Split (1)

train · 10.4M rows

date stringlengths 10 10	nb_tokens int64 60 629k	text_size int64 234 1.02M	content stringlengths 234 1.02M
2019/06/04	1,349	5,423	<issue_start>username_0: I've heard from not a few people that the first postdoc can be quite tough. You've been kicked out of the nest and have to figure out for yourself what's worth working on, what's likely to turn into a real project, etc. Many new postdocs struggle to publish or even submit anything in their first year. Considering the high stakes of academic careers, it makes me wonder if that in and of itself is a sign to pause and figure out a different career path. To put it as a question, > > Is your paper output the first year of your first postdoc a good metric for future performance? > > > I imagine it is actually possible to answer this question rigorously with data, but I would be content with anecdotal responses from senior academics.<issue_comment>username_1: > > Is [the first] paper output [during] the first year of your first postdoc a good metric for future performance? > > > In my opinion: No. (Although I agree that "it is actually possible to answer this question rigorously with data," that's rather time consuming.) Opinion-based questions are off-topic here, but in the context of the following back story, I think I can provide a reasoned answer. > > You've been kicked out of the nest and have to figure out for yourself what's worth working on, what's likely to turn into a real project, etc. > > > I disagree with the above rationale: Once "[y]ou've been kicked out of the nest," you have research that can be published (possibly with some additional work). So, the first paper published after leaving needn't require "[you] to figure out for yourself what's worth working on, what's likely to turn into a real project, etc.," you can publish research that was largely conducted before leaving. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: There are at least two ways to treat a first postdoc or the first year of any academic job post degree. The first is to use it to work over the backlog of problems that you saved in your "work backlog" notebook. You have one of those, right? If you are still as student, reading this, I suggest you get started on one immediately. If you saved descriptions of work that you had to put on hold during your dissertation work along with hints, and if you reviewed and updated the backlog periodically, you can probably get quite a few publications started or even into the pipeline by the end of your first year. You don't really want to be starting with a clean slate. The second way to approach the first year is to get yourself attached to other researchers in your field for collaborative work. If the institution has a large enough faculty, most of them can be local. You may not be "first author" on everything (anything), but you can get out there, but also establish relationships that will last and boost your productivity. If you are in a small place, or isolated by subfield, you can, perhaps, use conferences to meet people and try to set up communities of interest, or join those that already exist. In general, though, it is good to be working on a variety of things of different difficulty. Some of them might result in early publications, but aren't earth shattering. Others, you can work on for wider impact, though the going may be much slower. And when you go for the next job, that backlog of work in progress is your friend. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: If you're not productive early, it's doubtful you will be competitive for higher end jobs in academia. It's a tournament system and the odds are against you, just numerically. Doesn't mean you are a bad person or a dummy. But yes, maybe getting out of academia and into the general economy or government is wise. It's important for young researchers to pick projects that are high likelihood of success. Or "areas" with potential for several papers. I once told a grad student in my group "how will you publish that when it doesn't work", who was being pushed to do a dumb set of experiments by my advisor. And I meant it. (Some things can/can't publish negative results.) Probably shouldn't do dumb experiments...but at least if you can publish some "data point" paper(s) afterwards it's not a total loss. Don't just be a non-thinking "subordinate". Have your own opinions. There are always more possible things to do than time to do them. Give your time to what deserves it. If you are incapable of having good opinions about what projects are worthwhile...you are NOT a budding PI. Yes, you should be a paper-cranking machine as a postdoc. If you can't do it now, how will you do it when you are tenure track at an R1 school? This isn't grad school and you should hit the deckplates running. And avoid multi-year laser building projects like the plague. Let some other sap do those. Look at these two questions of yours: [Should I quit a project where I can't see how to contribute?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/130266/should-i-quit-a-project-where-i-cant-see-how-to-contribute) and [How to tactfully "decommit" from projects?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/130225/how-to-tactfully-decommit-from-projects) I would think the answer to these early questions would be obvious now, in the context of this later one. You need to focus and churn out first author papers. P.s. I'm sure the "reassurance crowd" will down vote this. But you need to hear the cynical view. