardless of the reasons, it is unlikely your professor is required to provide grades before the end of the course.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Personally I think an instructor ought to maintain a running grade count, but it is conceivable that one might not. Might only do the data entry and calculation at the end. Or maybe wants to retain ability to finesse the grades a bit (will only be done in your favor unless a snake, though).
I doubt there is a policy requiring the prof to give interim grading instruction, but of course you could check. There is a big difference between "required" and optimal.
For what it is worth, I went to a school that had formal, published interim grades every 4 weeks, during 16 week semesters. Most people hated this more than like it since it could create academic sanctions...
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: I've actually seen this a lot, and I think it's completely reprehensible. The reasoning is ostensibly that the only "grade" is the final grade, which cannot be accurately determined until after the final exam.
Unfortunately, you're not going to get anywhere with this instructor trying to get her to budge on this. You might have more luck with asking her a more noncommittal question, such as "How am I doing in the course?" or by asking her for advice about how you can do better (even if you're already doing well).
As someone who's TA'd for professors with this ridiculous policy, I can tell you that badgering the TA won't help. The TA doesn't know either. Really.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: I've been that professor several times. Much to my own chagrin, there often *is* no such thing as "the current grade". On a typical day during a typical semester, there are scores for homeworks, quizzes, midterms and whatever other assessments have been completed so far, and there is a formula in the syllabus that computes a "final score" from *all* the assessment scores, but:
1. the formula assumes all scores to be known, not just the first few. Extrapolating is not trivial, particularly if the rules include things like "the lowest homework score will be dropped" or "later midterms will be weighted more" or "the first homework will be dropped if the next ones show improvement".
2. the cutoffs for the grades are rarely decided upon in advance; they often are determined by looking through students's work (the final midterm or exam is particularly good for that, being fresh in the lecturer's mind) and clustering students into categories (e.g., if you see someone doing really good work, you put that student into the A-cluster, so the cutoff for A will be no higher than their score). Some lecturers also curve based on pre-determined ratios (something I avoid, but I've heard of lecturers forced to do this by the admininstration), but again it is impossible to predict the final relative position of a student just based on their current status, as some students improve heavily during the semester.
So computing a "current grade" is a nontrivial exercise in forecasting -- and a thankless one, as the reward curve is biased to the negative (getting students' grades right will net you some thanks; getting them wrong will cause trouble all the way up to disciplinary action). Teaching is hard enough without it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: >
> The professor says she refuses to tell us our grades. The syllabus mentions the same policy.
>
>
> Is this normal?
>
>
>
Normal is relative. From my perspective, having grades per class isn't normal. Your situation is clearly different, but you haven't given any information which would help us know what it is.
>
> What should I do?
>
>
>
Accept it and move on with your life.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Probably your professor doesn't believe in computing grades in intermediary stages for the subject of your class. Depending on the topic, the *only* interesting thing might be how qualified you are at the *end* of your class, when you can try to put all things together.
Let's look at a (fictitious and ridiculous) example. If you are able to work with 100% of all concepts taught in the first 88% of the class, your "intermediary grade" *might look like* a solid "A" at that point, right? Now imagine a future obstetrics doctor who only has learnt everything about the first eight months of gravidity.
And there is this saying even in *finance*: "Past Performance Is Not An Indicator Of Future Results". So you should concentrate on improving (to achieve optimal "future results"). Don't attach too much importance to intermediary grades. Not everything in academic studies is made of little portions you can check off one by one; sometimes you gotta catch 'em all before they start making sense ;)
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/11
| 1,472
| 6,262
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently a computer science graduate student on a low stipend, and have started spending a few hours per week tutoring undergraduates to help make ends meet. I love teaching and want to be a help to students, but I also want to make sure that I don't personally cross any ethical boundaries in doing so, or be complicit in students doing so.
Some obvious transgressions are [tutoring for a class for which I am also a TA](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/119030/is-anything-wrong-with-hiring-ta-as-a-private-tutor) (conflict of interest), and writing code or otherwise outright doing work for students (plagiarism), but what other ethical considerations do I need to keep in mind to remain above-board in doing this?
Students sometimes ask me questions about their assignments. *How much help is too much help?* If a student is asked a "trick" or unclear question, is it appropriate for me to clarify it? If they're having trouble debugging a program, can I help them localize the issue to a few lines of code, or do I need to remain very general about things? Can I review code they've already submitted to help them improve by, for example, showing a better way of managing memory in C, or showing how to optimize or shorten their programs? Can I write short code snippets illustrate a point in a lesson?
I've also noticed that some questions on homework assignments are very basic. For example, in our systems course, the students were asked "True or False: a register is a small location in RAM". The answer was in the lecture slides. It makes me nervous to not be able to distinguish a request for a basic fact from a request for a homework answer. The assignments are only visible to students during the term, so I can't tell unless they show me (as was the case here). Should I give an indirect answer like "I can't just tell you that; did you review the lecture notes on CPU architecture?" as I did this time? Was doing *that* unethical?<issue_comment>username_1: You seem to have a pretty good ethical sense based on your question, so I think you won't go far wrong following your instincts.
But if you have the opportunity, it is a good idea to go visit the prof teaching the course for which you are tutoring and ask for any additional general guidance.
It is usually a good idea to answer "trivial" questions with other questions. "What do you think the answer is? Why? Explain your reasoning." That sort of thing. Often the student will get a flash of insight. But if you can point to a flaw in reasoning you help the student without giving direct answers.
Good professors when asked questions by students seldom give out complete answers unless it is in the context of a continuing conversation. Instead, a "minimal" hint is given to get the student over a block and which lets them proceed. If a student repeatedly has problems with the same issue or block, an additional exercise will be given that tries to give the student practice with the reasoning.
But the technique of asking for an analysis of any issue that leads to a block is a good way to diagnose the student's thinking and help them get over it.
Giving students general problem solving strategies is also good, but probably less useful, as it doesn't usually have a diagnostic element. But even "Where did you look for an answer?" can help. Especially if followed by "Where else could you look?". You could then suggest other sources if appropriate.
I'll note for completeness that some students are misled by the resources that they use. Some of those resources are wrong and some may be written poorly leading to ambiguity. I've had students get in terrible jams by using perfectly rational thought processes applied to bad input data. That is rare, but it can occur.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: @username_1 has hit all the points. But I'll add that I've noticed that different departments have quirks. Often the quirk is just the department heads personal bias. It could be that at Nebraska College, tutoring students in your own department is fine, as long as there's no conflict of interest. But at Kansas College, the department head thinks that the same situation is unethical (I mean, after all, the undergrad has already paid tuition which, in part, pays your stipend, and now, here you are double-charging him.)
So my advice is that you ask the department head his views. His views may be unreasonable, but....you know.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Another feature ... When you become a private tutor for someone, then you are in a superior position. That means any romantic relationship between the two of you is not allowed.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: Try to ensure that any advice or assistance you give is consistent with what is permissible under the rubric of any assignment the student shows to you, especially if said assignment counts towards a qualification. Good tutoring involves guiding the student to find solutions for himself/herself, rather than doing the work for him/her.
Ultimately, the onus is on the **student** not to cheat. However, as a private tutor, it is your responsibility to provide the right guidance to him/her so that he/she acts ethically. If a student *acting in good faith* does something unethical as a result of erroneous guidance on your part, you may be held liable. So, always refer a student back to the regulations of his/her course. You can do this by asking him/her to check any relevant guidelines/rules in any relevant handbook/rubric. If in doubt, confirm with him/her as you go along what is and is not permissible (if the student *acting in good faith*, he/she will appreciate such clarity and understand his/her responsibilities). If you think he/she is misleading you about this, insist upon seeing the relevant handbook/rubric for yourself. If you have evidence that he/she is actually cheating, report it username_4ymously to the relevant authorities.
One final point about private tutoring: it may be worth making clear to the student that you **cannot** make any guarantees about his/her academic performance (because **nobody** can make such guarantees), since it ultimately depends on him/her.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/11
| 1,735
| 7,221
|
<issue_start>username_0: I, a graduate student, have started tutoring undergraduates in computer science at my university to help make ends meet. One student who inquired about my services turned me down upon hearing my rates and remarked (in writing) that they might as well just buy solutions to their projects on a particular freelancing website for that price, as their friends do.
Should I tell the professor about this student, in case he wants to review their submissions more closely? I don't have any proof that they *have already* cheated, but to me their exact words (which to protect my anonymity, I have chosen not to publish) and phrasing suggest strongly that *they are likely to*. In [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/57269/should-i-report-a-graduate-student-who-hires-other-people-to-do-their-coursewo), the OP appears to have evidence to suggest that cheating has taken place already, which seems more clear-cut.<issue_comment>username_1: **In dubio pro reo.** Evaluations of projects is already a highly subjective process. If you tell someone "Please evaluate this project, it is very likely the author cheated" they will probably give a worse grade than if simply told to evaluate the exact same project. What if the student then didn't cheat?
If your institution has no way of properly assessing a candidate, i.e., one could "buy" a degree by having external services do the work, then this is an institutional problem and you won't fix it by suggesting to a professor that one of their students *may* cheat.
Lastly, think about the effects your behavior has on the institutional climate. Would you like to study in an environment in which people tell professors "Arnold may be cheating, I watched him visit that freelancing website"?
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: First, I'll guess that the prof already recognizes the possibility.
Second, if you have a contractual obligation to the student you need to honor it. I doubt that is the case here since you were turned down. But you can't, ethically, act against the interests of your clients. You can, of course, back out of a client relationship if you think the client is abusing it or otherwise acting unethically.
Don't interpret the above to imply that you must do what the client wants you to do if it is unethical. Some relationships are governed by law, but those laws, i think, just try to codify what good ethics suggests. Lawyer-client relationships for example have legal constraints.
But even in the case you have such an obligation, you still could inform the prof that you have some evidence that such cheating is being contemplated. If asked by who, you may need to decline to answer. In particular, naming a student may well be very unfair as the student might just have been expressing frustration out loud, with no intent to break the rules.
If the prof is a bit naive, you can inform him/her about the likely web-sites that enable such things. But it is the professors responsibility to "police" the class.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> [The student] remarked (in writing) that they might as well just buy solutions to their projects on a particular freelancing website for that price, as their friends do.
>
>
>
That does not sound to me like "admitting" that they "would" cheat. If I said to a prospective financial advisor, "your rates are so high I may as well just declare bankruptcy now", that does not mean that I am going to declare bankruptcy, it is merely a way to express that the advisor's services do not seem cost-effective.
Given this, I would do nothing -- you offered legitimate tutoring services and the student declined your offer. You have no compelling reason to suspect that the student will actually cheat.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_4: You need to find and read your University's honor policy.
Assuming that:
1. It makes cheating an offense
2. It requires reporting violations of the policy
then it puts a reporting burden on the student who knows of cheating to report it, and either (a) they did report it (to you), which you need to relay or (b) their failure to report it is a violation which you know about, making you responsible to report that. Yuck!
As a graduate student, the best thing to do is to just kick this up the chain. Do not tell the professor that the student you met with is cheating, or tried to cheat, or is likely to cheat. Stick to the facts that they told you cheating was going on but you don't know the details.
The professor has a lot more latitude to stop the process at that point, perhaps by making a point during the next class to inform students that cheating has not gone unnoticed and needs to stop immediately. You can even make a suggestion to not drag the student in for questioning. The professor has (probably) the authority to make that decision; you do not.
---
Note that while you may feel that reporting is not ethically required, the correct way to fight back against such a policy is to tell your school you think (2) is unjust, not to go around disregarding it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: You're actually bringing up two separate possible things to do:
1. Telling on the specific student, and
2. Discussing the general situation of students buying intended project outputs online.
I suggest you pursue the *second* action with the Professor, without incriminating the person who gave you the tip (i.e. without the first item).
As for what to *do* about this problem - that's a matter for another question.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: **No, you shouldn't tell the professor about this student.** He hasn't done anything except telling you that some other students cheat.
Instead, you could approach the university and report that you have second-hand knowledge about students cheating by hiring freelancers to do their work. However, don't expect that anyone will be thankful for your service. It's safe to assume that this is no well-kept secret. There are probably plenty of students - not only your potential customer - who know at least as much as you do. If they choose to stay silent, why should you interfere? They are the victims who have to work more, while others obtain undeservedly good marks.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: I think it's clear the students motivation for this comment could have been too stress you are charging to much. I think he would be well within reason to be upset by you earmarking him for cheating.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: I would probably forward the email on to the professor and let him make the judgement call. It sounds like this particular student doesn't want to cheat and may do the work on their own but does appear to know that cheating is taking place (potentially on a pretty wide scale) in the class. I think it would be good for the professor to know this. If the professor applies a stricter measure of analysis to all projects to detect cheating, it is still fair to those who didn't cheat. If you really don't think the student should be mentioned explicitly, it may be appropriate to anonymize the email, but I don't really think that is necessary.
Upvotes: -1
|
2019/02/11
| 463
| 2,054
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently a second-year computer-science student. However, I am interested in pursuing social science after I am done with my bachelor's degree. To be more specific, *I am interested in the fields of Philosophy, Anthropology, and Political Science*. To be able to do that, I have started practicing and improving my writing skills. Since I do not want to continue studying CS, I will not be looking for internships or any research experience in the field.
In the summer, I want to do things that would help me getting accepted in social science. But I do not know what I can/should do. In engineering, it is pretty straightforward: It is usually an internship in a company or doing research with a prof. What are the equivalent summer positions for social science students?<issue_comment>username_1: In case you want to reconsider getting out of your field, there exists a "field" called complex systems (in some places), where you can combine what you know about Computer Science with social sciences, such as Economics, Anthropology and Biology.
In fact, I am an engineer who pursued a Master's degree in Applied Mathematics and I am now doing my PhD in Social Complexity, where I study social systems using ideas from anthropology.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: My recommendation, if you really want to go into these areas and be standout, complete your computer science degree. There is a real shortage of individuals with strong computational and programming skills in the social sciences. You will likely have potential advisers salivating at the idea of having a doc student who is competent with R, especially so if you are a whiz at the ggplot2 package or tidyverse.
Learn to accentuate your skill set with a strong statistics background and you will be golden.
A strong letter of interest coupled with a strong GRE quant score and a skillset demonstrating competency in programming and statistics...this is an application that many social science faculty dream of having.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2019/02/11
| 803
| 3,275
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am 5th year PhD, about to submit my thesis in few months and defend in around September this year. My computational materials science PhD thesis involved using a commercial software (ABAQUS) to model a machining problem. I had to come up with material models and write python codes to build new geometries and stuff. I did decent in my PhD with 3 publications in decent journals and few in preparation.
Now, I learnt the theory behind the working of the commercial software while beginning my work. I did it entirely through self study. However, my PhD thesis did not involve any manipulation or working with the actual theoretical formulation of the software. So, I don't have any working experience with the formulation of (Finite element method) FEA form of a problem and implementing it.
Now, all the jobs or postdoc positions in FEA application requires one to be able to solve a problem by hand, compare with analytical solutions, be proficient in implementing FEA weak forms into the commercial software...and so on. I don't know if I would be able to do it when required as I have not worked with it till now.
I don't know if I am even eligible to call myself a PhD as I feel unconfident/ashamed in my abilities to be called an expert in the numerical analysis field. What do I do?<issue_comment>username_1: Three quick thoughts:
1. Discuss it with your advisor. They might know of more suitable positions, or have field-specific advice.
2. During your PhD (and before), you should have improved the skill of learning things on your own. This will be useful in a postdoc or maybe an industrial position. Just don't be afraid to use it.
3. It seems you have some time left before the defense. Use it to start learning the software and skills you need. Consider starting a new research project where you'd have to use these methods (nothing like learning by doing!), or just reimplementing an existing paper.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Think about it the way Coke-Cola did about "share of stomach". IOW, we're not a soft drink company, but a nonalcoholic liquids company. Therefore a move into tea or water was still in scope.
Another story: buddy of mine was working on (very advanced and particular) PVD thin film research in a 3-5 semiconductor. He ended up getting a job working for a commercial company doing CVD of a different 3-5 semiconductor. This guy said to me "hey...this is totally different, I don't know it." I just looked at him as if he had three heads. I had moved from the hard sciences to a finance job. And knew nothing about thin films but would have been fine with taking a run at the CVD line manager job.
So...you are a coding engineering guy. You're way closer than you think. Now...my coding experience is Basic8 from decades ago. So...I would be a fish out of water. But you are just fine. Are the PVD guy doing CVD in a different 3-5 system. WAY closer than you think you are.
Other than that, postdocs are cheap and temporary. You'll be fine provided you are smart and productive. The Ph.D. was supposed to make you feel like you could figure anything out. This is very close to your current experience. You'll figure it out since you are smart, adaptable and diligent.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/02/11
| 577
| 2,524
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm an undergraduate student in Turkey, and am planning to do my Phd in US/Canada/Europe.
I've taken various graduate courses from my departments - Physics and Mathematics - in following status:
I enrolled to course, but it status was NI (not included), which means I didn't take any credit from the course, and it's grade didn't affected my GPA.
In this case, when I start to my Phd, is it possible to count these graduate courses toward the course load that I need to take during my Phd ?
---
As a side question, if I had enrolled those course in the normal way, i.e took credit from the course, and it's grade affected my GPA, could I still make them count for the course load that needs to be taken during my Phd ?<issue_comment>username_1: I'm a bit confused about terminology here. In the US, "course load" typically means the courses that you are currently taking, not those you have taken in the past that might support an application. I think you may mean something different.
However, graduate courses taken in the past will almost certainly support an application. But they may not reduce the number of courses that you need to take within the program you are accepted into. Some programs (not all) have actual credit hour requirements. If you have taken certain courses, you won't be required to repeat those (most likely) but would substitute other, more advanced courses or seminars. Sometimes, however, it is appropriate to re-take a course you've already had if there is some assurance that it is at a higher level than the one you previously attended. Some programs can be quite flexible and others not. Some programs, in fact, only require that you pass certain exams and write an acceptable thesis, with no course requirements at all.
So, the correct answer to your query is "it depends". But most likely the decisions won't be made in some fine-grained way. Acceptance into a doctoral program depends on an overall analysis and a decision that you are a good candidate with high probability of success in the program.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Most likely the key issue is your knowledge of the topic. If you can pass a final, pass an informal oral exam, etc. Obviously courses can vary in difficulty and students in how much they learned.
Depending on the school, it might lighten your overall course load or they might expect same number of total courses to be done, with you enriching by taking something else to replace what you validate.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/02/11
| 1,356
| 5,858
|
<issue_start>username_0: To explain further, I have loved books for a very long time. I've always been interested in how they're made, and the possible "illnesses" that can befall books and how one goes about to "cure" them. I want to do it as a job, and the research I've done has lead me to learn that there's printing press bookbinding, with machines, and then "craft" bookbinding, the work by hand. I want to know how I can obtain the skills to become a "craft" bookbinder. The "old" way. Are such programs offered at US universities? If not, what is the usual path for gaining such skills in the US?<issue_comment>username_1: It is possible that there are some academic programs. They would be more likely at a Community College, I think. But you might be able to obtain an internship or apprenticeship at some custom publisher or even a major book publisher.
To find such an opportunity I'd suggest the following steps. Your local library has a need to re-bind books and knows who does that. Find out the contact information for such a service and, starting with them, work up the chain of contacts to the people who do the actual production.
Other than librarians, you could also talk to a book-rep who visits your school or at an academic conference. Again, work up the chain of contacts to the production department.