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2019/06/04	1,178	5,007	<issue_start>username_0: I have heard from several places that to get a tenure-track assistant professor position and to get tenure, not only do you have to be a very solid researcher, but you have to be lucky. But I don't know what they mean. Could someone explain?<issue_comment>username_1: I can't give a universal perspective, but often there are so many factors involved that are outside the control of an applicant for tenure that it seems like it is luck and little else. In reality, it is just that the combination of factors is very complex and hard to predict. I'll focus on obtaining tenure itself, rather than tenure track. Let's take the case of a well positioned person. Good research, several publications, good teaching. Such a person would seem to be a good candidate, of course. But, they may not present themselves well to the tenure committee. Being extremely introverted, or even extremely modest about your accomplishments can work against you. Perhaps you have somehow offended some powerful member of the faculty - maybe just because they are jealous. Perhaps at the moment you come up, the enrollments have declined, or someone who was about to retire didn't, leaving no real room. Perhaps several other people were advanced to tenure just the year before and there is no room and rules don't permit you to delay. Perhaps someone has decided that another candidate meets the needs of some research group better then you do. Perhaps funding agencies have gotten more conservative just now and the university doesn't seem willing to make a commitment to you for the long term future. Perhaps the department you are in is in decline, reducing the need for faculty and reducing the overall 'clout' of the department head. Perhaps there is just too much competition for too few tenure slots right now. Some departments tenure almost no one, always on the lookout for new faces and thinking, sometimes correctly, that having worked there for seven years will give you a boost elsewhere. Top schools can be like that. Any of these can serve as a block, as can several other, similar, seemingly stupid things. A candidate does well to monitor all relevant and many irrelevant factors in the final few years before a decision must be made. If there is weirdness about you may be able to deflect it if you know and are prepared. It is good for a new faculty member to attach to a mentor who has some power and who will both guide you through the swamp and also serve as your advocate. If you need to present a tenure dossier to the committee, have someone more experienced in that particular system read it and give you advice on what to include/exclude and even on phrasing. The problem is that the rules are often too strict about timing. Seven years and up or out. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Luck is part of academia as it part of other businesses as it is part of life. To get a tenure track position somewhere, you are most likely one of many many candidates among which there are many good candidates. So it is an impossible decision to make for the hiring committee who to chose based on only objective facts. Of course you can screw up your interview or, the other extreme, be extremely talented and get offers everywhere, but if things just go well you need that bit of luck to get hired ( or to proceed to another round of interviews). Then there is of course the tenure decision. You need a bit of luck with applying for grants, getting papers published in (top) journals, and probably many more. Though I would not argue that it is solely luck. If you work hard enough or are very talented you will eventually get your fair share of luck :) In other words; apply for many positions and you will find your luck somewhere PS. This is just my humble opinion Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: At most schools in the US in fields where you do a postdoc, luck plays a relatively small role in getting tenure (because in the current job market the standards for getting hired are much higher than for receiving tenure), but luck plays a huge role in getting a tenure-track offer, in where you get a tenure-track offer, and in how long it takes to get a TT offer. Here are several ways that luck factors in: * How many schools are hiring in a given year and how many positions they have. * Which schools are hiring in a given year and whether they have people interested in your work. * Who else in your field is on the market in a given year. It’s very hard to be hired if you’re seen as the second best person in your subfield. * Timing of journal acceptances. Having a paper accepted in a top tier journal makes a difference, but there’s a lot of luck in who the referees are and a lot of luck in whether the process takes a few months or years. In consecutive years I had no interviews one year and over half-a-dozen the next year (with multiple offers) with all of the above factors playing a role. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