There are a number of presses in the US who do custom small editions for authors and others. Thorndike Press in Maine used to be one of those, but I don't know if they still do it. But there are others. Search for Custom Publishing. But they may use suppliers of services and you will need to work to find who actually does the work. You are looking for, and may find, a company that actually uses hand crafting to bind books and even those that design the bindings using non-standard materials.
If you can find a really high quality book production outfit, you might explore either an internship or an apprenticeship with one of them. It might be paid or not. But even an entry level regular position will give you an opportunity to learn the skills.
Another source, but harder to find, are individual artisans who design and manufacture their own books (poetry, art, ...). I met one within the past year at a craft fair. But a search for "hand made books" might turn up something.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: There are two main academic tracks I'm aware of that care about craft bookbinding, in a way that is beyond hobby: fine arts, and "library and archives".
In schools of fine arts it is not uncommon to have "3D design" classes that can include craft binding concepts and techniques as an option. Other classes can focus on leather-work, print-making, binding, embossing and imprinting (often used with book covers), etc. Depending on the size of the school and the local area, they may have occasional seminars specific to book-binding, and some will even be open to non-degree seeking students. So if you have a local arts program, it may be worth a visit/information/tour, and you can ask them if they may have any programming or faculty with experience in your area of interest. In may indeed just be a single person and you could try to take a class with them, or they may even be willing to work with you directly in a helper/apprentice/tutor role. You might also be interested in fine art restoration and preservation, though this is a not a program universally available at all art schools.
Artists are the primary 'consumers' and practitioners of modern craft book binding, because they care about one-offs and details in a way that commercial printers just don't (and can't) care about in the same way. Some commercial shops, especially serving high-end marketing/promotional companies do still buy craft binding work, but it would be hard for someone just with an interest in the practice to connect through this route.
The other main academic track is in library and archives, specifically in the sub-areas of preservation and restoration. This usually isn't focused only on books, though there are book-preservation specialties - but most people in the area will study a broad array of document preservation, from arts to historical documents to books and other artifacts. This will get you much closer to book illnesses if there is also a need for restoration. This is more of an academic path, as I don't know that they are as open to non-degree seeking students who just want to learn as book binding - but it might be a lead you can try to follow.
There may also be hobby-focused classes offered at community/trade schools in your area, as username_1 mentioned - which are also definitely worth a check, and probably your first point of contact if you are mostly interested specifically in learning how just to work with books.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The closest program would probably be a Library Science degree (e.g. MLS, MLIS). The actual percentage of the program that would directly deal with physical book construction and repair is almost certainly quite low, but what you will likely encounter in these programs are *fellow enthusiasts* who share your love of books and are likely to be able to point you toward potential opportunities.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: I was taught craft bookbinding in a university town - by the bookbinder to the university library. But he did not award degrees. Do you want to learn the craft or do you want a degree certificate? The two wishes may not be compatible.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: My spouse worked in a small bookbinding shop in her university library as an undergrad as a work study assignment. The shop was there to rebind and do other preservation work on the library's older books. It was very much a matter of learning under the supervision of one of the full-time employees.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/11
| 1,379
| 6,108
|
<issue_start>username_0: A (master) thesis about the development and assessment of an algorithm has some limitations. The method chapter is organized as follows:
* Algorithm Description
* Simulated Scenarios
* Evaluation method
The algorithm itself is not optimal and potential flaws exist in some modules.
The simulated scenarios were selected in order to create a representative assessment, but are not covering the entire range of possible conditions.
The evaluation method is based on a number of simplifications which might lead to faulty final results.
To make sure it doesn't seem like I'm hiding something, I would like to describe all of these limitations. Where would this fit best? In the individual sections of the Method chapter? Could I title the chapter after methods "Results and Discussion" and mention it there? Or in the conclusion?<issue_comment>username_1: It is possible that there are some academic programs. They would be more likely at a Community College, I think. But you might be able to obtain an internship or apprenticeship at some custom publisher or even a major book publisher.
To find such an opportunity I'd suggest the following steps. Your local library has a need to re-bind books and knows who does that. Find out the contact information for such a service and, starting with them, work up the chain of contacts to the people who do the actual production.
Other than librarians, you could also talk to a book-rep who visits your school or at an academic conference. Again, work up the chain of contacts to the production department.
There are a number of presses in the US who do custom small editions for authors and others. Thorndike Press in Maine used to be one of those, but I don't know if they still do it. But there are others. Search for Custom Publishing. But they may use suppliers of services and you will need to work to find who actually does the work. You are looking for, and may find, a company that actually uses hand crafting to bind books and even those that design the bindings using non-standard materials.
If you can find a really high quality book production outfit, you might explore either an internship or an apprenticeship with one of them. It might be paid or not. But even an entry level regular position will give you an opportunity to learn the skills.
Another source, but harder to find, are individual artisans who design and manufacture their own books (poetry, art, ...). I met one within the past year at a craft fair. But a search for "hand made books" might turn up something.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: There are two main academic tracks I'm aware of that care about craft bookbinding, in a way that is beyond hobby: fine arts, and "library and archives".
In schools of fine arts it is not uncommon to have "3D design" classes that can include craft binding concepts and techniques as an option. Other classes can focus on leather-work, print-making, binding, embossing and imprinting (often used with book covers), etc. Depending on the size of the school and the local area, they may have occasional seminars specific to book-binding, and some will even be open to non-degree seeking students. So if you have a local arts program, it may be worth a visit/information/tour, and you can ask them if they may have any programming or faculty with experience in your area of interest. In may indeed just be a single person and you could try to take a class with them, or they may even be willing to work with you directly in a helper/apprentice/tutor role. You might also be interested in fine art restoration and preservation, though this is a not a program universally available at all art schools.
Artists are the primary 'consumers' and practitioners of modern craft book binding, because they care about one-offs and details in a way that commercial printers just don't (and can't) care about in the same way. Some commercial shops, especially serving high-end marketing/promotional companies do still buy craft binding work, but it would be hard for someone just with an interest in the practice to connect through this route.
The other main academic track is in library and archives, specifically in the sub-areas of preservation and restoration. This usually isn't focused only on books, though there are book-preservation specialties - but most people in the area will study a broad array of document preservation, from arts to historical documents to books and other artifacts. This will get you much closer to book illnesses if there is also a need for restoration. This is more of an academic path, as I don't know that they are as open to non-degree seeking students who just want to learn as book binding - but it might be a lead you can try to follow.
There may also be hobby-focused classes offered at community/trade schools in your area, as username_1 mentioned - which are also definitely worth a check, and probably your first point of contact if you are mostly interested specifically in learning how just to work with books.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The closest program would probably be a Library Science degree (e.g. MLS, MLIS). The actual percentage of the program that would directly deal with physical book construction and repair is almost certainly quite low, but what you will likely encounter in these programs are *fellow enthusiasts* who share your love of books and are likely to be able to point you toward potential opportunities.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: I was taught craft bookbinding in a university town - by the bookbinder to the university library. But he did not award degrees. Do you want to learn the craft or do you want a degree certificate? The two wishes may not be compatible.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: My spouse worked in a small bookbinding shop in her university library as an undergrad as a work study assignment. The shop was there to rebind and do other preservation work on the library's older books. It was very much a matter of learning under the supervision of one of the full-time employees.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/11
| 2,653
| 11,063
|
<issue_start>username_0: **Summary**
I have recently submitted a paper to a fairly prestigious journal in my subfield of mathematics, along with a co-author. I am a junior author, but my co-author is well-established.
It's not the top journal in the subfield, but it is well-considered -- one wouldn't think "wow, amazing job!" [getting a paper there], but more "that's a solid, reputable journal, congrats".
About a week ago we received a rejection letter, stating as the primary reason that it was not sufficiently novel -- there have been two other papers on a similar topic (although these are far from complete answers).
My co-author was pretty angry by this -- I have very little experience, and so don't really know how these things happen. They even emailed the editor questioning it (s/he says s/he has never done this before, but felt this was extreme enough to warrant doing so); the editor said that s/he did not discuss such things, and would not go against referees. (The editor has now finished his/her term.)
The journal uses an electronic-style submission, via an online management system. As such, I assume that the new editor would be able to see that I had submitted before; as such, it would seem the done thing for me to add a cover letter, explaining that this is a resubmission.
Regarding why I might want to stay with the same journal, it stands slightly alone in terms of reputation. In the field, there are a few top journals, say with ratings 9 or 10 out of 10; then there's this one, at say 7 out of 10; then the remainder are 5 out of 10 or below. I'm not sure my paper warrants the top journals, so I would like this one if possible.
**Further Context; can be skipped if desired, with explicit question below**
There were two full reviewers; one was very positive, but the other negative -- albeit I'm not convinced this person read it so carefully, as s/he makes a logical error in arguing that one proof is 'immediate', and questioned one theorem, but stated it incorrectly (the correct statement answers her/his question).
Additionally, there were two 'informal reviews', "without scrutiny of the technical details".
Unfortunately, the result is rather subtle. (I presented it to someone, well-established, recently who at one point said, "It looks like it would be fairly straightforward, but it is actually quite subtle.")
It appears that at least one of the 'informal reviewers' (actually, the more positive of the two) didn't get the subtly, suggesting that there was only a specific difference between two other papers, but actually they are extremely different. (I'm not claiming my paper is *better* than those -- in fact, I submitted it to a less prestigious journal -- just *different*.)
The main point of rejection by the editor, though, was "originality of problem posing, ideas and methods -- in light of the existing results" (citing the two aforementioned papers).
As stated above, the paper is actually really quite different from the ones in the field -- it's not just me that feels this -- but in order to really appreciate this, one needs to have a reasonable understanding of the paper, or at least the other papers.
I feel that perhaps we did not do a good enough job of explaining the subtleties in the introduction. It is one of my first papers, and I did the writing, with comments from the other author. Since I am very familiar with the paper and the subtleties, I perhaps took it for granted that a reviewer would read it fully and carefully.
---
**Explicit Question**
Does rewriting the paper somewhat and resubmitting to the same journal sound like a reasonable idea, or should I just chalk it up to "the randomisation of the review process"? The editor has now changed, and the person that handled my paper is not an associate editor.
The positive reviewer gave lots of helpful comments -- the negative reviewer only gave a few, and (other than the one where s/he hadn't read the statement carefully enough) were typographical.
I would implement these changes (including the typographical ones), where appropriate. But the major change would be in explaining subtleties in the model better, and comparing with other models, explaining key difference (that are perhaps obvious to me, who has spent 2yrs on this project, but not to someone giving an 'informal review').
Bear in mind that my co-author has already contacted the editor, who said "I have no reason whatsoever to question the professional authority of the associate editor and reviewers", and would not comment on any of our concerns. (I do understand her/his point of view here, to some extent.)
As I said, I originally assume we'd just resubmit elsewhere, but since my co-author thought it worth contacting the editor, who would not consider it, I wonder whether it's worth doing this.
I would probably make the changes anyway, and if we got rejected we could just submit elsewhere after...
---
As you can see from this question, my writing can sometimes be rather long with unnecessary details, and the key details slightly hidden -- I am trying to improve this!
Incidentally, none of the people that looked at it noticed a fairly obvious mistake, where there was supposed to be a 3/2 factor... in the one display of the main theorem!<issue_comment>username_1: If you can re-write the paper in such a way that you can address the reviewers concerns (novelty), then it is fine to resubmit it. But the paper shouldn't try to "argue" the case. Either the results are new(ish) or not. But I expect that novelty is a harder thing to address than some other things. Perhaps the reviewer just knows a lot about the field and thinks your results are minor. Rewriting to make things less *subtle* might help or not with this reviewer, but it probably would in general.
But you can, of course, resubmit elsewhere. But I would only suggest doing so if you can, in some way, address all reviewer suggestions.
But as second author to a more senior person, you may need to take their lead on this.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Resubmitting to same journal is a bad idea. I would move on.
A. You haven't been given any encouragement by the journal to do so. They are going to see same paper coming at them. Even if you can clean up the darned subtlety.
B. Just psychologically aren't you going to kick yourself if you stay at this journal and get bounced again? Take a new shot.
ALSO, take a look at the issue of previous work, how you cover it, how you differ, and rewrite the paper to better explain the compare/contrast.
EDIT, to expand versus several comments throughout whole thread:
1. MITM: It's OK whatever you do. After all, if it works for you "woot!" Of course if it doesn't, then "on your head, be it". Sounds like you will be fine to handle it either way. You are a sharp guy and producing.
2. My impression is that the pick a 7 journal was a reasonable stance ***when you first submitted***. However, now, getting a negative result, you need to reevaluate. Think of this more like a real option decision tree in a probabilistic Bayesian universe than a Euclidean proof.
This will sound flippant, but is a classic example from economics and math: When I wildcat a well, I make some judgement to take the risk. Fine. However, having returned a dry hole, sinking a second well in the SAME BLOCK is a VERY different calculus. I've learned something to change my prior. Of course, if the block is incredibly promising or oil prices are very high, I might sink another well before moving on. And I can (in parallel with your case) tell myself that I didn't have an optimal completion, etc. etc. (this time will be different, better, blabla). But bottom line is I got some negative feedback and need to adjust my prior.
I liked the approach of aiming for a "7". But if it was in any way borderline at the time...well the "market" just gave you feedback. At this point, I would move on to a "surer block" and sink my next well in a "5" or "4" block. (Lower risk.) Don't go to a predatory journal. But I would be fine to going to more of a "datapoint collector" type journal. I don't know your field so well, but in chemistry, there are reputable journals that will still collect a lot of less interesting results.
Perhaps you can go back in the future and argue about the subtlety or draw out some of the differences. In future work, reviews, talks, etc. But at this point, think it is more important to just get the finding out there.
The good thing is nobody is kvetching about the math so at least the equations are right. (Well fix the 3/2. And, uh, take a good look since what else did you miss? But still, nobody is fighting the proofs.) But on notability. This is a harder thing to argue/fix *even if you are "right"*. Sure, people could just be not following all the arcane subtleties. Or conversely you all could be doing the old math trick of trying to take credit for "generalizing/improving" other people's basic work. At a certain point, it really doesn't matter which (and I actually guess it is more the former). But just get the result out there, so it is in play.
Move to a less prominent journal; get the result out there; collect your notch; and don't bang your head against a wall legalistically. And then move on to next piece of work. If you keep producing, good things will come. If you get diverted by reviewer debates and editor debates and the like, it may derail the production.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Fix the paper anyway
====================
You got feedback, so implement it and (re)submit to Arxiv. Do think of a referee missing some points as feedback, and, to the extent convenient, try to address that, too. If they misinterpreted a theorem, should you give or recall some definition right before it, add an example after it, or emphasize how it is different from other results wherever you discuss prior art, or maybe even after stating the theorem?
Why not submit to a different journal?
======================================
If there exist other journals of roughly equal prestige and roughly similar readership, there seems to be little lost if you were to submit there, rather than in the original journal. If, on the other hand, no equivalent journals exist, I would still prefer going for a different journal if reasonable choices are to be found. Reasonable journal might be a good enough generalist journal or a slightly less reputable specialist journal - one would have the same weight in terms of prestige, while the other would have the same amount of exposure to the interested people, if your field is at all like mine.
Resubmitting to the same journal, and to a different editor (as seems necessary) without telling that that is indeed what you are doing seems somewhat impolite; not clearly wrong, but not quite something I would like to be caught doing, either. Submitting to the same journal with an explicit cover letter or similar would be ethically fine, but there might come a (hopefully quick) rejection.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/02/11
| 581
| 2,413
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm applying to a Master's program in "Mechatronics", in Germany. One of the program requirements is a ECTS credits form for some specific fields.
According to the university I'm applying (Tuhh) the workload indicates the time students typically need to complete all learning activities (such as lectures, seminars, projects, practical work, self-study and examinations) required to achieve the expected learning outcomes.
I'm not sure how to convert my degree credits/hours into ECTS, given that ECTS points do include studying and assignments hours.
In my university the credits assigned in the transcript of records correspond ONLY TO LECTURES (classroom hours), where 1 credit is equivalent to 15 hours, even though all lectures are accompanied by homeworks, exams and self-study time.
I can convert the credits on my transcript but there is a clear lack of required ECTS credits. This is because only the workload of lectures are included and the self-study hours are not explicitly incorporated in the university transcript which leads me to consult how to proceed to complete the form.
I'd appreciate if someone could enlighten me. Please, let me know if more information is needed in order to calculate the ECTS.<issue_comment>username_1: You can estimate it: if your previous programme expected you to work full-time on it (40 hours a week), and let's say you have 3 courses per semester, then each of these courses would be 10 ECTS (assuming equal load). As there is 60 ECTS in one year, i.e. 30 in a semester. 1 ECTS is equal to 28 hours by the way.
But calculating ECTS is hardly something you need to be doing on your own. You should approach the German university about this, chances are they have conversion tables, or at least some precedence on how to convert these figures. Moreover, the ECTS requirements is just a metric of what they actually want to measure: relevant experience. So you can also discuss your personal case with them and provide them with the study guides of the relevant courses you've followed to see if you fullfill their requirements.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: According to my University in Germany (TUM) the conversion factor is 2. 1 degree credits/hour equals 2 ECTS. Anyhow, you should contact your home university as well as TUHH for their conversion formulas as your are surely not the first to have to do this.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/02/11
| 1,862
| 7,894
|
<issue_start>username_0: A student of mine has asked to take his final early because he is "going out of town." He has only just mentioned this to me and we are already halfway through the quarter.
I have spoken with some faculty in my department and one has suggested that if not taking the exam early would impose an undue financial burden (i.e. he bought tickets months ago and didn't know he would have a final this day) then he should be allowed to take the exam early, but if he planned a road trip with his friends last week, for example, then he should have to take the exam at the scheduled time.
I like this policy, so my question at the moment is: how can I ask this student for more information about his vacation? It certainly seems as if it will be the latter since he has not mentioned it to me until now, but I would like to be sure before I decide.
Additional comments: I would obviously rather him not take the exam on an earlier date because I am worried he might share test information with other students. This is a calculus final so it takes effort on my part to write a different exam, and I feel a bit miffed at having to write an entire new test so someone can go on vacation.
Edit: The syllabus statement on makeup exams: "In this course, we will have one midterm and a final exam on the dates mentioned above. These dates are firm and cannot be changed except under extraordinary circumstances. Make-up exams will be permitted at my discretion.'<issue_comment>username_1: If, as you say in the comments, the final was known by the time the quarter began, you certainly have no obligation to make any accommodations for them. (The university I did my undergraduate study abroad at announced finals like halfway through the semester. It was really weird.) Yes, 10 weeks ahead of time means tickets will not be very cheap, but that's a risk you take when buying tickets around finals.
When I was in school, we often planned trips around having a final on the last possible date (Thursday afternoon). Once or twice it paid off, most of the time it didn't.
Your other options when your final conflicts with your travel is to change classes. This person didn't, and is now hoping you'll feel bad that they completed half the quarter and you don't want to toss it all.
I don't see "undue financial burden" as mattering here. They had all the information they needed.
If they have extraordinary circumstances, such as needing to visit an ill family member, then by all means, help them out. But, since they didn't already mention an extraordinary issue, I suspect that's not why they're traveling.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Since no extraordinary circumstances have been mentioned, I would not allow change. I personally think you should take a more extreme stance than what you are describing here. It's irrelevant if he bought the tickets a while ago (in fact, it would argue against offering a dispensation because he could have bought them after the end of all exams, versus gambling.)