2019/06/04	1,000	3,932	<issue_start>username_0: I am a young grad student, also having the luck to be collaborating a bit with a (rather) big shot. Of course, it would be nice if he gets a good impression of me for the future, as he could probably be an excellent reference when it comes to finding jobs later. But probably, the same discussion applies to any senior researcher you're working with. Now, the first logical thing would be to work very hard thinking outside the box on problems, using creative, a bit unconformistic approaches in order to try proving that my intelligence and deep understanding of the topic are beyond average. The other thing is just nicely executing the suggestions by him and the other collaborators, being an efficient, obedient employee outside the spotlights, such that his 'factory runs smoothly'. On the one hand, the second possibility does not seem to really allow distinguishing myself; on the other hand; the first possibility may come across as a bit annoying by trying too hard to impress;also it is apparently often a good idea to play a bit dumber than you really are [('Never outshine the master')](http://48laws-of-power.blogspot.com/2013/10/law-1-never-outshine-master.html) . To be clear, I'm quite sure I'm in the end still far weaker than him, but I can spend more time thinking on the same problems. A concrete example: if he suggest something and I've thought of that myself before, should I tell so?<issue_comment>username_1: These are not mutually exclusive, actually. The correct aphorism should be "Never outshine the master if he is a jerk". I've seldom been happier than when one of my students goes on to surpass me. I know of a few and I suspect there are others. Cool. Don't be arrogant, though. Wisdom and arrogance aren't especially compatible. The movie "Good Will Hunting" is an object lesson of a professor who can't handle the presence of a brilliant student. But if students don't outshine their "masters" then humanity never advances. If it weren't common at places like MIT and Cambridge for students to go beyond their doctoral advisors then scholarship could never go forward, only backward. So, do good work, help others, be fair, explain carefully, take advice, accept honest criticism, do better work. Ask for help when you need it, but do due diligence first in your study. And, say "hi" to people and show an interest, volunteer a bit of time and effort occasionally. And, do even better work. My personal secret, though I didn't recognize it at the time, was: ask a lot of questions - good questions. Listen to the answers. --- And after you finish your degree and move on to a fantastic job and are building a great career, don't forget to go back and thank your old mentor, in person, for starting you on the path. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As noted, these are not mutually exclusive. Indeed, someone coming up with their own ideas and showing a deep insight into the topic often is what makes "the factory run smoothly" because I don't have to spoonfeed them Step N+1 in their project at every meeting. > > if he suggest something and I've thought of that myself before, should > I tell so? > > > Do you have thoughts on it? "I thought of that myself" isn't impressive, and isn't helpful. "Yeah, I thought about that recently, and have been tooling around with an implementation of it. What do you think about $Thing" is. So should you be smart or be a pleasant co-worker? The answer is "Yes." Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I don't see a trade-off between the two strategies, so the answer is: both. However, my hunch is that you are too concerned with making an impression. This can become awkward or even annoying. Try to focus on the work you're doing, and don't worry about brownie points. If your work is good, it should be acknowledged, and your present insecurity will dissipate. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/04	1,574	7,068	<issue_start>username_0: In the comments [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/131373/is-it-impolite-to-ask-to-which-journal-a-preprint-was-submitted#comment349159_131373), a user suggested that when two proofs of the same theorem are obtained independently, it is a common practice (at least in physics) to submit them to the same journal. I was wondering what the benefits of this approach are and how widespread it is. (I'm particularly interested in mathematics, but insight from other disciplines is also appreciated.) Edit: Just to clarify, I'm not asking why it's worth publishing independent proofs of the same theorem - that's something that can be taken for granted, at least in mathematics. What I'm curious about is the practice of specifically publishing the two proofs in the same journal (as opposed to different journals).<issue_comment>username_1: I can only speak for mathematics. However, when you really understand the nature of mathematics you start to realize that the proofs of the theorems are often as or more important than the statements of the theorems themselves. The proof, in showing why something is true, gives a roadmap to truth. Sometimes a technique, if it is not standard but is interesting, can be the most important aspect of a math paper because that same roadmap might just show a way to prove other things, some similar, and some not. My own dissertation had interesting theorems, to be sure, but it was most useful for the proof of one of the theorems. The proof was unexpected and gave new ways to approach some problems in Analysis. So, a journal that shows two independent proofs of the same thing can be especially interesting since the similarities and differences between the proofs can give hints of other things that might be shown. I doubt that it is especially common, though in popular areas of research it must happen. Parallel research is pretty widespread, though if offset in time by only a bit, it won't be possible to have such things in the same issue of a journal. On the other hand, getting beaten to a result may not be devastating if different approaches are taken. Other mathematicians can learn from that. From the journal's standpoint such situations are especially satisfying as two different but interesting proof methodologies may represent the merging of two separate trains of thought. That in itself is interesting to a mathematician and may lead to consolidation or to further advances. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Generally, in such a situation, the journal in fact takes care to make sure the two papers are published in the same issue. This has a few effects: 1) There is official acknowledgement that the papers are simultaneous, independent work, and both sets of authors deserve credit for original "discovery" of the theorem. 2) There is official acknowledgement that some expert(s) consider both proofs of the theorem to be roughly equally good. 3) Presumably, the same editor has handled both papers, and this means that the editor has to spend less time understanding the basic contents of the papers (at least the statement of the theorem) than they might otherwise. 4) If the two proofs are similar enough that this is plausible, it's common for both papers to be assigned to the same referee, so that only one person has to spend time on the material rather than two different people having to spend time on it, and also so that the referee can make any necessary comparative judgements (which might be none). (The journal might decide, probably in addition to one referee who looks at both papers, to have someone from each group referee the other paper!) Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Both username_1 username_2 have provided good answers already. However, since I am the user who wrote that comment, perhaps I should weigh in on this too. First of all, let me note that I wasn't thinking only about theorems, but more generally about results. Here is perhaps the clearest dividing line between mathematics (for the sake of this discussion broadly defined to include theoretical computer science, parts of mathematical physics, and similar fields that largely deal with theorems) and the natural sciences. If you have a valid proof of a theorem, reproducibility is guaranteed. In the natural sciences you rarely have that guarantee. Accordingly, multiple groups finding consistent results is kind of a big deal - whether the two groups use the same methods or not (think different samples, measurement techniques, numerical methods/codes, formalisms, approximations, etc.). If two groups can independently obtain consistent results, that raises both readers' and the journal's confidence in the papers. If a journal accepts this cultural attitude in general, there's no reason not to also apply it to theorems. A second significant difference between mathematics and most subfields of physics is that authorship order matters. Combining two preprints into one joint paper could lead to a more impactful paper, but it would very likely also lead to some unpleasant conversations and compromises. The number of authors per paper is also larger on average, raising potential concerns about dilution of credit. Hence, such joint papers should be expected to be less common. Having established that having two independent papers may be a good thing, what are the advantages of publishing them in the same journal (and likely issue)? * From a reader's point of view I think it's mostly a wash. There might be a convenience factor to finding both papers next to each other, particularly in a print journal. On the other hand, if both papers are published in a journal you don't track closely, maybe you would have preferred to see them spread out. Of course, in arXiv-heavy disciplines you might already have found both anyway... * From the authors' point of view it's nice to have what's essentially a rubber stamp saying that both works were independent, simultaneous, and of similar quality. It also helps provide equal visibility, and credit. Compare it to the case where one of the papers is published in a top journal, and the other in an obscure journal. It's not hard to guess which one is most likely to be overlooked. (Of course history provides a number of examples where the obscure paper came years before the other, so it's not an unfounded worry either.) * From the journal's point of view, they're looking to publish interesting things. If both papers are interesting, then why not publish both? By handling two papers reaching the same result, the editor (who's likely not an expert) can also be more confident in the results and minimize the risks of having to publish errata in the future - or, in extreme cases, having to retract the paper. As username_2 points out, there's also a factor of editorial efficiency. Finally, especially if it's an important result, a journal/publisher in today's impact factor-centric world would probably be incentivized not to share citations with a competitor. Upvotes: 0