You gotta draw the line when tested like this or all kinds of excuses will come out of the woodwork to take advantage.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Unless this is a very urgent trip, then there's no way I'd allow the change. There are always students who want to play "airfare wars." They buy airline tickets for a date half-way through finals, knowing full well they might have an exam scheduled late. They think that coming to me and showing me their ticket, "But I already spent $480 on tickets!" will leverage compliance from me. The best they'll get from me for their manipulation is that I'll give them an incomplete and give them their final MUCH later (so they have to retain their fresh knowledge a couple months.)
If his sister is getting married or the Army Reserves has called him up or is mother is hit by a bus, then OK, I'm happy to accommodate. But I didn't take "But I have plans" from my own children as an excuse.
I'll mention here that my syllabus contains a sentence that says plainly that I won't budge just because you already bought your ticket.
To your specific question, I'd say to, or e-mail the student and say something like, "Unless this is a crisis, then I can't move the date of your exam." Then it's up to him to convince you that it's a crisis.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: I would not grant them a makeup exam unless they can show me that it is indeed an extraordinary circumstance. They're adults and should be treated like ones.
Here's why I think that you should stick to your guns (and how I explain things to my students when they're asking me to bend the rules for them). What about all of the other students in class that did not approach me for an additional exam? As far as I know, there are some students in the class that canceled vacation plans, missed a friend's wedding or their sister giving birth because they knew that this was exam period and Prof. username_4 does not grant makeup exams unless there are extraordinary circumstances.
So, by letting this student off the hook, you're telling all those other students that they were being idiots for following the policy that you put in place!
I like this explanation because it doesn't make you sound like it's too much trouble ("*of course* I would *love* to set up another final just for you, *but think of the other students*..."), or that you don't trust the student not to leak the final exam details. Plus it is extremely difficult to argue against. I use this reasoning for almost every unreasonable request - from grade forgiveness to pushing deadlines.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I usually accommodate such requests. It makes a big difference to me if the student has asked about an accommodation 4 or 5 weeks in advance of the final, since then it is relatively easy to be creative about a solution that is fair to me (not a lot more work) and fair to the class. However, most courses in my university (US state school) have several lesser exams that combined may count as much as the final exam. If the majority of the course grade was based on the final, I'd probably feel differently.
So my primary motivation is to make sure that the student is going to show good faith effort to cover any final material that wasn't on earlier exams.
I make a contract with the student to weight the other exams more. That way I don't have to create a separate final.
The contract usually also specifies additional required work/assignments. The student has to do 'more' to show me their mastery of material that would have been on the final. (I try to figure out things easy for me to 'grade'. If making it easy for me to grade means that it takes more time and energy on the part of the student, that's fine!)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: I don't see why the circumstances of the trip matter, unless it's for a funeral or similar unforeseen emergency. It's incredibly unlikely that your university doesn't have final exam schedules posted long in advance, so the student either knew or should have known the date of the final when he registered for the course and bought his tickets. You really should have put this in the syllabus, but there's probably a university policy stating that the instructor doesn't have to give a final at any time other than the time in the official schedule.
On the other hand, it's entirely up to you whether or not you want to give the exam early. Making a distinction between a road trip and a "financial burden" is irrelevant and leads down a slippery slope. Is it a financial burden if the student's rich family paid for the ticket or if it's a cheap flight? Regardless of the circumstances, the student wants to start spring break early and wants you to do extra work so that he can do that. Taking that additional work on is your decision.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/02/11
| 774
| 3,333
|
<issue_start>username_0: Preferably from a professor's candid viewpoint. When writing graduate recommendations for an undergraduate, do professors write general recommendations describing why #insert name# is a great fit for graduate school or do they tailor each letter to the school. I know this can vary from professor to professor, but what is a common practice.
I ask because I will be applying to graduate schools (quite a few of them on my list currently) and just wondering how much extra work each school is for my professors.<issue_comment>username_1: Professors often write just a single general letter about the student and send that everwhere.
Advantage: don't feel shy about applying as many places as you want.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Actually, I think the common practice is to be as supportive as they can be within the limits of time and honesty. But if you are the student you can help in this. If you are intending to apply to a large number of places, let the prof know this so s/he can write a general letter that can be sent out quickly. You might even suggest things that you would like stressed in such a letter.
But if the situation comes up that you are applying to a place that you are especially interested in and which may have special requirements, let the prof know that the general letter should maybe be spiced up a bit.
If the professor is somehow connected to a university or has worked with some faculty there s/he may tailor the letter in any case, knowing what they might find interesting in your background and/or potential.
Some professors ask students to write a first draft of a letter, or even the final draft.
If you are the professor, it might be useful to ask students what they think are their most important qualities and significant accomplishments as an aid in preparing any letter. It is also good to keep a general letter on file in case you are asked again in a year or so if the student's situation is changing.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It depends on the professor's familiarity with you and the school. There is no one-size-fits-all answer.
My mentor, who I worked with for four years, spent much more time on my letters than I'd expect from anyone else, tailoring them to specific schools based on little blurbs I provided them with describing my interest.
My second letter-writer, who knew me less well, tailored their letters to the couple of programs he was personally familiar with, and presumably his alma mater, which I applied to.
My third letter-writer I don't believe did that much tailoring at all, as they knew me the least well and was also not in the field I was applying to.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: My own MO is to write 1 letter (per student) and send it to each school unmodified, **unless** the student tells me what I should stress (or un-stress) for particular places. Keep in mind that professors usually don't know the specific preferences and biases of math departments outside of their field and their personal travel experience; there are maybe 2 departments in the world I could tailor a letter for based entirely on my own knowledge. The onus is on the student here, who has ideally put out some feelers and gotten to know people she would want to collaborate with.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2019/02/11
| 1,064
| 4,478
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am in the process of advisor searching for a PhD in mathematics.
I came across this site called Google Scholar which lists nearly all the publications of a professor.
I found that many professors don’t have any citations of their papers in the first three years
If at all, it is two or three citations per paper.
Does this reflect that their publications are of poor quality?
If yes what are the parameters other than Google Scholar to know about research work of the professors?
Are there any alternatives to Google Scholar which serve the above purpose?<issue_comment>username_1: This would vary by field, of course. But there is more to selecting a good advisor than just their output, even the recognized quality of that output. In fact, having a superstar as an advisor can be a mixed blessing/curse. They may be so focused on their own research and career that they give you little direction in your own. If you are especially self motivated and can find and develop your own research this is less of an issue than if you are like most students, needing guidance in finding problems and developing solutions.
But the citation count of a person gives some, but not the final, measure of their quality as a researcher, not necessarily as an advisor. If you want an even better measure (IMO) get the citation count of the students that they have advised. Even just the number of "produced" students and where they wound up in their careers is a good, but not perfect, measure. It is more likely to be useful for a senior professor than a junior one, of course.
If you are already at the institution, student scuttlebutt is actually a pretty good indicator of an advisors "quality" as an advisor, if not as a scholar.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It's an important metric for evaluating research production. Of course no metric is perfect, blabla. But it is a decent one. Despite the people who hate this, it is normal to see h-indices listed (even as a field) in nominations for rewards for instance. And hiring and compensation committees look at it.
Again, it's not perfect (can be gamed, other metrics may show things it doesn't). But it is a very simple reasonable first cut. *But I think talking to scholars in the field is actually the superior metric.* People know who the big/medium/small wheels are. And which are tires that fell off the car and are sitting on the side of the highway.
Finally while being with a big name is <NAME>, a very reasonable variable to raise, it is not the only one in looking at advisors. I.e. research production =/= good advisor. You need to consider other things like is the fellow a jerk or nice, how fast do people graduate, is it a huge lab group or tiny, current funding, etc.
For instance, I would be inclined to avoid professors working on tenure (they may not get it, or may need to be slave drivers to get it) and would prefer someone who was a big wheel but is winding down (maybe 60 or so in age). Even the jerk, slavedriver big wheels tend to get a little more kind and grandfatherly towards the end. And reputation has a long dwell time, so it's not as critical for an old, established scientist if he goes emeritus shortly after you worked with him (might even be an opportunity for you to sneak under the wire).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: As others have pointed out, research output for your advisor may not be as important as other qualities in the supervisory relationship. Having given that caveat, if you are going to measure research level by citation count then it is important to at least adjust this for basic things like the number of authors on papers. For a measure of total citation for an author, it is preferable to use the **author-adjusted citation count**, where citations to papers with multiple authors are shared between those authors.
If you do not adjust for this then the citation count will tend to be much larger for authors who do papers in research groups with many co-authors, and this will not accurately reflect the research output of that single author. For example, if five academics each write one research paper and each paper gets 10 citations, then their citation count would each be 10. If those academics put each others names on those same papers, without any further change, then the raw citation count for each academic jumps up to 50, without having produced any additional research.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/02/11
| 2,080
| 8,332
|
<issue_start>username_0: TLDR: Got a PhD offer at top choice, all details checked out, and I want to accept now (much earlier than the April 15th deadline).
A colleague (at the professor level) I mentioned this to said I should wait as it could look 'too earnest' accepting roughly 10 days after notification.
Is there any truth to this claim? I.e. does it 'look bad' (i.e. desperate) if I accept now? I'm just genuinely excited and am ready to lock it in.
Additional details (from comments):
* This offer is a 'hard' offer such that it is from the department, many cc'd people, and is in writing
* I have other 'hard' offers from other universities and have yet to hear back from a few more
Other relevant questions:
* [Responding to a prof's email about acceptance in a PhD program](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/85044/responding-to-a-profs-email-about-acceptance-in-a-phd-program)
**Update**:
Thank you all SO much for your input. I went ahead and accepted the offer and got feedback saying they appreciated the rapid response and the PI was eager to arrange a talk for next steps. While this is likely the standard positive response, I have marked Buffy's answer as correct. The first two sentences made the most sense: 'Actually, it is simple **courtesy** to accept as soon as you **know** you will do so. This helps the institution **deal with its obligations to you and others**.' I then let the other universities know immediately after and I hope this helps their search process.<issue_comment>username_1: I think your advisor has the right instincts here. Any time you are in this sort of position (schools, job search, etc.) it makes more sense to wait. It can only be to your benefit. Also, school A may decide to up their offer, give you a visit, etc.
It's not so much that anything bad will come of your accepting early. It won't make you look bad or too eager. But you are just not using the situation to max advantage.
P.s. I think it's a good question. Should not be closed.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Actually, it is simple courtesy to accept as soon as you know you will do so. This helps the institution deal with its obligations to you and others. It isn't a game you play for "advantage". You hope to develop a long term relationship with this institution. Treat them with respect and expect them to reciprocate.
Don't accept before you are ready, such as when other offers might come in, but don't delay for any perceived "strategic" reason.
Similarly, once you have accepted the offer, extend the other universities the courtesy of letting them know you will not be accepting theirs.
Upvotes: 9 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I doubt they will care much either way if you accept early or at the last minute. Appearing eager is not a bad thing. You should be excited to start a PhD.
It is courteous and prudent not to delay if your decision has really already been made. It means they and you can move forward with the process of registering as a student. It also means they can say no to waitlisted candidates.
However, if your decision is not certain yet, then don’t make it earlier than necessary. For example, you haven’t seen all the other options yet. And you haven’t visited. These could change your mind. So I would wait until you have a clearer picture.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: A few questions to consider:
* Do you have a binding contract signed off by them you just need to sign and send back? Or any other legally binding offer?
Until you have that you need to be in a hurry (to get it, not to sign)
Following your edit: you did not mention the country so I am not sure what "hard" means. They can write the nicest letter with "we want you!" and cc: the whole world, but if in your jurisdiction this is not binding you should be careful. It is not like you are buying a TV - this is a PhD program you are very eager to get into.
For instance in France you get an offer letter which is legally binding.
* Is there any advantage of waiting? Negotiations? A better offer from somewhere else you would be waiting for?
If the answer is "no" you do not gain anything at waiting and your mind will be at peace once all the paperwork is over.
Following your edit: so it looks like there are other events you are waiting for? (the replies from other schools)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I would take your colleagues advice - but not for the reason he cited.
Waiting a few days allows the excitement to die down and stops you from making rash decisions. Perhaps there is some catch in the agreement that you glazed over because you were too interested in the good parts.
You've also mentioned that other offers are coming in - waiting allows you to consider all of them properly. There might be a gem among them that you notice too late (if at all). It would be unfortunate to accept this offer moments before a better one arrives in the mail.
So I recommend waiting at least a couple of days just to cool down and consider your future carefully. If you have already done this, then I see no reason not to go ahead. As other answers have said, you want to build a positive relationship with these people and being prompt is a good way to start.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_6: There is no logical reason to delay your answer once you are certain of the deicsion you have taken.
You are not in a position to negotiate, and the contract details for a PhD position (in the majority of cases, but you can correct me if it's different for you) are locked. You are not earning any "reputation point" or "coolness points" by waiting for the sake of waiting. Accepting as soon as you made up your mind - and I mean you are sure about it - is the correct, respectful, and polite thing to do so that the university has the time to start the paperwork and eventually notify other candidates that the position has been taken. Those candidates in turn can make up their minds on the offers they got. Essentially, there is quite a bit of people waiting on your answer so unless there are reasons to delay I would not do it.
IF you have a reason to wanting to take some time, be it to let your emotions cool down and take a clear-headed decision or because you want to wait for other offers to come in and compare, then by all means do so. It is in your full rights. Otherwise, if you know you will want to take that place no matter what, lock it as soon as possible.
Also remember, something many people underestimate is that once you sign a contract you have a job. You are employed with all the benefits that come with it. If the university burns down tomorrow and you have not signed a contract, you will lose it.
I am sorry to say, but from the information you provided I don't see the reason in your colleague's advice.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: >
> Is there any truth to this claim? I.e. does it 'look bad' (i.e. desperate) if I accept now?
>
>
>
As others indicate, some people/organizations may "raise an eyebrow" at an immediate acceptance, but most wouldn't. Problem is, you don't know which is which.
What I suggest you do is: Write them something which is almost an acceptance, but not quite. For example:
>
> Dear Mr. `[Secretary / Investigator / Administrator's name]`,
>
>
> I was very pleased to receive your offer, and will in all likelihood accept it.
>
>
> In the mean time, I would like to know whether `[something trivial here]`. Also,
> once I accept, what exactly `[some procedural-technical question here, timelines etc]`?
>
>
> Respectfully,
> Reputable Misnomer
>
>
>
So, you're asking about things that happen after your acceptance, as though you're about to to make those arrangements. But you still have not said the words "I accept". When you actually do accept, it will be after a (hopefully very short) while when you get an answer. And regardless of whether the answer is satisfying or not, I don't think anyone would think it strange that you accept *then*, because it's not an immediate acceptance.
Also, this does "tie" them to you in the sense that you're telling them to expect an acceptance, so unless they're completely psycopathic they would not withdraw the offer without saying "please make a final decision immediately".
Upvotes: -1
|
2019/02/11
| 2,356
| 9,137
|
<issue_start>username_0: There are a lot of questions here on what predatory journals *are*, and how to tell if a journal *is* one or not.
Are there known cases where a journal has "switched" camps, or where substantial evidence has been presented that they have? That is, has it ever occurred where:
* A journal developed a strong reputation for being predatory, recognized this, and engaged in a good-faith process of reform, eventually gaining at least a non-trivial amount of scientific credibility or impact?
* A journal with no history of predatory behavior suddenly started showing signs of becoming a predatory journal? For example, a publisher may have fallen on hard times, or been scooped by wealthier journals, and decided to lower their standards to such a level as to become predatory in order to survive.
For example, if someone has claimed, "The *Podunk University Journal of Advanced Best Practices in Intermediate Spline Reticulation* used to be a low-impact but serious journal, but after Podunk U was rocked by a cheating scandal in 2003 and there was a gradual movement away from Spline Reticulation toward Spline Retransmogrification from about 2005 to 2010 with a corresponding drop in the number of serious papers on Spline Reticulation being submitted, they started becoming a 'pay for play' publication and nowadays mostly publish incomprehensible screed written by rich patrons who want to increase their publication count.", that would count.
As the definition of a "predatory" journal is somewhat vague and based on professional judgments rather than 100% objective criteria, I would consider any of the following to "count" as a determination that a journal is or is not "predatory":
* The journal's practices or policies are so blatantly predatory or non-predatory that a conclusion is self-evident.
* A large-scale consensus exists on a journal's nature, even though there may be a minority that has raised a legitimate case for the opposite conclusion.
* A substantial, notable professional opinion has been released concluding that a journal is/was or is/was not predatory at a specific time. Inclusion on Beall's list would count as a professional opinion that the journal was predatory at the time it was added.<issue_comment>username_1: The Publisher [Frontiers](https://www.frontiersin.org) was - and, since there is no further development, still is - listed on Beall's List. Starting from scratch and with problems and therefore seen as predatory in the beginning by some researchers, Frontiers is now a reputable publisher with their journals listed in Scopus, Web of Science and the Journal Citation Report. The whole story is even included in [Frontiers' Wikipedia article](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frontiers_Media).
Regarding the question of what is a predatory publisher/journal and what is not, there is no clear answer or dividing line. There is a [recent publication (still preprint)](https://peerj.com/preprints/27532/) trying to gain further insight by analyzing the publishers/journals on black and white lists and comparing their characteristics.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: This is an example of either a predatory journal taking over a legitimate one, or of a predatory journal trying to become legitimate, in 2016:
>
> OMICS International, a “predatory” publisher of fake and low-quality research, has bought another Canadian science publisher — its third this year.
>
>
> OMICS has acquired Intellectual Consortium of Drug Discovery & Technology Development Incorporation, of Saskatoon. <NAME> of the University of Colorado, who investigates the shadowy world of fake science publishing, discovered OMICS has expanded the group from three to 10 journal titles, all of them operating only online.
>
>
>
--[Predatory publisher expands control of Canadian science journals](https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/predatory-publisher-expanding-empire-in-canada)
At least one person believed that the purchase of his journals was an attempt to go straight for OMICS:
>
> One of the world’s most well-known “predatory” publishers has bought two commercial Canadian publishers of about 16 medical specialty journals ... When <NAME> decided to retire after running Pulsus since 1984, he said he searched for potential buyers, but could find “no other takers” for the remaining journals. ... He stated that he believed OMICS bought Pulsus in order to “start anew” as a legitimate publisher.
>
>
>
--[Alleged predatory publisher buys medical journals](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5088087/)
However, OMICS continues its predatory practices in general since buying these journals, and the expansion from three to ten journals is very suspicious. Several of the journals that were bought have terminated or attempted to terminate their relationship with OMICS. For that reason, among others, I can't really tell if the new ownership has been outright predatory, if the journals are still above board, or if they're somewhere in between.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: This question isn't really answerable because [what's predatory and what isn't predatory isn't well-defined](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/23719/why-do-open-access-consortia-affiliate-themselves-with-questionable-publishers/115704#115704).
If you define "predatory" as being on Beall's list, then the answer is yes: MDPI was on Beall's list in 2014, and then removed in 2015 (there are a few other publishers that bounced back and forth on the list too, e.g. Hindawi). However if you believe that MDPI was not predatory to start with, or if you believe that MDPI is still predatory, then saying this publisher has switched from being predatory to reputable makes no sense.