2019/06/05	7,788	31,172	<issue_start>username_0: Premise ------- My department recently finalized the faculty teaching assignments for the Fall 2019 semester (starts at the end of August 2019). As these assignments were being discussed a few weeks ago, my department chair approached me and asked my "interest" (her word) in teaching an "explorations" (again her word) class that students could take to learn more about our department and our discipline. She had a pre-written syllabus that she had composed. The proposed work load for the class essentially consisted of having 80% attendance at a weekly 50-minute class period and filling out a course review at the end of the semester (10% of the grade was to come from a nebulous "class participation" score). This class would be worth three (3) credits, which would be the typical credit given for a class that met for three 50-minute periods a week and had several exams, weekly homework, etc. Some examples of classes in my college (STEM) worth 3 credits: All names and course numbers are effectively fake. These are all real classes at my university, but I have completely made up the numbers to mask the real classes. * Math 3340 Differential Equations. * Math 3870 Algebraic Number Theory. * Phys 2200 Electromagnetism. * CoSc 3130 Compilers and Interpreters. * Stat 4650 Bayesian Inference. * CoSc 3270 Intro to Machine Learning. * CoSc 4270 Advanced Machine Learning. * Chem 3510 Organic Chemistry I. * Chem 3520 Organic Chemistry II. (CoSc is Computer Science. This is not what my university calls it. I did this literally just so that every class only had a 4 letter abbreviation). I told the department chair that I was not interested in teaching the class and made the passing observation that it seemed like the class was rather simple for a three credit class. She told me that, yes, it is a rather simple class, but that this was okay, since it was "targeted at the athletes from our university." The class is open to any student at the university, but it requires departmental signature to add the class. I feel that this may be treading a fine line that borders on academic fraud, [such as this scandal at the University of North Carolina](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_North_Carolina_academic-athletic_scandal). This is exacerbated by the fact that I have now discovered that there is not only one version of this class, but three (XXXX 3910 Explorations I, XXXX 3920 Explorations II, XXXX 3930 Explorations III) versions of the class. The classes meet concurrently (e.g. Tuesdays at 2 p.m.) in "different" rooms, however it is really just one big room that can be subdivided into three classrooms with accordion curtains. (Each section of the room has a separate door to the hallway and a separate room number). So the "Explorations" classes can effectively be taken all at once by signing up for all three classes and then just sitting in the big room and "participating." The Issue --------- Despite my declining having any interest in teaching one of these classes, I have been named as the instructor of one of the classes. The department chair and a new adjunct hire have been listed as the professors over the other two classes. Students have registered for the class and it looks like out of 21 students on my class list, 19 are student athletes. I spoke (informally) with our associate dean about this class soon after my department chair first approached me about the class. At that point I had not yet been assigned to teach the class. He informed me that the dean had signed off on these classes in order to "engender interest in the college." Most student athletes at my school do not major in STEM fields. I'm not sure how high this goes. I do not want to lose my job over being unwilling to get up in front of some student athletes and talk about interesting things in my field. If the class was worth fewer credits, I would feel better about participating. But as it is, I feel uncomfortable being associated with the course. If it were worth fewer credits, I might be more favorable to the thought of teaching the class. Should I blow the whistle here? --- Addendum -------- I do not have tenure. I am relatively new to the department. I think this is why the department chair is asking me and an adjunct professor (new hire) to cover these classes. I mentioned that I had been assigned to teach this class to one of my senior faculty. His assessment was essentially "Oh yeah, sounds fishy. But if [Dept. Chair] got it approved, must be on the up and up, right? Ha ha ha...." Grade break down for the class is as follows: * 10% Participation (On an integer scale from 0-10). * 10% Course Evaluation (Filled out = full marks, not completed = zero). * 80% Attendance: + There are 10 total class meetings (we do not meet every week) + You get 1 point for each class period you attend up to and including your eighth class period attended. (Max score of 8/8). The class is not pass fail. ABC grades are assigned. So, if you participated at a level 9 (whatever that will mean), filled out the course evaluation, and attended 5 class periods total, your score would be: > > 9% + 10% + (5/8)\80% = 69% in the course. > > > If you participated at a level 3, did not fill out the course evaluation, and attended 7 class periods total, your score would be: > > 3% + 0% + (7/8)\80% = 73% in the course. > > ><issue_comment>username_1: Your comments to my answer say clearly that blow a whistle means to make an outcry about a case of fraud. You have however no expertise to make the judgement of fraud. This judgement is made at a higher level, such as an accreditation board. So, the answer is no, you should not and indeed cannot blow a whistle in this way. How should you proceed? Perhaps you are asking whether you should blow a whistle to lead a charge about the integrity of the course. As an untenured faculty, this is not a battle for you to lead or to engage fully. In essence, it is a rabbit hole that could suck away your success in your career. It is a battle for tenured faculty members