The same goes for the other bullet point you mentioned (of a reputable journal becoming disreputable). In 2016, OMICS - a publisher generally held to be disreputable - [acquired two Canadian publishers <NAME> Publishing and Pulsus Group](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OMICS_Publishing_Group#Acquisition_of_Canadian_publishers), as well as their journals. You can see from the Wikipedia page that this "led to a decline in publishing standards". However if you read the quoted source, the objection is:
>
> <NAME>, the former managing editor of the Canadian Journal of General Internal Medicine, said that after the OMICS deal was announced in January, she went on the company’s website and immediately noticed red flags as she started browsing through the journals.
>
>
> “There were all kinds of typos, the grammar was wrong,” she said in an interview from Ottawa. “In medical journals, everything has to be accurate -- every comma, every word -- so that was my first suspicion.”
>
>
>
In other words, the decline in publishing standards is based on poor copyediting. Does poor copyediting make these OMICS-acquired journals predatory, given that [poor copyediting can happen even in reputable journals](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/11441/how-should-i-respond-to-a-terrible-copyediting-job)? You'll have to come to your own conclusion. <NAME> clearly thinks so, but not every reasonable person will agree with her.
**Edit:** to further illustrate how much of a grey area there is in what's predatory and what isn't, consider a journal that doesn't perform peer review. Say this in a vacuum and most people will immediately assume the journal is predatory. If this is your definition, then there has indeed been a predatory journal that "reformed" and started implementing peer review: *[Medical Hypotheses](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_Hypotheses)*.
The problem is, as you can see from the "Peer review debate" section of the Wikipedia article, this journal was started by a reputable academic (<NAME>) and published by a reputable publisher (Elsevier). <NAME>'s stated reason for starting the journal is that peer reviewers tend to dislike ideas outside the scientific mainstream, which makes it hard to publish new ideas. His solution was to not perform peer review, and to worry less about whether the paper is true but whether the paper is interesting. Ironically, when put this way, there are people who agree with this sentiment too.
The upshot of this policy is that in 2009, *Medical Hypotheses* published two papers arguing that there's no proof that HIV causes AIDS. There was a backlash, the media got involved, Elsevier investigated and subsequently demanded the journal implement some level of peer review. The then editor-in-chief <NAME> refused and was subsequently sacked. A couple of years later, 198 academics published [an article in another journal](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11017-012-9233-1) defending <NAME> and *Medical Hypotheses*' original peer review model.
Is *Medical Hypotheses* predatory? It didn't perform peer review and published pseudoscientific papers! Is Elsevier predatory? It fired an editor that didn't do what it wanted! Again, you'll have to come to your own conclusions. There's no clear answer.
Upvotes: 5
|
2019/02/11
| 257
| 1,090
|
<issue_start>username_0: Should one include a "Last updated on [DATE]" footer at the end of an academic CV? Why or why not?
(I would imagine that context matters. For example, perhaps it wouldn't be advised for a CV that I would submit as part of a job application, but perhaps it's worth including on the version of my CV that I post on my institutional website.)<issue_comment>username_1: I almost always include a last updated date on my CVs. There are numerous online copies of my CV that I am no longer in control of and I think it is useful that people can see that what they are looking at is 10-20 years out of date.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It's not uncommon for academics to not update their CV for years. That is, only update it when required for a job application or promotion. Thus a "last updated" date provides a useful warning that this CV might not have recent publications and activities on it.
There may also be multiple versions of a person's CV floating around. The date will help you quickly determine which should be used.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/02/11
| 2,212
| 9,291
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have not yet seen anyone in academia put a copyright notice on their CV or resume. Why is this?
One might expect that even if the content is implicitly copyrighted, the layout/format/style of the document -- perhaps more so for a graphic designer -- is part of one's intellectual property.<issue_comment>username_1: Copyright generally protects the content/text/copy and not the layout. If you believe your layout is so novel, you could try patenting it, but I doubt that will be successful (and you probably should not be using something so novel for a CV unless you are a graphic designer).
In response to comments, according to this document from the [US Copyright Office](https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ33.pdf) the layout of a document is not copyrightable.
>
> As a general rule, the Office will not accept a claim to copyright in “format” or “layout.” The general layout or format of a book, page, book cover, slide presentation, web page, poster, or form is uncopyrightable because it is a template for expression.
>
>
>
You might try and claim the CV layout is like a blank form, but those are also not copyrightable
>
> Blank forms that are designed for recording information and do not themselves convey information are uncopyrightable.
>
>
>
Even the content of the CV is probably not copyrightable
>
> To be copyrightable, a work must qualify as an original work of authorship, meaning that it must have been created independently and contain a sufficient amount of creativity.
>
>
>
since a CV is generally just a list of facts and the text is not really creative.
The combination of the text and layout might satisfy the requirement for copyright and potentially entitle you to damages if someone copied your CV, but it would not provide protection from someone using your CV as a template and replacing your accomplishments with theirs and likely would not protect you from them taking your accomplishments and reformatting them.
As for weather a patent would be appropriate, I think it would fall under a [design patent](https://www.uspto.gov/patents-getting-started/patent-basics/types-patent-applications/design-patent-application-guide)
>
> A design patent protects only the appearance of the article and not structural or utilitarian features.
>
>
>
where the layout is the design and the article is the content of the CV. As I said above, this is probably a huge stretch.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: 1. In the US, copyright notices have not been required for decades. So there is no benefit.
2. It isn't done and will be perceived as strange. Since the purpose of your resume is to help you, don't do things like this.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: While your CV can technically be regarded as a piece of intellectual property, the usual reason why people assert their copyright to a work by putting a copyright notice on it is to deter and prevent other people from copying or sharing that work (usually so they - the authors - can profit by selling the work).
With your CV, it is actually in your interest to have as many people as possible sharing it and passing it around, so the incentives work completely in the opposite direction from a more traditional type of intellectual product.
Now, if your CV is such an amazing piece of work that people will be willing to pay for a copy, we’d be having a different discussion...
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Putting copyright notices on pages you write is alien to how people think, and they typically never consider the possibility they might need to/want to do that.
After all, copyrights (and copyright notices) are strange artifacts of authoritarianism in human society, dating back to how the [British crown decided to artificially prop up publisher monopolies](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_copyright_law) centuries ago.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> One might expect that even if the content is implicitly copyrighted,
>
>
>
*Content* of a CV should generally contain *information* and [information is not subject to copyright](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright). It will probably be subject to some [information privacy law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_privacy_law) though, depending on your location.
>
> the layout/format/style of the document -- perhaps more so for a graphic designer -- is part of one's intellectual property.
>
>
>
Yes, it is possible for the layout or style of CV to be intellectual property, however, it is unlikely indeed, unless you *are* a kind of graphic designer or similar who has meticulously created a sufficiently originally looking CV unlike any other.
Otherwise, since CVs are generally comparatively rigid in structure, format and purpose, unless you are in the creative field, you might risk either (a) creating a CV that looks similar enough to one of the billions of previous ones to be considered plagiarism for the purposes of copyright, or (b) creating a CV whose outlook is unique, [has a sufficient degree of originality](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement#Non-infringing_uses), but fails to produce any interest in the potential reviewer, who, perhaps, must orient himself quickly among dozens of different CVs every day.
Plus, even in that case, as others said, you don't need an explicit copyright notice, since the things that are copyright-able [will be considered such](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright#Copyright_notice).
On the social side, if I, as a prospective employer, saw a trivially looking CV with a copyright notice, I would consider the author to be ostentatious and less likely of interest for employment (He wants to copyright his CV? What else he might have misconceptions about?).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Can you? Absolutely.
Must you include a notice in order to maintain a copyright? No, at least not under most current copyright regimes. For example, the U.S. did away with this requirement effective March 1, 1989. Most other countries had removed it long before. So long as your CV meets the threshhold of originality, which is generally quite low, it will be protected.
Should you? In the U.S., including a notice still conveys some "benefits." Generally speaking they are not actually beneficial to a person who holds copyright in a CV, because they are associated with bringing an infringement suit. It seems unlikely to me that you would want to bring an infringement suit based on someone's use of your CV. You can read about the benefits in the U.S. Copyright Office's [Circular 3](https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ03.pdf).
You say you haven't seen copyright notices on CVs in the past. (Neither have I.) I'd urge you to defer to this custom. Why give people reviewing your CV a distraction? Plus, presumably you want your CV to look like the CVs of people who have been successful in obtaining the sort of job you want.
While we're at it, let's address what the copyright protection in your CV, which is automatic and independent of the copyright notice, actually covers. It does not prevent others from using unoriginal elements of your CV that you did not create. For instance, typesetting the headings in bold would not be original, and thus your right to your CV would not entitle you to prevent me from bolding the headings on my CV. You might also follow quite a few CV conventions in preparing your CV (e.g., listing items in chronological order). Your copyright will not give you a property right in those conventions. You also list facts on your CV, such as the year you got a particular degree. Others can use that fact without permission, as copyright does not protect facts. Since CVs are dictated by convention and consist largely of facts, the right of the copyright holder is essentially narrower -- it covers only very close reproduction of the CV. In the United States this is sometimes called "thin" copyright.
Does that mean others cannot copy, distribute, or display your CV? Not entirely. When you share a CV with someone, especially via a job application, you are giving them an implied license to use it for the sorts of things you both anticipate they will use it for (e.g., distributing copies to members of a search committee). In addition, anyone can use your CV under the user's rights recognized in their jurisdiction (e.g., fair use in U.S. law).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: I put a copyright notice on the version of my CV that I posted on my website. I did this because others periodically would upload my CV to file sharing websites. (I assume this was because the websites required you to upload files. Not sure why my CV was picked for this.) I don't want that to happen because my CV has changed significantly over the course of grad school. Old CVs don't represent me well.
Since doing this I have not noticed any file sharing websites with copies of my CV, though I don't know if that has anything to do with the copyright notice.
For what it's worth, I also added the date of the last change and a URL to download the most recent version at the bottom. Those would probably do more to stop people from thinking my old CV is current than anything else.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/12
| 2,810
| 11,421
|
<issue_start>username_0: I work as a senior academic in an important university in Europe. My name is in several publications in top journals in my field.
I have always published papers together with brilliant collaborators who really made the difference but they are not there any more.
I am working on a new paper as a solo author but I am suffering a mental blockage and serious problems of anxiety.
I have previously published some papers as a solo author but I need help with this new paper. The difference now is that I am not able to start writing the proof demonstrations and therefore I cannot attract collaborators. Blank page syndrome. When I try to work on it, I have panic attacks. It's not a lack of skills because I have previously performed at a high level, I am blocked because I am used to collaborative work and talk about work helps me develop my ideas. I am now in a vicious loop, without proofs to attract collaborators and without collaborators to develop proofs
I was invited to give a seminar on my previous paper in an American university. I could use that opportunity to talk with them about my new ideas. I also spoke with some of my department colleagues. They are waiting for me to develop a bit more the proofs to decide whether my idea is feasible and collaborate. They are busy and will not help me at the moment. Right now, I am alone with my unsolved proof and my panic attacks.
Two questions:
* How can I overcome this mental block when working with theoretical mathematics?
* My job is my life, I don't want to leave academia but this situation is killing me. Should I leave academia or stay regardless the consequences?<issue_comment>username_1: *Note: after the OP updates the question, I feel this answer doesn't answer it much. Nevertheless, it's still applicable in a general case I think.*
The method to solve [mental block](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_block) is very easy: take a break. Everyone has it, even your brilliant collaborators, so there is no need to be anxious about it. (The more you are anxious, the more likely you have it).
My experience is that if you don't know what to write, read more books/papers. During the reading if you catch relevant idea, then it will invoke the idea that you are looking for, and then it will come as flood. If it still doesn't come, then perhaps ideas for other problems will come?
Other resources:
* [Writer's block](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Writer%27s_block)
* [Occupational burnout](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupational_burnout) (for a psychology approach on this)
* [Process theory of composition](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Process_theory_of_composition) (for those who is interest in the field studying about writing: composition)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It's okay to need help on a particular project. It's natural to become interested in questions that are not entirely within one's expertise. But I think this idea that you need to have X amount of the proof done before you're "allowed" to bring on coauthors is not necessarily true. I can think of two other ways to get people interested: first, get better at selling the question itself, and second, work out a particular example or toy problem in detail. (Toy problems are a good cure for being stuck, in general.) If you do that and still can't find anyone to work with you, you can get help from the literature. It's not as efficient as working with coauthors, but reading is better than staring at a blank page.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: There are those who do not do well with theoretical mathematics. And they always consult a mathematician for that work when it comes up in their research. This situation is OK. (It is said that Einstein always had a mathematician handy to help him with his math.) It may mean sometimes that the mathematician will be added as a co-author; and other times it may not.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: Forgive me but I'm going to just wildly speculate here and hope that you find a bit of value in it. Perhaps you are just the sort of thinker that thrives on the synergy of working with others and getting ideas bounced around and reinforced (or shot down). That doesn't make you less of a mathematician, of course, but just represents one way of getting all of the pieces together.
It seems like you thought of yourself up to now as the 'junior' member of your circle and now the others have died or retired and so you are left 'alone'. In fact, IMO, you are left, now, as the senior member, but you don't need to continue to be the 'only' member.
Try to build up the circle again with new junior members with whom you can interact, building up their ideas as well as your own. It will give you that synergy again, if this is indeed the issue (like I said, speculative). A local circle is best, of course, but today's communication resources give additional options if learn to use them intensively.
And you have the opportunity to become the master that those younger scholars look up to and revere as they grow into the profession. Very cool.
---
One additional factor might be at play. When a person tries too hard for too long at intellectual activity, the brain sometimes rebels and shuts down. A break is called for, especially a break that gets the blood flowing, such as physical exercise. Physical exercise that also engages the brain but in a different way from the normal research mode can be helpful. I use Tai Chi for this as it is a mind-body fusion exercise, though not aerobic. When younger, I used cycling and x-c-skiing and such though they didn't have the same mental component. But an hour or so break for physical exercise can sometimes invigorate you.
And since the mind works subconsciously as well as when forced, sometimes insights magically appear during or immediately after a break. Even a sleep break.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: Maybe you could try out a method from another field ! (Computer Sciences.)
It does not help with the exact same problem, but you could try out the [rubber duck method](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubber_duck_debugging), usually used to find a problem in some code, but it works by explaining what [the code] does to somebody else [which happens to be a toy].
Maybe it could stimulate you to just talk to a rubber duck, as long as you haven't got anybody else to talk to.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: I am an academic with tenure. I experienced difficulties with research at one point. I had been working on mathematics for about 30 years. I share below what helped to tackle it. I am back in a creative zone, happily producing results--in fact delivering some of my best results.
Others have given great advice, including finding new research partners to work with. Can you take on a grad student? I always found conversations with grad students very stimulating.
Panic attacks can be addressed via breathing techniques (very helpful and simple to apply). There could be other causes for stress or blank page syndrome too (e.g. conditions affecting sleep such as apnea etc), so perhaps check your health with a GP.
Others suggested engaging in sports. I find swimming energizing and super useful prior to a research session.
A creative activity (other than maths), such as sculpting or writing (or drumming or portrait drawing as Feynman did) will help to regain creativity elsewhere, which you can bring back to research in due time. It worked for me.
Gain distance. If one is too close to the work and attaches too much importance to it, then the work can suffer. I work with far more detachment now on a topic that I find more important than any other I worked on before. I keep perspective, humor and balance in the work. I found better pacing than when I was younger. If you change your life style and get more distance from your work by socializing, sports or creative undertakings, then the distance and added perspective this brings will help to overcome stress. I never stress in research at this stage. It is delightful (again and far more so than when I was a younger scientist).
Get a sabbatical to work with a mentor. Finding the right mentor to work with can make all the difference. I found a mentor who is very active, yet retired for quite a while. He is an inspiration and working with him and seeing him in action has changed my work practice.
All of the above helped me to move forward. Life always brings many challenges. A research block can be a sign that you require something different. So perhaps consider it as the opportunity that it is to regain what you are looking for...
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_1: Here is an excerpt from 'Surely You're Joking Mr. Feynman!'. Copy from [here](https://www.pitt.edu/%7Edruzdzel/feynman.html)
>
> When I was at Princeton in the 1940s I could see what happened to those great minds at the Institute for Advanced Study, who had been specially selected for their tremendous brains and were now given this opportunity to sit in this lovely house by the woods there, with no classes to teach, with no obligations whatsoever. These poor bastards could now sit and think clearly all by themselves, OK? So they don't get any ideas for a while: They have every opportunity to do something, and they are not getting any ideas. I believe that in a situation like this a kind of guilt or depression worms inside of you, and you begin to worry about not getting any ideas. And nothing happens. Still no ideas come.
>
>
> Nothing happens because there's not enough real activity and challenge: You're not in contact with the experimental guys. You don't have to think how to answer questions from the students. Nothing!
>
>
> In any thinking process there are moments when everything is going good and you've got wonderful ideas. Teaching is an interruption, and so it's the greatest pain in the neck in the world. And then there are the *longer* period of time when not much is coming to you. You're not getting any ideas, and if you're doing nothing at all, it drives you nuts! You can't even say "I'm teaching my class."
>
>
> If you're teaching a class, you can think about the elementary things that you know very well. These things are kind of fun and delightful. It doesn't do any harm to think them over again. Is there a better way to present them? The elementary things are *easy* to think about; if you can't think of a new thought, no harm done; what you thought about it before is good enough for the class. If you *do* think of something new, you're rather pleased that you have a new way of looking at it.
>
>
> The questions of the students are often the source of new research. They often ask profound questions that I've thought about at times and then given up on, so to speak, for a while. It wouldn't do me any harm to think about them again and see if I can go any further now. The students may not be able to see the thing I want to answer, or the subtleties I want to think about, but they *remind* me of a problem by asking questions in the neighborhood of that problem. It's not so easy to remind *yourself* of these things.
>
>
> So I find that teaching and the students keep life going, and I would *never* accept any position in which somebody has invented a happy situation for me where I don't have to teach. Never.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/12
| 2,544
| 10,762
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am considering developing a new journal, with an innovative publishing method, and would love to hear some insights. The main concept is to change the review process. I would like to have a extra fast review period, by doing two things:
1. All the reviewers should be still PhD student or post-doc students. They are the ones with higher knowledge on a specific topic and more free time to quickly review a paper.
2. Reviewers get paid if they review in less than one week, lets say 10 USD, as an incentive.
Also, all papers are open-access and there are no publication fees. The income would come from ads on the papers. What do you think? Would you publish a paper in a journal like this? Would you be a reviewer?<issue_comment>username_1: Your idea has no chance of success. I'll ignore the part about reviewers being PhD students and postdocs and just look at the publishing model, because that alone is enough to sink the concept.
**Ad revenue is not enough to sustain a journal**. Just consider: who is willing to pay to advertise in a journal?
* You might be able to get some ad revenue in a print journal, but as a whole, print is declining (maybe ~20% of the journal market at this point and dropping), plus with the most lucrative markets (developed countries) almost fully using electronic articles, you're not going to reach much of an audience that advertisers will be interested in.
* Plus, if you do print your journal, you have printing costs to pay for.
* Even if you go fully electronic, academic journals don't have nearly enough readership to attract advertisers. Just compare [how many subscribers you need on a YouTube channel to monetize content](https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/16/16899068/youtube-new-monetization-rules-announced-4000-hours) (I use YouTube because this is also an advertisement-driven service). YouTube wants one thousand subscribers. Academic articles don't come close to 1,000 readers on average.
* And to top it off, not only are you generating no revenue (diamond open access), you want to pay your reviewers. Where are you going to get the money from? You can beg your editorial board members work for free, you can use a free editorial-management system, you can outsource copyediting and typesetting to the authors, you can ignore marketing your journal, you can strongarm your institution to host your journal's webpage for free ... but paying reviewers involves cold hard cash.
The only way this can work is if you manage to secure renewable, external funding. Depending on how much you're willing to skimp on a journal's operating costs, as well as on how many articles your journal gets, you might not need more than a couple of thousand dollars every year. However even this level of funding is not easy to get. There's a reason why diamond open access journals are rare.
tl; dr: you can try, but expect to fail.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The first thing you need to do when developing a new service is to come up with a realistic business case. What are your fixed and variable costs, and what kind of revenue you can expect?
**Fixed costs:** at least costs for hosting your website and papers, staff (maybe you initially will run everything yourself in your free time, but if this should become a real business you need to envision a future where you can't do it all on your own anymore), advertisement. All together not too bad (probably).
**Variable costs:** if you pay a modest 10USD per review, every article will cost you at least 20USD or 30USD to produce. Additionally, you may want to pay editors as well (why would they work for free if the reviewers get payed?). This sounds like peanuts, but it adds up since you are paying this upfront and for every *submitted* (not only accepted) article, and even for the ones that get viewed less than a 100 times in their lifetime. One journal that I am in the Editorial Board for accepts about 20% of submissions, so your unit costs of an accepted article may be in the range of 100USD or more.
**Expected revenue:** it is unclear to me if you want to put ads on the website, on the papers, or both. In any case, advertisement revenues live from *large* numbers of views. Nobody pays you to advertise contents that a few hundred people look at every month. In journals such as [PeerJ](https://peerj.com) you can figure out how many views articles typically get, while data from platforms such as Youtube can give you an impression of how many views per paper you will need to offset the variable costs. However, do take into account that views follow a long tail distribution - most content basically nobody ever looks at, so your *high runners* need to make up for it. This is true for all platforms - Youtube does not earn money with most videos, but when it does, it often makes *a lot* of money. It is unclear to me how many scientific articles you can expect that would hold the same mass market appeal.
All in all, I am not buying the business case based on this napkin calculation, but it's certainly in the realm of possibility that it could work out financially. You will need to do your own estimations.
That said, you also have some **other considerations** (which may also sink your business even if the monetary side would in theory work out):
* Bootstrapping a journal outside of the big, established organizations (Springer, ACM, IEEE, ...) is *hard*. Authors today live and die based on reputation of the journals that they publish in, and your new journal will need to fight to be seen as serious. That it also operates differently will be a strike against it in this dimension. I assume that you hope that your fast reviews will provide sufficient incentives for authors, but I am not buying it - fast reviews are not typically considered to correlate with quality, and neither is that the reviews are done by PhD students and postdocs. You personally may be convinced that PhD students write better reviews than senior academics, but the larger academic world is unlikely to agree. If you want your business to succeed, the community needs to buy into your premise.
* Another aspect that may be held against your journal is that your journal has somewhat unfortunate incentives: it is better for you to accept than to reject (given that rejected articles incur costs but never lead to revenue), and it is even better to accept highly controversial (but wrong) articles that get viewed a lot. Even if your journal never gives in to these temptations, I foresee that there will be a certain level of mistrust hanging over the scientific trustworthiness of your journal.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: So the deal is that if you drop everything else you are working on to do a review in a week, you earn $10?
I think you need to reconsider that business model, or at least, make the gain worth the disruption. $100 might work better than $10 for "impoverished" grad students, but it's still only chicken feed for a professional.
If somebody offered to pay me $10 to review something, I would put in the amount of effort that $10 was worth. That's probably about 5 minutes of my time - long enough to flick through the pages, and write a couple of sentences saying "awesome" or "garbage". That counts as "a review", yes?
The above intentionally avoids the question of whether the whole idea is ethical from an academic point of view, but if it won't work as a business model, the question of ethics doesn't matter much.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: It isn't exactly an academic journal, but [Scientific American](https://www.scientificamerican.com/) is a high-quality publication in which advertising is a large part of their business model. But, the way they make things work is by being a reasonably popular publication. Without the popularity, the advertising wouldn't generate enough revenue (why would advertisers pay for ads unlikely to be seen by many?). Furthermore, they wouldn't keep the readership that they have unless they maintain a consistent high quality in what they publish -- where quality isn't just measured in terms of accuracy but also depends on writing quality and anticipated reader interest. They couldn't function if they relied on poorly-paid graduate students rather than professional editors to decide on what gets published. Your desired properties of being quickly-reviewed and advertiser-supported pull in opposite directions.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: As others have stated, your approach is a bit naive, but I don't think it's unreal. Just improbable. If you are going for a new concept do it properly. 10$ is effectively zero. Consider paying hundreds per review.
Also consider paying real fees to authors. Almost every periodical except academic ones pay their authors. Newspapers do, tabloids do, comic journals do...
Should the access be free? Preferrably, but I don't think it's mandatory. People pay for Scientific American and The Economist. Why wouldn't they pay for a good academic journal? Of course, not the current fees but prices comparable to normal journals like the ones I mentioned.
Now how do you pull it off? Who's gonna pay for it?
For an inspiring example in another area, see <https://letsencrypt.org/sponsors/> - here's a bunch of companies who are paying so every website could have an SSL certificate for free. I think it is possible to convince companies like Google or Facebook to sponsor academia, especially if you are going to improve a field that they care about, say - AI research.
I don't think you can survive on ads. For most fields there's no one audience. Like what are you going to sell to AI geeks or statisticians? Few of them are interested in hats, some in chess and others like cooking. It's not like you are going to sell them calculators and I doubt it's even worth advertising professional products like SPSS to them...
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: How much you're paid rates on youtube are terrible because youtube gets most of the cut and the targeting is very broad, so the ad impressions are not worth much (but they have to stream your video, handle ad campaigns etc... all of that is not free).
Youtubers make more of their money from the in-stream adverts (and paid review / product placement). Advertising in a scientific journal would refine the target and in theory increase the value of each advert, and you would get a bigger cut.
It's all a game of numbers:
* how much is your audience worth to advertisers. (nVidia, google etc... might be highly interested in an audience of AI researchers, lab equipment manufacturers in biomedical journal...)
* how big is your audience.
* how high are your expenses.
Good luck
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/02/12
| 224
| 948
|
<issue_start>username_0: I sent an article it's been almost 4 months, but still my article is in the same status "submissions being processed", that I have to do is what I contact the editor or I wait for their response, since I have heard when we send an e-mail to the editor, he sends the refusal directly, I wait for your suggestions, thank you in advance<issue_comment>username_1: Move to another journal. You should have done that a while ago.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Contact the editor. It happened to me once that the referees were divided, so the editor sent the paper to more referees, hence prolonging the process. He just forgot to notify me. Moving to another journal is a bad decision, since you haven't been rejected yet. What if then you are liaising with two journals and both accept it? **Not good**.
Also, check the average processing time of the journal. Some do take long time, even up to six months!
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/02/12
| 467
| 1,957
|
<issue_start>username_0: One of my papers got accepted yesterday. We had received conflicting opinions from the reviewers even after three rounds of revisions. We also had written a rebuttal directly to the Editor in response to one of the reviewers' comments in the last revision.
I never reply to an Editor after receiving an acceptance letter. However, this time I am sure the Editor had to take a decent amount of time to review our responses and reviewers' comments and make an informed decision.
Is it common to thank the Editor after acceptance email?
Thank you for your comments!<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think it is essential unless there was something left unresolved in the last communication. Of course it is always polite to thank people. But to the editor it is a business decision, rather than a personal one. So, either way, writing or not, you are just fine. And congratulations on the acceptance.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Is it common to thank the Editor after acceptance email?
>
>
>
It's uncommon. I've handled hundreds of papers and I think I've seen this only a few times.
Aside from that I agree with username_1's answer - write a thank-you email or not, you are just fine. I generally just smiled and moved on to the next paper, after all.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Is it common to thank the Editor after acceptance email?
>
>
>
**It is uncommon, but this review was also an uncommon one.** From your description, it sounds like the Editor would have done a substantial amount of work considering the competing merits of conflicting reviews and your own rebuttal to a reviewer. That is work in excess of what would normally occur in a review process, and so it would not be out of place to email and thank the Editor for his/her work. It is nice to get thank-yous for doing your job well, so I would recommend you go with your instinct and send a thank-you email.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/02/12
| 772
| 3,174
|
<issue_start>username_0: I submitted a research paper to a reputed journal (open access). Later, after getting the first reviews, most of the authors are refusing to pay the publication fees even though we all previously decided to contribute.
I sent a wave-off request to the journal by explaining the money problem. The journal denied the delay so at last I requested them to withdraw the paper. First they said that they were withdrawing it. Later they said that we mistakenly wrote withdraw instead of "move to production" (which is a clear lie).
I have mailed them so many times to withdraw but now they are replying in an impolite way. How can I convince the journal to withdraw the paper?<issue_comment>username_1: I've never tried this but if you inform them to withdraw the paper and that the *fees won't be paid*, that it will get their attention.
If you have given up copyright already, this might not be effective, and you may already have a contractual obligation to pay and will need to fight it out with your co-authors.
But if you still hold copyright, then they have no rights to publish the work. You can, then, also inform them that you won't sign over the rights.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This sounds like a strange situation, in which something isn't adding up. It seems to me that one of two things is going on here:
1. This isn't actually the reputable journal that you think it is. It might be a "look-alike" predatory journal, or a formerly-good journal that has been hijacked, but in either case they are trying to scam you.
2. Something is deeply confused within the editors, and they've decided to publish despite the fact you've told them that you will not be paying.
In the first case, you definitely don't want your paper there, and in the second case maybe you'll get a free publication for some strange reason. The problem is to distinguish between the two cases.
Accordingly, I would recommend proceeding by writing an email something like the following:
>
> Dear Editors:
>
>
> As you know know from our former correspondence, we are unexpectedly unable to pay the publication fee for this paper. We are confused as to your current plans for the paper, however, and request a clarification. Which of these two is your current plan for the paper?
>
>
> 1. The paper is withdrawn, and we will submit to a different venue.
> 2. You plan to waive the fee and publish the paper free of charge.
>
>
> Please let us know promptly, so we can plan the next step with this paper. If you do not reply within one week, we will assume the paper is withdrawn.
>
>
>
If they are predatory, they'll probably try to either stall or else try to tell you they're going to publish it and you have to pay. Ignore such threats, even if they bluster about taking you to court. You are the author and nobody can force you to publish a scientific paper against your will: if they try, they will simply be exposing their own fraud.
If they're real, they'll probably answer one way or another --- or fail to, in which case you would be quite reasonable to assume the paper is de facto withdrawn and take it elsewhere.
Upvotes: 4
|
2019/02/12
| 666
| 2,791
|
<issue_start>username_0: Academics commonly get invitations to conferences. Some of these are legitimate, but many are simply scams or bogus. How can you tell at a glance which is which?<issue_comment>username_1: The fastest way possible is to use a policy of "don't call me, I'll call you" with venues (conferences, journals, etc.). If you don't already know them, discard correspondence from them. In most cases there are already too many options to chose from on where to go and where to submit, so there is little to lose from discarding unsolicited contact from people you don't already work with.
The next, more open, version is to ask a few sensible people you already know. "Hey, have you heard of XYZ conference?" Assuming the people you know and respect are not carbon copies of you, this should net you a very high percentage of recognition if the conference is worth bothering with. Asking people you know and respect, and who are not exactly like you, is a great way to broaden your horizons if you are not yet familiar with what the useful venues are already.
Note that I take a somewhat snobby view of venues here, in that I don't actually care about *mere legitimacy*, in the same way I don't care to eat at a restaurant because I won't immediately be robbed for going in. I want a way to spend my time, effort, and money that is much better than my existing options. Some conference I've only heard of because of some unrequested 'invitation' is vanishingly unlikely to provide an option better than the ones I'm already aware of.
If for some reason something new appears that really piques my interest, I would look to see who supposedly is on the organizing/editorial committee, and see if there are people I know and respect and would like to work with (and if so I might also contact them directly to ensure they actually are affiliated and approve). I would also read previous papers/proceedings/abstracts and see what they have to offer. If I am not impressed with the quality - really, genuinely impressed by how useful and applicable the papers are to my work - easy slam-dunk into the trash bin.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Is it a conference you've heard of? Do you know any of the organizers? Do you know any of the main speakers? If the answer to all 3 questions is no, it's probably not a worthwhile conference.
Academics are usually fairly aware of the main conferences and researchers in their field. Most of the scam conferences I get invites to are in far away locations, in fields that are at best tangentially related to mine (signal processing, education), or are hopelessly broad in scope. They are put on by Universities and organizers I've never heard of. There is very little chance of mistaking them for a legit conference.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/02/12
| 1,824
| 6,666
|
<issue_start>username_0: In academic life you need to publish papers. Some journals publish papers merely based on peer review; they don't ask for money. For some other journals, you have to pay certain amount of money for your paper to be reviewed and published.
What are this second kind of journals called? I have heard "money journals". Is that the name used for these journals?<issue_comment>username_1: Actually, many journals, even quite reputable ones ask for money, but the good ones expect that the authors are funded by grants that will cover publication costs. On the other hand there are "predatory" journals that seem to exist only to publish relatively low quality papers and make money in the process. They are like "vanity publishers" of novels and such, but do provide an audience of sorts, including web publishing, for example. [Beall's List](https://beallslist.weebly.com) is now somewhat out of date, I think, but you can find many predatory journals here. Most of those are best avoided as people finding your papers there will, at least, wonder why you couldn't have done better.
I don't know current practice, but even the AMS used to charge (page charges) for paper they publish in some journals. It means that the cost of publishing isn't entirely borne by members of the society. The bill would normally be sent to the author's grant. If there is no grant then it would be sent to the author's institution. If it was refused there, it would be sent to the author. But if the author wasn't able to pay the fee, then (in the past at least) the paper would still be published. It wasn't a condition of publishing, but a request.
If you are writing grants, include something for publishing fees unless it isn't permitted or isn't needed.
But note that there are costs associated with publishing, even if it is mostly done by volunteers and publishing is online. Someone need to pay for the web site and the space to host the papers. These costs need to be paid somehow.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This model is typically called "[Gold open access](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/51996/what-is-the-difference-between-green-and-gold-open-access)".
Some of them are good and well-reputed (e.g., the [PLOS](https://www.plos.org/) family of journals), and some are predatory scams designed to bilk authors out of publications fees.
In most fields, journals will never ask for money to allow peer review: in those fields, that is definitely a red flag for a scam. Note, however, that in a few fields, such as economics, it is standard practice to ask for submission fees.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Based on some comments, I think providing some insight from Economics, Business and Finance (not my areas but I am familiar with their practices), where submission fees have become prevalent. This is the expansion of a comment I left in the first answer, and perhaps selfishly I would not want it to get lost.
A reliable but not exclusive guide for traditional publishers is the [Academic Journal Guide](https://facultystaff.richmond.edu/~tmattson/AJG%202018%20Journal%20Guide.pdf) by Chartered ABS. It does not include PLOS or some journals with good impact factors, but is a common quality benchmark (publication quality, promotion etc).
Finance is an easy one to deal with, as it includes only 8 4\* journals. Economics, Management etc are easy to cross-check but more numerous. Links provided for the submission instructions, as I provide only an summary.
>
> [The Journal of Finance](https://afajof.org/submissions/) - published by Wiley:
>
>
>
**Submission Fees**: High-Income Economies. AFA Members: $250, Non-Members: $300, Middle-Income Economies. AFA Members: $100, Non-Members: $150, Low-Income Economies. No Submission Fee
**Return/Refund Policy**: if editorial decision taken 100 days after submission, applies to first submission only, refund at desk reject.
>
> [Journal of Financial Economics](http://jfe.rochester.edu/submit.htm) - published by Elsevier
>
>
>
**Submission fees**: $900 for journal subscribers, $1,000 for non-subscribers (institutional subscriptions do not count). Referees are paid an honorarium out of the submission fee. There are no page charges.
**Refund**: on the last submission if accepted for publication.
>
> [The Review of Financial Studies](http://rfssfs.org/submit-a-paper/) - published by Oxford University Press
>
>
>
**Submission fees**: SFS Member Fee $240, Nonmember Fee: $300 [Paying the nonmember fee gives the submitting author a one-year SFS membership.]
**Refund**: The fee is waived if conditionally accepted. Invited Dual Submission: The first round fee is waived; subsequent rounds require the submission fee.
>
> [The Journal of Corporate Finance](https://www.elsevier.com/journals/journal-of-corporate-finance/0929-1199/guide-for-authors) - published by Elsevier
>
>
>
**Submission fees**: US$ 300 at first submission, US$ 270 at revision submission. The submission fee applies to every round, unless waived by the Publisher.
**Refund**: none, even at desk rejection (*my note: this is a very common rule in Elsevier journals*)
>
> [Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis](https://jfqa.org/submissions/) - published by the University of Washington
>
>
>
**Submission fees**: $350. **Refund**: $275 at desk rejection.
>
> [Journal of Financial Intermediation](https://www.elsevier.com/journals/journal-of-financial-intermediation/1042-9573/guide-for-authors) - published by Elsevier
>
>
>
**Submission fee**: US$400 for all new submissions and for revisions. **Refund**: None. Desk rejected papers will no longer be refunded starting 1st January 2018.
>
> [Journal of Money, Credit and Banking](https://jmcb.osu.edu/submission-instructions) - published by Wiley
>
>
>
**Submission fees**: $150 for subscribers and $200 for non-subscribers, no submission fee for a resubmitted revised paper. **Refund**: not mentioned (my note: probably no refund)
>
> [Review of Finance](http://revfin.org/how-to-submit-a-paper/) - published by Oxford University Press
>
>
>
**Submission fee**: €300 for a regular submission or resubmission, reduced to €250 for EFA members. **Refund**: full if the editorial decision is rendered after more than 100 days. The clock starts from the day that the submission is moved out of the holding tank and assigned to an Editor. If the paper is desk rejected without an external report, all but €100 of the fee is refunded.
>
> **On the other hand**, SAGE journals such as the reputable Journal of
> Management, have no submission fees.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/02/13
| 621
| 2,488
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm writing a historical work about a German philosopher, in which I use some of his unpublished notes.
One quotation contains an almost untranslatable, hardly intelligible expression - it's not essential to the point I'm making with the citation (which is perfectly clear), but by cutting it out using [...] I mangle the quotation even more.
Can I translate it literally (which turns into nonsense) and write [*sic*] behind it? After all, it's not what was actually written but my translation, so I feel like this isn't really an option. Or should I chose one of the different possible interpretations that make some sense of it, but thereby pushing some particular reading, even though I don't need that to make my point?<issue_comment>username_1: Make a [judgement call](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/judgment-call) and explain the basis for that call to the reader.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> After all, it's not what was actually written but my translation, so I feel like this isn't really an option.
>
>
>
You seem to have unconsciously ruled out what I would consider the best option: leave the phrase in question untranslated with a footnote which gives the literal translation and says that the phrase's meaning is unclear but irrelevant.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: In language-related papers, it is common to do all of these options:
* give the untranslated version
* give the literal translation
* give the semantically closest translation in English
Of course it depends how important this particular sentence is to your work. But if you want to mention it, you should at least give the original sentence and a translation in my opinion.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Give the loose translation in brackets. For instance, if the original says "This happens once in a blue moon", then give the translation as "This happens [very infrequently]". If you want to be complete, give a footnote with the original German and literal translation.
>
> So-and-so says "this happens [very infrequently][1]".
>
> [1]"<NAME>", literally "once in a blue moon", an idiom expressing extremely low frequency
>
>
>
(Obviously, this answer is pretending, for the sake of an example, that "<NAME>" is German idiom that literally translates to "once in a blue moon" but means "infrequently", and is not asserting that this is the case in reality.)
Upvotes: 4
|
2019/02/13
| 1,291
| 5,235
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have finally found my true *calling*. I want to work on autonomous underwater vehicles trying to solve different problems from research to oil and gas industry.
The problem is that I am having issues finding the PhD positions for this:
* If I search for marine sciences, I usually end up reading a PhD position about oceanography related to biology and physics.
* If I search for computer science PhD, it is usually very broad as it includes creating algorithms for autonomous robots.
* "PhD in Marine Robotics" does not bring many results.
I specifically want to work on making **underwater** robots as autonomous as possible.
The only PhD program that I found is in [MIT](https://gradadmissions.mit.edu/programs/whoi), but the chance of getting in there is quite low. Can anyone hint me on how to search for this specific PhD position? Thank you!<issue_comment>username_1: This is a very applied field, I don't think there are PhD programs related to directly to underwater robots. I did my PhD in this exact field :) so most of this is my experience and knowledge of the field.
Generally you shouldn't worry much about what the PhD program says exactly, as this field is very application driven, so Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (AUVs) are usually designed and built in places where they are needed, close to shore or to oil and gas industries. This usually relates to PhD programs in marine or oceanographic sciences, but the most important thing is the advisor, who can guide and support you in your research.
In a University with "application" departments (like marine science) and "basic science" departments (like CS and Engineering), you can do a PhD in Science or Engineering of AUVs while working to solve some problem related to the application side.
A quick way is to go to Universities and Research Centers in Robotics, for which there are many and they usually cover application fields like underwater, space, rescue, etc. For example, Carnegie Mellon Uni has a [Robotics PhD](https://www.ri.cmu.edu/education/academic-programs/doctoral-robotics-program/) program, for which there should be Professors interested in Underwater Robotics. As you mentioned MIT also has a partnership with [WHOI](http://mit.whoi.edu/) and they do a lot of Underwater Robotics.
But as you mentioned, not many Universities touch this subject. In general Research centers (not always affiliated to a University) usually have the lead in this topic.
In Europe, the leader is definitely the University of Girona with its [CIRS](https://cirs.udg.edu/) research center. They design/build AUVs, and develop algorithms for autonomy. The [German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence](https://robotik.dfki-bremen.de/en/research/fields-of-application.html), Bremen branch (where I work) also builds AUVs and algorithms for autonomy.
In the UK there is also the [National Oceanography Centre](http://noc.ac.uk/) in Southampton which does a lot of Marine Science supported by AUVs, so they also design/build AUVs and related algorithms. In Norway's NTNU there is [AMOS](https://www.ntnu.edu/web/amos/newfrontpage).
I know that there are AUV many researchers in Asia, like at the University of Tokyo and the Tokyo University of Marine Science and Technology.
This list is not exhaustive, AUVs are developed all around the world. About PhD positions, that is something that depends on funding, time and topics, so its up to you to search these. Hope this information helps.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Spanish university named *Universitat de Girona* (UdG) has got a team working on underwater autonomous robots. Not sure if they are currently offering places for Phd students.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: "Autonomous underwater robots" is an application, not a field of study, so you're unlikely to find the specific department you're looking for (and it's a bit of a naive attempt). You *will* find a variety of (cross-disciplinary) paths to degrees associated with robotics: computer science, electrical engineering; control engineering, mechanical engineers, ....
You haven't provided us with enough information to help us help you figure out where you fit in to this.
You should consider finding a school that has a group working with underwater robots, and a department within the above list (that you are qualified to study in) that has, or is willing to establish, a collaboration with that group.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: A friend of mine got his PhD in basically "Underwater Autonomous Robots" at Johns Hopkins in this department: <https://dscl.lcsr.jhu.edu/> - Dynamical Systems and Control Laboratory, part of a Robotics Lab in the Mechanical Engineering department.
I recommend looking at universities with good Engineering departments and see what research they have done. Often the department's page lists "People", "Faculty", or "Research," -- chase all of those to see what people are working on.
You may also want to track down a single researcher/research-team, and apply for the school where they work. Find some scholarly articles that interest you, and then google the authors, if the blurb doesn't indicate their current affiliation.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/12
| 782
| 2,962
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've noticed in some papers (CS) that even if the authors define acronyms in the abstract, they restate them once again in the rest of the paper. It is like "what happens in the abstract stays in the abstract"!
So, I was wondering if there is a rule regarding the above?<issue_comment>username_1: Abstracts are read separately from the paper itself. They aren't an introduction, but more of a condensed version.
So if the paper defines an acronym, it shouldn't rely on the abstract for it. On the other hand, the abstract is supposed to be fairly short, so there isn't usually much of a case for defining acronyms there.
It depends on the paper, of course, but consider spelling out the whole term in the abstract if it is referenced only once there.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> I was wondering if there is a rule regarding the above?
>
>
>
**There is a simple rule: always do what is most helpful for your reader**. Often your reader will not read the abstract of the paper at the same time as the body, so it would not be unusual for a reader to start reading the paper without first reading the abstract (perhaps having read it at some previous time). If they read from the start of the body, and are presented with acronyms that are not defined, that might lead them to a situation where they don't understand some part of your paper. I would therefore recommend erring on the side of caution and defining your acronyms in the body of the paper.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Usually its convenient, if possible, to include a small glossary in the beginning of the paper. In this way it´s possible to consult every time you came up with an acronym in the text.
Also, re-defining them in the text is better. Sometimes readers don´t assume abstract and paper as part of a whole.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: I would repeat it. Some people read abstracts only (e.g. Chem Abstracts is a pulication of abstracts). Those who are reading the paper may not read the abstract.
Really, each should be self-supporting. Otherwise, you start to morph the abstract from an abstract to an introduction.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: This answer partially repeats what I said [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/60890/introducing-abbreviations-in-an-abstract-for-a-repeated-term/60910#60910)
>
> Abstract are tricky. For example, APA 5 style used to say that abstracts had to be self contained. That meant you had to introduce acronyms in the abstract and then again in the body. In APA 6, this has been dropped (cf. [this blog post](http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2011/11/brevity-is-the-soul-of-lingerie-and-abstracts.html)). I still go with introduce the acronym on first use in the abstract and then again on first use in the body. I also introduce acronyms on first use in figure captions (not sure that is APA style or Strongbad style).
>
>
>
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/02/13
| 1,019
| 4,486
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am considering applying for a research prize that is apparently given out as one award per year, up to a certain amount of money. Applications are accepted all-year-round (there is no deadline).
I don't really understand this model of research funding: if a funding body gives one such award per year, then surely it would want all candidate applications to be submitted by a certain day of the year (each year), so that they all be compared and the award given to the best one *that was submitted within the chosen time frame (in that year)*.
If they receive an application in January, say, and decide to give it the award, then what do do they do if an even better application is submitted in June of the same year? They can't fund it even assuming their maximum amount wasn't all used up by the earlier application, because they claim to only give *one* award per year. And they can't reject it on grounds that they already funded a project that year, since there is no deadline that the authors of the second application exceeded.
Unfortunately in this case I am not able to enquire to the funding body itself. Also, my question is more general as it also concerns other research awards that use the same call/application model.<issue_comment>username_1: Very often foundations and private organizations have rules that are difficult to understand. You should always go to them with your questions. They will not be offended or tie the question to your application. You are likely not the only one with these questions. Application guides, FAQs, and even webinars are very common for foundations and should always be sought out before contacting a sponsor.
Even federal programs have rolling deadlines. Typically this is tied to how their budgets function. If they receive an incredible proposal, they want to fund it as early as possible into their budget period in order to make sure they expend the funds. If they wait too long into their budget year and no proposal feels worth funding, they may not be able to use the money. If the foundation receives this budget from another entity, they may have to send the money back to the main institution--it doesn't roll over to the next budget period.
You can ask them general questions, such as how many proposals they typically receive in a calendar year and if they convene review panels on a regular basis or as needed. My hunch is that they are prioritizing funding **any** proposal that scores high enough, not necessarily the best project within a given year (perhaps you should ask if "year" = calendar year or if they have a different fiscal year). In the event that they get multiple entries though, they would surely fund the best project. Focus your questions such that you can learn about the intent of the program. Rather than asking bluntly "why are you doing it this way", the questions should focus on how the competition for this award is framed, because that is what you are trying to consider--what your competition looks like and who the reviewers are.
Depending on the foundation, scientists may not even be the primary reviewers of the work--board members may make the first call based on what they are interested in. Some foundations do not restrict topics, and so a proposal on robotics may be up against a proposal on climate change. If the board is more interested in climate change, they may opt for this proposal and ask for a scientific review to ensure the project is sound. These types of structures are more common when the proposal/research summary is very short (1-2 pages). Some faculty refer to them as "beauty prizes" because the academic rigor is not as intense, and sometimes the goal of the program is just to give money to science and attach the foundation to prominent scientists.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This is a yearly award. I would guess that they keep all the stronger applications (even the ones they decided not to fund) for several years and reconsider them each year.
They are thus using the philosophy (quoting from [Piet Hein](http://www.leptonica.com/cachedpages/grooks/grooks.html))
>
> You'll always be late
> for the previous train,
> and always in time
> for the next.
>
>
>
If you want to apply in time for the next award, you will have to somehow figure out when the cut-off is; the best way (possibly the only way) to do this is to have a friend on the committee deciding the awards.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/13
| 373
| 1,624
|
<issue_start>username_0: I applied to grad schools this year. I haven’t heard from some of them but the one I was admitted to I was invited to come and visit. My understanding is that this is relatively common, but I would like a better sense of how common.
I want to visit the school I choose before I make a decision on where to go. My question is: should I expect to be invited eventually for a visit day for the schools I am admitted to? If not then I guess I should plan a trip myself.
To add to the context I will say that I believe I had a relatively strong application.<issue_comment>username_1: It can vary on funding and they don't always invite all accepts.
If you are interested in a school particularly, I would reach out to mention your interest. Maybe it helps.
Also of course consider to do a visit on your own.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: In the US context, for most graduate programs in science or engineering fields, at relatively wealthy and prestigious institutions, it's quite normal for departments to pay travel expenses for prospective students to visit the department before making a final decision to accept an admission and assistantship offer. In some departments, prospective students are invited to visit before admissions decisions are made, which is more like an interview.
For programs outside of science and engineering, or for programs at less wealthy and prestigious institutions, such visits are much less common.
I would ask the department about the status of your application, and if you've been admitted whether they are sponsoring recruitment visits.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/02/13
| 1,053
| 4,192
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was rejected from all of my top choice schools and am still waiting to hear back from my other schools. The top two being Southern Methodist University and Baylor University. Honestly, I feel horrid about myself and know that my GRE Subject (Math) exam was terrible, but know that everything else about my application was very strong.
My advisor has told me that I should retake the exams and apply again which makes me take a year off of school. I graduate May 2019 with my Masters in math so I would apply again in Fall 2019 and hear back Spring 2020.
I am wanting advice on how I should view these rejections because at the moment I am extremely sad about it. Additionally, how do schools view students reapplying after a rejection?<issue_comment>username_1: Rejection is an opportunity to improve yourself. I suggest the following steps:
1. Give a time to accept your current situation
2. Analyse the weakest points in your application
3. Make a plan to improve your application, talk to other people (grad students, professors, etc.) when possible!
4. Apply again
Reapplying is not a bad thing as long as you are able to show your ability to overcome difficulties.
All the best in future applications!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: First things first: don't feel bad. I was among the top three students in my country and I still got rejected by all the top schools I applied to for undergraduate study. It's a great big world out there with lots of highly intelligent, highly motivated students with excellent applications, and it's only going to get more competitive the higher up you go in academia.
Second: now is not the time to worry about what you might have done differently because it'll just make you feel worse. But in six months' time, if you're still unaffiliated and want to apply again, then would be a good time to read the paragraph below.
>
> Remember that you can't just apply to top schools. You could easily be rejected everywhere. You should also apply to schools which you are confident you'll be accepted in, as well as schools which are 50-50. Then, come decision time, you'll at least be able to go *somewhere* and not have a gap year to fill. "Somewhere" might not be as good as "dream school", but it's still better than "nowhere".
>
>
>
Third: what to do next is the most pressing thing to figure out. Doing nothing is not ideal - that makes you a burden to your caregivers. If money is at all a concern for you, I advocate getting a job. You might not be able to commit for very long (although you can delay grad school for two years or more too) but you still might be able find a temporary job. Working has [many great advantages](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/123119/should-i-do-a-doctorate-straight-after-my-master-or-work-for-a-while-first/123128#123128) that can change your perception of grad school completely. At the very least, you'll be on a more solid footing financially when you attend.
If money isn't a concern to you, and you're dead set on doing PhD studies, then you can use the intervening year to learn more mathematics. For example you could stay put at your current institution for a year taking extra masters-level courses that you didn't take because of time constraints. You could do an extra research project with your current supervisor. You could look up the job requirements for jobs you want to do, and take the year to self-study those. You can do all these while preparing for another attempt at the Math GRE. You could even take the gap year to travel the world, which like getting a job will be a transformative experience that will teach you things you cannot learn at a university. See [this related question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/582/how-can-a-graduate-school-applicant-improve-his-application-for-next-years-seas?) for more suggestions.
In short, getting admitted to a PhD program isn't everything. Shake of the disappointment of having been rejected at all your top choices and you'll find there're lots of things you can do, not all of which might be related to studying but will nonetheless lead to personal growth.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/02/13
| 662
| 2,865
|
<issue_start>username_0: This year I am applying to an big university's summer camp this year, and I am not really aware of how US Universities handle this situation. I am a Mexican "medical intern", I call myself like that because I know no better term to describe my degree, which would be literally translated as "In-Social Service Medical Doctor". I have already taken and passed my professional exam, but my degree is still in process, and probably (very likely) won't be ready at the submission of my papers.
If it were a Mexican institution I would just use "MPSS" (Medical Intern at Social Service by Spanish acronym). However medical intern seems like I have just finished medical school and I am at my Internship year (which it not the case, I have already finished it, thanks god).
The only question I have is: would it be recommended that my teachers to refer to me as INSTERT FULL NAME HERE M.D. or Dr. INTERT FULL NAME in my recommendation letters? if it is not, how could they call me in those letters?<issue_comment>username_1: I am struggling to understand exactly the position you are applying for and don't know much about the medical field, but would expect your references to refer to you on a first name basis in the letter. This seems even more likely in the case where the degree status is in flux/unclear. At some point in the letter it should probably say something like
>
> Luis has completed their MPSS at University of Mexico, completed the internship year, and passed their professional exam. They have completed all the requirements for their doctorate in medicine and will be receiving the MD degree at the graduation ceremony in May.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: In the US, calling yourself an MD would imply and, in some places, possibly require, not only that you hold a degree, but that you also have a license from one of the State Boards as a physician. I'll guess you would have some risk using the term otherwise, even if another country recognizes you as a "Medical Doctor". In fact, many immigrants to the US holding such qualifications in their home countries can't work here as doctors (physicians) and some, unfortunately hold fairly low level positions.
There are people who work in research and hold the MD degree, but aren't licensed to practice medicine. I think they are careful to avoid getting confused with acting physicians, such as MD (Research), or some such.
But saying that you hold an MD degree from a Mexican university would be different from calling yourself an MD and listing it in your titles, I think. People would misunderstand.
On the other hand, "Dr." is ambiguous and refers to anyone holding a doctorate in any field I'm Dr. username_2, for example, but my degree is in mathematics. But I wouldn't use even that title until the degree is formally awarded.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/02/14
| 507
| 2,195
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am thinking to apply to a graduate program in computer science (Research Masters or PhD), but I am not sure how often universities accept applications.
For example I know the University of Toronto does so each December (so only once a year). But I wonder if other places (anywhere in NA or Europe) have different patterns.<issue_comment>username_1: I am struggling to understand exactly the position you are applying for and don't know much about the medical field, but would expect your references to refer to you on a first name basis in the letter. This seems even more likely in the case where the degree status is in flux/unclear. At some point in the letter it should probably say something like
>
> Luis has completed their MPSS at University of Mexico, completed the internship year, and passed their professional exam. They have completed all the requirements for their doctorate in medicine and will be receiving the MD degree at the graduation ceremony in May.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: In the US, calling yourself an MD would imply and, in some places, possibly require, not only that you hold a degree, but that you also have a license from one of the State Boards as a physician. I'll guess you would have some risk using the term otherwise, even if another country recognizes you as a "Medical Doctor". In fact, many immigrants to the US holding such qualifications in their home countries can't work here as doctors (physicians) and some, unfortunately hold fairly low level positions.
There are people who work in research and hold the MD degree, but aren't licensed to practice medicine. I think they are careful to avoid getting confused with acting physicians, such as MD (Research), or some such.
But saying that you hold an MD degree from a Mexican university would be different from calling yourself an MD and listing it in your titles, I think. People would misunderstand.
On the other hand, "Dr." is ambiguous and refers to anyone holding a doctorate in any field I'm Dr. username_2, for example, but my degree is in mathematics. But I wouldn't use even that title until the degree is formally awarded.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/02/14
| 655
| 2,693
|
<issue_start>username_0: In your opinion, which is more important when deciding where to do a PhD?
Choosing a top-tier university with a brilliant professor who is an excellent mentor or choosing a decidedly average university with a professor who you do not know the quality of their mentorship, but the subject matter is naturally more interesting to you?<issue_comment>username_1: Some people are fairly agnostic about their choice of dissertation topic and are happy learning to become interested in whatever interests their advisor. The fact that you are posting this question suggests that you are not one of those people.
You'll be happier, do better work, and set your career in the right direction if you pick an area that genuinely interests you. It's true that an advisor's prestige has a lot of currency, but it's not worth so much that it makes sense to sacrifice what you feel is best for you in the long run. Grad school is tough enough without the stress of added friction.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Lets talk about some statistics first-
1. institutional prestige matters in hiring decisions made by committees. Getting your PhD or doing a Postdoc at a top 10 university matters. The degree in which it matters varies across fields. If you did not get your PhD in History from Harvard, you are at a major statistical disadvantage in obtaining a tenure track position. See <NAME>., <NAME>., & <NAME>. (2015).
2. Publishing during your PhD career is highly correlated to your academic productivity during tenure track. Graduate students tend to have better publications records at elite institutes. See Horta & Santos (2016). Whether this is because of the more competitive culture, the increase in graduate student "quality", or the pressure from a demanding professor is unknown. Probably a combination.
3. These above two factors depend on field. Fields that have strong cultures of scholars having been in the field prior to academia give less weight to institutional prestige (e.g. education and nursing) but they still care.
So in other words, grad students in an elite university tend to publish more. They also tend to dominate tenure track positions.
You dont have to go to an elite university for your phd, but you at least need to do so for your post doc or masters.
In my own experience, I had a strong publication record at graduation, did my postdoc at an elite university, and was hired for a tenure track position at an R1 university. My advice might very well be biased to my own experiences but I feel that the data and statistics say that my experience was the norm rather than the exception.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/02/14
| 680
| 2,818
|
<issue_start>username_0: Lately I have been applying to many universities for a position on a master's program, therefore I contaced many people asking them questions regardings these programs. What troubles me is the following:
When I recieve an answer, am I supposed to answer saying "Thank you" or something like that?
My reasoning is that these people (secretaries and such) have too much work and having an email at their inbox just thanking them will just cause iriation and disorganization.<issue_comment>username_1: This can depend on a lot of things, but mostly on how much the other person did to help you and how much it would be part of their normal job. But in some situations, a simple thank you, totally appropriate in person, is, as you say, just noise that takes effort to deal with.
I often don't send such thank you emails myself, for this reason, and wonder, as you do, if I'm doing the right thing. And I find thanks you notes back to me as just an additional task to handle.
I sometimes add "thanks in advance" to the end of a simple response, getting it out of the way. Sometimes the return thanks is just assumed by the receiver, in any case.
But I don't think that "in person etiquette" is really identical to "online etiquette" and that we have to wait for some time to pass until everyone is comfortable with the difference. In the short term, use your judgement.
But, after a sequence of questions and responses, it is probably more important to give thanks at the end. And if you don't send individual "thanks" but later meet the person, you can then say "thanks for your help in the past".
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: My experience on both ends is that the thank you is effective and appreciated. I recommend also to use their name.
"<NAME>, thank you."
Yeah it is another line in their box but it seals the conversation. What really drives busy people crazy is the long meandering emails. They are used to a machine gun of short ones. Look how they communicate (an "OK" response to 5 para request).
I would edit the subject, also, to put "Thank you" in the subject, but keep it in the reply string. That way they can quickly see it in list of emails and know it does not require further action.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I have a feeling no one uses it, but I keep doing so as a small etiquette token.
Set priority to low
===================
In most email clients you can set how important this email is. It's mostly well hidden. You might know it best from seeing everything mailed by HR people being tagged as **SUPER URGENT!!!**.
But there is also a converce of it, "not urgent", "low priority" or similar.
If I happen to write a mail that is just a "thank you" with no additional information, I set this flag.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/14
| 725
| 3,117
|
<issue_start>username_0: I worked on a project as a graduate student in a research group in order to complete the credit points (20 ECTS Germany) required for my Master's degree. I was not employed on a contract i.e. not paid for the work because it was for completing the credit points for my Master's degree. Now I want to include the work as a research experience on my CV (for application to a PhD program) but I am unsure whether I can name the title of the experience as "Research Assistant" or not.
I do not know what technical title I should give this job.<issue_comment>username_1: I would suggest that you not claim *any* title that wasn't assigned by others. You can give a description of what you did or suggest that the work was "similar to GRA" but that is different from saying that you actually had the title. Your only official "title" was student, I think.
While what you say might be accurate in some sense, the problem is that someone seeing official documentation and not finding you listed with a title you claim, all start to wonder why and even thing you have given a fraudulent answer. While that isn't your intent, you don't want to open the possibility of such an accusation.
I suspect that in Germany it is especially important to be accurate about titles, though that may be changing.
But, for a CV, have a section on experience with a very brief explanation and a phrase "similar to ..." that gives the person the right idea about your duties, but not claiming a title.
You could also, in a mail or email, ask the institute what you can call yourself on your CV. But I'd suggest that you want the answer in writing and from someone official if it isn't a formal position you held. Then there can be no question of your intent.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This will vary a lot by location and job type. You should certainly follow local customs (i.e., Germans may be pickier about titles than Americans). The below has my Western (i.e., US) bias.
In universities, you can assume the hirer will understand the subtle distinctions between contract type, so it's best to be accurate and describe exactly what you did. I don't see a problem using the phrase "research assistant" if you were an assistant who did research, but directly below that, I would give the name of the program / contract type so that the reviewer understands exactly what you did and can't accuse you of misrepresenting anything.
Outside of universities, the hirer (particularly first-line resume screeners) will not know or care what you are talking about. If you were an assistant doing research, you should definitely use that title rather than a "technically correct" title that could be misinterpreted (e.g., if an industry recruiter sees "student", they will assume you are in a classroom taking tests and discount your resume accordingly). Listing the exact program might still be a good idea, but it is essential to concisely explain what you did. You could even say something like "Research Asst. (X program), Univ. of Y"; this is both accurate and concise.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/02/14
| 1,672
| 7,387
|
<issue_start>username_0: I just graduated with BS from undergrad and am employed as a research associate staff by a research team at the university.
I would like to ask for suggestions about how to obtain research funding for my independent project. Most of the funding opportunities are only available for registered students. I am not a U.S. citizen eligible for national grants.
I am working in the field of social science and human-robot interaction and have 2-3 advisors from undergrad research and courses who encourage me to carry on my undergraduate projects and are willing to provide advising. However, they did not specifically offer me guidance of how to resolve the need for funding. It seems like I need to take the initiative to present this research opportunity to them.<issue_comment>username_1: I'll make three suggestions, but these are a bit difficult to obtain.
First, if you intend to return to the country of which you are a citizen, then you might explore funding from there, since your skills would eventually benefit them. This is actually available in some places.
Second, you might be able to obtain funding indirectly. Suppose you can convince one of your professors to apply for a grant that will fund your research and permit him/her to support you under the grant, even though you are not a citizen. If you don't need personal support, but only research support, this would be much easier, of course. But you would probably have to do the actual grant writing so that your advisor(s) can submit it with little effort on their own. This, in itself, can be a valuable skill, though obtained with a bit of pain.
Third, you might explore private funding from some interested corporation. These have no real limitations, though the money might be relatively small. But if you have skills that the company might find valuable, perhaps you could work with them, without pay, but obtain a grant for research. I've done this sort of thing, but was in a different (more advanced) situation. In my case the grant didn't support me directly, but paid for such things as travel and equipment. But there might be legal issues that you would need to resolve through the university if you were directly supported.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> I am working in the field of social science and human-robot interaction and have 2-3 advisors from undergrad research and courses who encourage me to carry on my undergraduate projects and are willing to provide advising.
>
>
>
Why won't the advisers help? Promising advising without working to provide an environment that facilitates the work seems more exploitative or inconsiderate than helpful, although perhaps there is more to the story.
>
> I would like to ask for suggestions about how to obtain research funding for my independent project
>
>
>
It depends on the scope of your project. Is returning to school as a graduate student under these advisers an option? Will one (usually small) foundation grant be enough?
I would not ghost write a grant. Unless the adviser were very ethical, with no conflicts of interest, there is the possibility that your contributions would not yield anything (denied grant, or approved grant under someone else's name).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I assume this is not US-based? There are no *a priori* restrictions on foreign nationals being Principal Investigators on federal grants in the United States. You actually have other administrative roadblocks to consider as well. There isn't really such a thing as an "independent researcher" unless you are working out of your house, in which case, your odds of getting funding drop precipitously. Awards are made to institutions, not researchers. So the National Science Foundation (NSF) does not give money to your advisers per se. They are simply the technical contact for the project. They do not have the rights to the project that many imagine.
Every university will have a policy on who can receive funding. This is typically called "PI rights", and should be published online in some capacity. Here's an [example](https://research.columbia.edu/pi-eligibility-sponsored-projects) from Columbia University. On this page, they specifically state appointment types that allow for PI rights. If you are not in one of these appointments, you do not have the authority to seek funding. Universities typically have "exceptions", which involve filing paperwork. You typically need a PI who will sponsor you. Columbia explains their policy on this on this page as well.
The idea here is that you are not in a position that is typically entitled to facility and administrative (F&A or "overhead") benefits, such as having a research administrator assigned to you. The school then has to make that resource available to you at some cost. You also would not fit into the typical mentoring circles that most PIs have access to, where they receive mentoring on technical aspects such as project management. A research administrator can't tell you how to fill out your progress report, only that it is due. Without a dedicated PI mentor, the university would be loathe to approve PI rights.
There are other concerns too:
* What does your budget look like? Are you going to need help procuring items? Someone to process reimbursements? Are you going to hire people?
* Is your appointment going to last the full length of the grant? Are you guaranteeing your entire salary? If not, does the university need to commit to the remainder of your salary for many future FY's? If so, who is that guarantee--the PI or a department budget?
* What happens if you leave the university? They don't have to let you take the money. They may take over your project and reappoint a new PI.
* What facilities do you need? Do you need a desk or access to specialized resources?
I will say that in the 8 years that I have submitted proposals, only once have I seen a postdoc get PI rights approved for a specific project. It took over a month to be approved by the dean's office, and it was because there was enthusiastic support from tenured faculty. I cannot fathom that anyone without a PhD could get approved for PI rights. It's not that there is always an explicit requirement, but there is a question of what category of researcher would be capable of being a PI and managing a scientific project but also does not have a PhD. Even if such a person existed, if their research and work was so compelling, a PI would surely vouch for them and enthusiastically mentor them. If not, they aren't worth the risk to the institution.
Being a PI is rough. It's really hard to learn how to procure and manage a grant even when you have access to the best resources. You need to work on getting the support from your advisers (and they turn your idea into a grant, but they are the PIs and you could be named specifically in the grant instead of employing generic personnel) or return to a formal path to PhD if you are interested in doing this type of work and having your name as the PI.
Regardless of your academic interests, at the end of the day, your institution has rules in place in order to protect it from individuals who may be unable to fulfill their commitments. Your current academic appointment suggests that you cannot continue this work unsupervised, so you need to remedy that first.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/02/14
| 1,344
| 5,735
|
<issue_start>username_0: A while back, I submitted a paper to a mathematics journal. Since then, I have managed to prove an additional result that I think would improve the paper. If the paper gets rejected, I plan to incorporate the result into the paper and submit again elsewhere. If the journal accepts the paper and asks for revisions, my question is whether it would be acceptable to add the new result when I submit a revised version. The other option is to write up the new result as a separate paper, which may or may not be significant enough for publication.
The reason I ask is that I want to avoid wasting time now. It would be a shame to spend time and effort on incorporating the result into the paper now if I need to remove those changes in the case the paper is accepted. On the other hand, if I can include the result in the current paper, then I don't want to spend time now writing an entirely new paper for this one result.<issue_comment>username_1: This is the sort of question to ask the editor. If it is a small change it might be fine. Anything bigger could, perhaps, require another round of review to assure the editor.
Another paper would be a good thing, of course, if you can publish it, perhaps augmenting it with more results to make a more complete whole. But, you need to write it up in any case unless you intend to just abandon it. If it is in the current paper, its significance might not be noticed, of course. But if it is relatively insignificant it might not actually matter to the editor.
You could ask the editor now, which might save some effort. But you could, perhaps, also add it to the next (final?) version if acceptance comes soon. But warn the editor about what you have done so that it is clear. Editors probably don't like surprises.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Small change OK. Big bad.
I would lean towards publishing a followup paper instead. Does more for you on pub count. Let's this one move forward. Plus gives you a little more time to solidify this new finding.
Publish, publish. Don't perish. Don't perish.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: You can make whatever changes you like in revision. The key point is that the paper is being refereed again. (Maybe the referee isn't paying so much global attention to your paper the second time around. But by the way, maybe the referee wasn't paying so much attention the first time around! There are never any guarantees of that, but you have done your due diligence.)
It is quite common for revised papers to contain many small to moderate changes, including those that were not called for by the referee. If you think about it, it is probably better not just to make precisely the changes asked for -- you are also responsible for your paper as a holistic document, and localized technical changes may necessitate other changes for the sake of unity, coherence and so forth. However, as a referee it is a bit disconcerting to get a paper that has *too many changes* I have not asked for: at a certain point it begins to feel that I have to referee two papers when I have agreed to referee one. For instance I recall getting a revised paper that was almost 10 pages longer, and I didn't like that much (but I did recommend it for acceptance).
As an author I can think of several cases where I have added significant material to the paper in revision, so it certainly does happen, and at the moment I cannot recall a situation where adding the material seemed to adversely affect the status of the paper. If there is one extra result that you want to put in the paper and its proof takes only a couple of pages, I think you should probably go ahead.
Although I think you'll get away with it fine, whether it is really *better* to put more theorems into a math paper in revision is a different question that I am a bit too daunted to fully address here. It depends on so many other factors, many of which are cultural. E.g. another answer writes:
>
> I would lean towards publishing a followup paper instead. Does more for you on pub count.
>
>
>
In most parts of pure mathematics having "more papers than theorems" or "more papers than ideas" is looked down upon. If in a certain paper you prove four cognate theorems and then later you try to write up a paper on a fifth cognate theorem, there is a good chance that the journal in which you can publish that little paper is so much worse than the first journal that it doesn't specifically help your career to do so. Whereas if you just appended the fifth theorem in the first paper, you probably wouldn't get any more credit for that either...but at least the fifth theorem would appear in print with little additional trouble on your behalf. I can definitely think of theorems that I have added to papers in this way (not necessarily literally in revision; sometimes just as offshoots of the main project): I proved them so I want to publish them, but I do not always want to play the "How good is this?" game if I don't have to.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: This is actually quite common, that by the time the referee report comes you may have a bit more to say. Or the extra bit may come from the revision process itself. It is fine to add it to the paper. Indicate the addition when you send the revised version.
(Quite common: this has happened to many papers I've refereed and to some of mine as well. And I have anecdotal evidence from several colleagues that this is indeed usual.)
Of course, if rather than a bit more you have significant material to add the situation is different: the decision seems now to be whether to write a sequel, to discard the current one, or to thoroughly revise it.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/02/15
| 1,144
| 4,932
|
<issue_start>username_0: The answer, in theory, is trivial -- add them if you think they contributed -- but there are some nuances...
1) This person (who left about 4 months ago) was a more senior researcher (not Prof. title, in fact below the Prof.) who was in charge of managing a small research group that I'm part of. This person expected to be in the author list of all papers, given the seniority, even with minimal contribution (1h meetings every 2-3 weeks where basically I explained what I was doing and was given some high level comments)
2) We did have a couple of meetings prior to the departure, where the idea (the 'direction', the 'goal') of the research was agreed upon and how it could be tackled.
3) We agreed on a possible solution that I proposed, but this solution did not work (the person is not aware of this, since we haven't been in touch since the departure) and the paper is now quite different. Even though the technique I'm using now was brought up in a conversation, I had already had the idea that it could work so it was not this person's contribution (although the person might think so because it was 'said first').
4) We have had previous arguments over paper authorship, and I gave in and added the person just to be in their good graces.
I do not think this person contributed enough, given that the initial idea was mine, the solution was mine, the paper and experiments were done by me. But I don't want another enemy in academia. At the same time I have negative emotions toward this person because I was on the receiving end of some name calling and threats during a previous argument that affected me negatively.
Thanks for any input.
EDIT: I'm a postdoc.<issue_comment>username_1: It is good to minimize the number of academic enemies you have. Purely as a strategic move you might just want to ask them unless it seriously offends you. That seems better than making an assumption one way or another.
How much contribution is enough depends on a lot of things, including field and place, of course. But helping with "high level" direction doesn't sound like it is trivial.
Of course, in asking if they would like to be on the paper you could say that the "paper has evolved quite a lot since you were last involved".
Pick your fights for when they really matter, I think. Especially as a post-doc who wants to move up.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The best advice is to be professional. The professional thing to do is likely to add this person as an author for your stated reasons given that they did contribute to the paper.
I had a similar situation arise with authorship a few years ago. My coauthor and I had a falling out. Prior to this we were working on a manuscript where we agreed to both be first authors. After the falling out, I had the opportunity to list myself as the only first author. At the time, I felt very indignant. Later I realized that the fault for the fallout was largely of my own making.
I am thankful that I stayed professional and cringe at the idea of not being professional now that the emotional cloud has lifted away. I would have gained nothing by doing so and only lost. Keeping the author order as agreed allowed things to normalize again.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Supposing potential coauthors are not for or against the coauthorship and you do not think that either approach is non-ethical (see the Vancouver conventions below for a widely used necessary and sufficient criteria for authorship; your field may vary), send an email and ask them. Have the paper draft (with or without their name) as an attachment.
Dear title name,
We have continued working on the paper after you left. Here is the present draft that we are considering submitting. Would you like to remain/be an author and if so, could you read through it and suggest improvements?
The idea is to ask if they interested and ask for input at the same time. If they do not answer, then after reminders and other good faith attempts at contacting them, they have not given their final approval and you do not need to include them as an author; do acknowledge them as appropriate, of course.
For reference, Vancouver conventions, from <https://www.etikkom.no/en/library/practical-information/legal-statutes-and-guidelines/the-vancouver-recommendations/>. These need to be interpreted charitably to make sense for less experimental fields.
1. Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
2. Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND
3. Final approval of the version to be published; AND
4. 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.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/15
| 708
| 2,962
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am applying to MS/MA programs and my first due date is tomorrow. All my matierals were submitted 2 weeks in advance,however, my final letter writer hasn’t submitted his LOR. My other two have both been submitted but I am worry they will not carry as much weight as they are coming from directors at my company (I have been out of school 3 years). My professor agreed to write me a letter late November and I i then sent him my resume/transcripts/statement of intent. I also sent him a thank you card over the holidays to express my gratitude. I have not heard back from him since early December, after he agreed to write my letters. I have sent him 1 reminder email on earlier this week as my first application is due tomorrow. He has not responded. I am wondering if it’s proper etiquette to call him? With the rest of my applications being due March 1st I am a little apprehensive that I may run into this issue every time.<issue_comment>username_1: I suggest that you remind him by SMS first and then after couple of days you could call him if there is no answer. It is ok to call your professor as long as you do it with proper etiquette.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: If you are able to, you might consider attending office hours if your professor has them openly available before the deadline. In the event that your professor misses this first deadline, I would try to get them to submit the letter to the other schools as soon as possible. It is likely that all of the letters will be basically similar (meaning that all letters should be already written), so an early submission to the other schools should not be an issue.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes, call him. More generally, I see two scenarios,
1. **Your reminders were not received or seen,** in this case my next steps would be to call, go directly to his office / after his class and look for him, or see if there is an administrative assistant in the department that can track him down.
2. **Your reminders were seen but he hasn't done it and is avoiding you,** in this case, I'd keep politely reminding by phone or e-mail but expect that you may be ignored and then get an e-mail in the 11th hour saying it's done. Sometimes I don't reply to those types of e-mails until I've actually completed the task.
I think it can help to help letter writers by providing a simple document of talking points so that they won't have to spend so much time looking through their documents for details, e.g. "You know me from your Fall 2017 offering of XX class, where I got a grade of XX. I did my final project on XX and you said it was XX (see attached final paper). If possible, I am hoping that your letter could highlight my experience with XXX and my strengths at XXX, which I believe I demonstrated by XXX." This might speed up the process.
Finally, note that some schools do give a bit of leeway on LOR deadlines as this happens often.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/02/15
| 993
| 4,406
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have submitted my first paper in a very top conference, but the paper was accepted in the poster section instead. I am ok with that, as the reviews were very helpful.
However, is it interesting to travel (it is far from my workplace) to do a poster presentation? I have never done such a presentation as I just finished my first Ph.D. year, but I believe it would be interesting to meet people and have some feedbacks. I am just afraid that people will go through the poster and not ask questions, so the work would have been done for "nothing". I still hesitate because the conference is very good in my field.
Thanks for your feedback.<issue_comment>username_1: It depends on how well the poster session is organized, and on the culture in your discipline (do people show up, do they engage with the people next to the poster or just do the *pro forma* lap past all posters and leave again, etc.). So there is no single answer to this question.
However, I come from a discipline that puts little value on poster presentations, and I disagree. For me the poster presentations are the ones that have been most productive. In a poster session there is much more room for me to interact with the participants, while in a presentation it is me talking followed by one or two questions. It is the interaction (questions) from the audience that tells me if my argument is clear, if I made any mistakes, if there are some interesting angles I have missed, if there is another group that does interesting complementary work, etc. etc. So I have received a lot more interesting feedback from poster presentation than from oral presentations. Also, if a part of my argument is unclear, it typically takes a bit of back and forth to pin down where the exact problem is. In a oral presentation there is typically little room for that, but such a conversation is perfectly natural for a poster presentation.
So my suggestion is to ask someone who has attended that conference before whether the poster session was half-way decent (not 7 in the morning on the day after the conference diner, 20 minutes walk from the main venue, parallel to lunch which was served on another location, or other disasters). If there are no disasters, then a poster presentation is probably well worth it.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Attending your first conference as a PhD student is a great opportunity to get acquainted with how conferences work in your field, to witness how your senior colleagues interact with each other, to learn what other people are doing in your area and identify new emerging and trending topics. I think this would be a great opportunity for you even if you didn't have anything to present. But since you have a poster presentation, on top of all the above you may get to present your work to an audience and maybe establish interactions that may lead to useful advice or even a collaboration further down the line.
It is true that poster presentations limit the exposure of your work compared to talks, but I think you should not worry about this at your current career stage.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I am in a field with a pretty strong "poster session" culture. At a major conference poster session, you will find not only grad students, but well respected scholars presenting their research in poster format.
To be fair, poster sessions always align with 1:00-2:30 after lunch dessert time or 5:00-6:30 cocktail hour. So in essence, its a chance for doc students to network and present their research in a casual environment. For established scholars, its a casual place to chit chat about their latest project while enjoying a glass of wine or piece of cheesecake.
This is not the norm across all disciplines though. I have been to conferences where a poster session was akin to a throw away presentation where no one really showed up, even some of the authors.
My recommendation is to ask someone who has been to the conference to get a feel of what the poster session is like.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: A poster session presentation is a very useful way to introduce yourself to a conference. A talk is higher profile, but also higher risk. You should certainly WATCH a half dozen conference presentations before trying to DO one, and having a poster at a conference is a great mechanism to do so.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/15
| 510
| 2,228
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm interested in going to grad school in Canada. I'm a foreigner but I can relatively easily obtain my PR as I satisfy all requirements.
Admission-wise, would applying to grad school as an international student give me any leverage? Considering that the tuition fees would be far higher and Canadian universities are run with a business mindset.
I did my undergrad in Canada but my GPA is far from stellar (well below 3.0). I'm trying everything to improve my chances of admission.<issue_comment>username_1: In most English-speaking countries (Canada, Australia, New Zealand), "domestic student" means "citizen or permanent resident of the country" - regardless of where you graduated.
Please notice this definition may be different in other countries (for example, in Germany, grad school applications by anyone who completed their undergrad in Germany are considered "domestic" for all purposes - barring, in some cases, tuition fees...).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This is admittedly wild speculation and only suggests a way to find the proper answer.
If the university has designated separate categories for admission then it might matter, but it would depend on how competitive each category is. But it is difficult for you to learn the latter, even if you can determine that there are, indeed, separate categories.
But if there are no such definite, separately considered categories, then I would suspect (predict, but not "know") that it would have little if any effect. At best a third level consideration.
In order to obtain admission anywhere, under almost any system, you need to convince the committee that you have a solid background of knowledge, that you are a hard worker, and that you have a good likelihood of success in the program and thereafter. If you can do that, then other things will matter hardly at all. It would only really matter if it were down to the final few applicants in which decisions need to be made on less important criteria.
There are irrational systems, of course, some depending on patronage and such, but not in Canada.
But even the GPA will matter less than you think if you can show other clear indicators of success.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/02/15
| 285
| 1,252
|
<issue_start>username_0: If I already asked a professor to serve on my dissertation committee but I now longer want him on my committee for various reasons, how can I politely tell him this through email? I just don't know how to say this in a polite and not at all prideful way.<issue_comment>username_1: Just tell him you've decided to replace him but thank you for having been willing. Don't volunteer or reply with the "why". If you're on campus, I would just do it in person. Make sure you have a replacement available too. Then just notify whoever maintains records of such stuff, department secretary, I guess. Probably worth letting your advisor know too.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: You do not need to tell them from the first place. They will implicitly understand that you changed your mind. It is fine. But if you send them the official forms and dissertation, I think you need to follow a certain procedure. In this case, it is not polite and not recommended to change a committee member unless there are strong reasons.
Contacting committee members should be done by the supervisor not by the student in most of the places. I highly recommend you to consult your supervisor as this is part of the supervisor's job.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/15
| 673
| 2,686
|
<issue_start>username_0: Long story short. I was look for some undergraduate level research for this July and August, so I contacted a professor like a month ago. Things went very well, and two weeks ago I even had a Skype conversation with one of their PhDs, from which I can tell that they are preparing to include me into their research group, because we talked about a lot of details like everyone's schedule, and they will presumably be my research leader in the future.
At the end of our remote meeting, the PhD told me they will send me a detailed schedule and research topic to me "in one or two weeks", and "feel free to shoot me an email in case I forgot about this". It has been over two weeks since then, so I sent an (extra polite) reminder three days ago, but I still haven't got any response yet.
Is it OK to sent another reminder to them? How long should I wait before doing so?
This is not a duplicate of [How to get people to reply to emails and what to make of a no response?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/45616/how-to-get-people-to-reply-to-emails-and-what-to-make-of-a-no-response), because I am talking about a reminder to a previous reminder that is already sent. Also, the recipient is a PhD instead of a professor.<issue_comment>username_1: You can wait for another 1-2 days and send a reminder again. In the reminder, ask if there is any change in the prospect of the planned collaboration. You can also offer yourself to help with the situation, if they see you fit for this (even if the chances are small that you can actually help).
Of course, keep being polite (but do not over-do it).
*Good note from **@user2912328** in the comments: verify the correctness of the e-mail address of the PhD guy.*
*Note from me: please also verify the SPAM folder of your email. A friend of mine found (by mistake / luck) no less than 3 messages from me hidden there - while I was worried that he might be upset with me or something.*
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As long as you remain polite, you can just send them a reminder now or in a couple of days. I would also suggest a phone call (if you have phone numbers, you can also call the group secretary) or contacting them through Skype.
All the signs are pointing to them wanting to include you in their research group; furthermore, researchers sometimes get overwhelmed with demands which leads to them not responding to emails that they really would like to respond to. I am reasonably sure this is happening here as well. If it makes you feel comfortable you can indeed, as per @username_1's suggestion, ask if there have been any changes in their plans.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/15
| 1,234
| 5,249
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a computer science Ph.D. student. I have written a couple of research papers and some of them are under review. I have started becoming fearless from some time as my past experience has told me that with time and with hard work every research problem is solvable to some extent (make something publishable out of it). I have tried to now pick the research which is less related to my previous research works. I am doing this thing on purposefully as I don't want to narrow my research domain. My belief so far is that pick something read few papers for some months and purpose a question take more months and then write it.
**Question:** I am wondering what are the other things which I can try to be more fearless or what are the things students should practice in order to become more and more fearless? I used to a person with lots of fear but now I have become confident. I know fear some time push me but after failing some projects I have become a fearless person.
Some meaning of the fear is to take the courage to pick a research problem and solve it and make it publishable.<issue_comment>username_1: I have to admit that I was a little nosey and checked out your profile. I noticed that Academia was your only community.
I would suggest becoming more active on other communities. If answering questions doesn't interest you, then simply browse the unanswered, or even answered, questions. Sometimes you are just so focused on your particular area of study that you don't realize how much you truly don't know (no offense). This has helped me in the past. And, if nothing else, it is a way to learn about new topics and witness interesting conversations about them.
-- Start with checking out these questions: <https://math.stackexchange.com/>
Good luck!
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I'd say that you must learn not to take things too close to your heart. "Fear" appears when something hurts our self-esteem. The key is to realize that in most cases it should not. Say, a reviewer rejects your paper, providing very harsh comments. You feel like jumping between a cold shower and a frying pan, but you should't. Reviewers don't know you personally, they are only doing a job of bashing your paper if it's not good enough. If you paper is not good enough, it doesn't mean that you aren't good enough, so your self-esteem shouldn't suffer. (And it especially shouldn't suffer if a reviewer is wrong.) Accept criticism and continue.
If you fail, often it means that you aim high, so it is normal to fail. We aren't in school where all problems have ready answers. Many directions are dead ends, and we must realize that it's OK to hit a dead end from time to time.
In a sense, it is equally important to practice humility. A huge number of talented people establish start-ups, record songs, write novels and draw comic strips. Most of them fail, this is just the way it is, and we shouldn't think of ourselves as exceptions. Accept that failures are as inevitable as gravity (so, once again, don't take it too close to heart). It is also useful to understand your limits. We all have stronger sides and weaker sides, and even our stronger sides in most cases won't get us a Nobel prize next year. Aim high, but stay realistic with your goals.
In short, be passionate about your topic, but try to keep your inner self "protected". It should not suffer when you are hurt as a professional (due to failures or criticism). It is hard, but doable to some extent.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I'm not a PhD student, so please take my advice with a grain of salt.
Fear is not always bad. After all, courage is doing things despite being fearful.
I have found that people have much more courage when there is a higher purpose to what they are doing. Please don't take this the wrong way, as I doubt a journal would publish research if it had little purpose. But inevitably some research will end up being more useful. Perhaps the fear is not your paper being rejected, but rather feeling that you haven't contributed to science. Make sure to properly identify what it is you fear.
If you are struggling to find purpose in your research, keep in mind that your knowledge of computer science could be extremely useful in other disciplines. Reach out to them as username_1 suggested; maybe you could solve some of their problems. A recent example that comes to mind is [a video by SmarterEveryDay](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdW7vhYYSdM), where they used a neural network to prevent kickback in circular saws. No research paper needed there! Although the litmus test is probably scarier than peer-review.
Think outside the box and keep an attitude of serving society. If you feel fear, remind yourself of the purpose of your research however abstract it may be.
Taking a different approach, fear and anxiety are interrelated and anxiety can be reduced with exercise. Assuming you don't already exercise enough, perhaps you could become more fearless by exercising more, although that's just a hypothesis. There are also drugs that eliminate fear, but it's probably best to stay away from those. At some point, fearlessness becomes recklessness.
I hope that was helpful.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/02/15
| 1,398
| 5,597
|
<issue_start>username_0: It has recently come to my attention that a renowned scholar in my field whose academic journals have been highly influential in my area of research has recently been charged with child pornography. Is it possible to separate the scholar from their work? And will my thesis research, in turn, be judged for referencing the work?<issue_comment>username_1: Of course it is appropriate. Why not? They did relevant work, so you have to cite them. With citing, you do your duty -- you are in no way saying you "like" the cited persons.
Of course, I am assuming that their research is sound and is not somehow influenced by the child pornography. It was a different case if there were problems with the research.
On the other hand, not citing them could get you into big (or small) trouble.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: I think that in almost every field you can separate the work from the person who did it. Many people in the history of science and mathematics, at least, have turned out to have "feet of clay." You aren't tainted because you use someone's work.
The only exception I can think of is if the charge of misconduct is somehow related to the research - unlikely.
The Unabomber was a prize-winning mathematician before he turned evil. His mathematical work doesn't disappear from history.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Others calling this an "ad hominem fallacy" or saying you must "separate the scholar from their work" are wrong. In a system where citation is the currency that fuels careers, you can't separate them; any resolution of this dilemma must acknowledge and attempt to mitigate the fact that the author cited does usually benefit from citations. This is particularly true in cases where the author is still alive and still has a career, but in the case of hateful ideologies (e.g. Nazi works), there is also the aspect of citation benefiting the ideology that lives on past the author.
Now, how do you do that? It's hard, and academia doesn't have good solutions right now. Fixing the whole academic publishing system and citation economy is related, but not really something you can wait on. From an academic integrity standpoing, you do have an obligation to accurately cite work you used, were influenced by, or built on. But if this person is a "renowned scholar" and "highly influential" in his area of research, there's also a good chance that he's going to get off with a slap on the wrist, partly due to the justice system and academic community considering him "too big to fail" or considering the "value of his work" too important to jeopardize by ostracizing him.
Sadly, I don't have any good answers for how to fix this or even avoid being complicit in it. But I do think it's worth saying that the people who are telling you it's not an issue are morally bankrupt.
On a related note, the Unabomber was [once cited with a footnote](https://www.reddit.com/r/math/comments/rlamc/better_known_for_other_work/) "Better known for other work."
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: I agree completely with guest2's answer. I'll add this: **The author has only been *charged*. He/She hasn't been *convicted*.**
Presumption of innocence - i.e. the idea that people are innocent until proven guilty - is one of the most sacred principles of the criminal justice system. Even if someone disapproves of you citing a child pornographer, they can't really fault you for doing so before the author is convicted.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: To add another perspective to this, you even knowing of this author’s (alleged) crimes is a great coincidence:
* A considerable amount of criminals is never caught.
In particular for ownership of child pornography, I would expect the dark figures to be so high that I have likely cited somebody guilty of it.
* In many countries, e.g., Germany, privacy laws or at least codices of press, police, etc. forbid publishing the name of a criminal for protection of their rights, allowing rehabilitation, etc.
Names are usually made public only if the person in question is in public spotlight anyway (e.g., in [this case](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sebastian_Edathy) of a member of parliament) or the case itself is of extraordinary public or historic interest (such as [this one](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanwings_Flight_9525), and even there, it took a while).
So, you probably only know about the crimes of the author in question because they were in a country with another attitude to privacy, were considered in the public spotlight anyway, or information leaked out somehow.
* You either had to investigate this author or this was a widely available knowledge in your field, which is also something you cannot assume to happen in every case – at least I do not investigate whether there is some public criminal track record of every person I cite.
So, what makes that specific author different from authors whose crimes you never get to know?
And even if we presume that something is different, what should the scientific community do about it?
Reiterate the author’s entire work and publish it again, so it can be cited?
Is every convicted criminal’s work free game for plagiarism?
(This becomes particularly absurd in fields like pure math, where a paper can be fully self-contained.)
The only exception from all of this I can see is if the author’s research can be expected to be biased due to pedophilia.
But then it’s upon the scientific community or the respective journals to judge this and retract or annotate the respective publications.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/02/15
| 500
| 2,113
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a master's student in Applied Math with two undergraduate degrees in physics and math. There is a professor who is coming to my university to give a talk on his research, and I read his abstract for the presentation as well as part of his most recent publication and I really would like to work with him doing this over the summer. He is from a National Lab I have interned in before as an undergrad. There is almost no programs for graduate students at that lab and, since I am an international student, I am ineligible for the only one I found there. Is there any way for me to approach him to ask him for the possibility of working with him?
I have a pretty strong research background, and professors I work with at my university will be at the talk he is giving. I don't know if this could help me in any way.<issue_comment>username_1: Yeah, just talk to him after the talk. Maybe even get onto his schedule or take him to lunck or the like. Talk to whoever is sponsoring his talk (introducing him). Usually, these guys have a bunch of 1 on 1s they do with the faculty. No promise, but if you don't ask, you don't get. But even if no scheduled meeting, can pigeonhole him.
Also, I would be open to a general conversation. You're interested in his work. Maybe he'll be interested in yours. Don't just make it "got a slot for me?" but a conversation on research.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I would send an email a week or so before the visit, saying about what you have said here and asking if the two of you could have a conversation during the visit. That would be better, I think, that surprising him at the talk. It will give him a chance to review any opportunities that there might be. He might also think of others who might be able to help you.
If you just surprise him with a request he won't have that opportunity to think about it, and the circumstances of the visit might make it impossible to make contact in an ad hoc manner.
But if there is nothing he can do for you directly, perhaps the contact can develop into something longer term.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/02/16
| 460
| 1,844
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have hit a wall. I will receive a D in a math course (my major), C- but doubtful. D is passing according to university. It would drop my gpa from 3.6 to 3.3. Two more courses after this to take, so a lower gpa might follow. Does gpa matter when applying for jobs in the math/science field? Let me say, I am not going to grad school, I am an older return student, so being a single mom, I would like to wrap this Bachelor's in Math up. Will keeping a D negatively impact job prospects in any way, or having the degree is the only thing that matters?<issue_comment>username_1: Yeah, just talk to him after the talk. Maybe even get onto his schedule or take him to lunck or the like. Talk to whoever is sponsoring his talk (introducing him). Usually, these guys have a bunch of 1 on 1s they do with the faculty. No promise, but if you don't ask, you don't get. But even if no scheduled meeting, can pigeonhole him.
Also, I would be open to a general conversation. You're interested in his work. Maybe he'll be interested in yours. Don't just make it "got a slot for me?" but a conversation on research.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I would send an email a week or so before the visit, saying about what you have said here and asking if the two of you could have a conversation during the visit. That would be better, I think, that surprising him at the talk. It will give him a chance to review any opportunities that there might be. He might also think of others who might be able to help you.
If you just surprise him with a request he won't have that opportunity to think about it, and the circumstances of the visit might make it impossible to make contact in an ad hoc manner.
But if there is nothing he can do for you directly, perhaps the contact can develop into something longer term.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/02/16
| 663
| 2,678
|
<issue_start>username_0: My paper was accepted to be published as a chapter in a SPRINGER book after it was presented at an IEEE-sponsored conference and gaining a high score form their peer-reviewers. The editor of the book series (also the chairman of the conference) invited me to submit an extended version of the paper (at least 30% of new ideas) so, I emailed the final manuscript but didn't get any feed-back until I figured out that the book is now available online but the title of my article doesn't appear in its table of contents! I asked the book editor about this issue but still haven't gotten an answer.<issue_comment>username_1: Based on your timeline, my guess is that your email didn't reach the editor. Perhaps it went into her spam folder, or he saw it and then forgot about it, etc. There's little chance this is malicious. After all, the editor has nothing to gain by holding your manuscript unpublished. Now that the book's been published, there's no chance of inserting your manuscript into it either.
You've already emailed the editor, which is all you can do. At least it'll make clear where the error was, and more optimistically, perhaps the editor will find somewhere else to publish your manuscript. It's all you can do, and next time, you can ask the editor for a confirmation of receipt if you don't hear back from her after a while.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> The editor of the **book series** ... invited me to submit an extended
> version of the paper (at least 30% of new ideas) so, I emailed the
> final manuscript but didn't get any feed-back until I figured out that
> **the book is now available online but the title of my article doesn't appear in its table of contents**! I asked the book editor about this
> issue but still haven't gotten an answer.
>
>
>
So you are invited to submit a paper as a chapter **for a volume** in the book series. Book chapters are also reviewed (although things are easy when you are invited), and once it is accepted, the editor will tell you which volume of the book the chapter will appear.
As you haven't received any review, it is not a surprise that your paper does not appear in the **latest volume** of the book. Unlike conferences, it can take years for the chapter to appear (in my case, 2 years since it was accepted)
You see the book editor is also the program chair of some conference(s). He also has to do his own research, and likely to be a professor with teaching duties, and so on and so on. It is not unusual that he does not response to you within one week.
You can shoot him an email again, but there is nothing to worry here.
Upvotes: 1
|