to address. Engage someone at a higher level in the department to blow a whistle in this manner. For the immediate term (summer), contact a trusted, tenured faculty member in your department. Discuss their views on whether the course is worthy as a case to raise for improvement or potential Academic Fraud. Your Faculty Senator may also have insights. Use this time to gather information about what other faculty in the department feel about the course. You may also learn about your allies and enemies for future worthy battles that you would want to fight to improve the integrity of courses in the department. For the Fall term, teach the course. Establish what it requires and strive to meet its standards to the fullest degree possible. As you desire and as the course description permits, allow yourself the liberty to inject some degree of your own username_5 integrity. However, be clear at the outset about what this means in your grading rubrics, especially when they differ from your colleagues who are teaching EXACTLY the same course. Finally, when you do make changes, be prepared that you will have students who will either jump ship right away or who will complain loudly about you during and after the course, and they will likely do so to the highest level possible. In other words, tread lightly about this path. Also, during the Fall term, grant yourself the liberty of having an easy course to teach and do something productive entirely for you. After the Fall term, write a course assessment report. When this would be an engineering course in an accredited college, this report would be called an ABET course assessment report. Document the course requirements, what you did during the course to meet them, and what the outcomes were from your efforts. Bind these documents in a folder and post them to the department. This is your record of the level of integrity that you held under the constraints that you had to meet. Looking ahead from that point ... Keep yourself productive in your own way and trust that, as the case may require, you have done what was demanded of you with the fullest integrity allowed. As the saying goes, you cannot be blamed after that point for anything falsely done by those above your pay grade (or tenure level in this case) and for something that you are in a position only to seek to correct by seeking further advice. Finally, your background discussion adds information on other factors that have no bearing on the question of blowing a whistle for fraud. specifically, you raise an issue of not being willing to teach the course. I will address some aspects of it here as well. Your teaching load is most likely assigned to you by the department Chair in consultation with you. Your Faculty Handbook sets the policy. You can ask your Chair again for the due respect to not have to teach the course. Your reasons that the credit hours are too high or that you are unwilling to "stand up in front of some student athletes" will likely fall on deaf ears. Some might consider you raising such alarms as reasons to brand you as a complainer. A senior faculty member might give you further guidance for a better reason to decline the course. One that comes to mind is to ask how teaching this course will or will not strengthen your teaching credentials for your tenure dossier. Again, your Faculty Handbook sets the guidelines to make this call. To be fair, no one appreciates being assigned to teach a course that seems to be beneath their dignity. The proper reflection may be to define the standards that you can live with to teach the course to the best level permitted, to present your standards clearly to the students, and to hold to them as you teach. You might by inverse consider this case as a challenge in your own learning process -- how well can you learn to teach something worthy about your field to students who are not at a level that you normally would want to teach and who are likely not at all interested in learning the material in the first place. You also say that you are unwilling to teach a course that is potentially a case of Academic Fraud because it may make you complicit in such fraud. You did not generate or approve the initial form to create the course, you did not dictate the requirements for the course for this coming Fall, and finally you are not able at this moment in time to determine whether the course is truly a case of Academic Fraud. Teaching what you are assigned is an obligation of your appointment as a faculty member. You must do what is assigned to you. Failing to do this is a cause to fire you. With due notice to a colleague about your concerns of the integrity of the course, you do the best that you can in your position to give notice that you want to know whether the course should be investigated even as you go forward teaching it. In summary, raise your concerns about the integrity of the course privately to trusted senior faculty. When you mean this as your statement to blow a whistle, then yes. When by blow a whistle you mean to lead a charge on a case of fraud, no. This is not a battle for an untenured faculty to engage. When you want to consider to improve the integrity of the course, continue by gaining insights about the course, by teaching the course in the immediate future to your best standards within the bounds of its requirements, and by consulting to find allies to improve or change (remove) it. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: If it were me, I would try hard to get reassigned to another course, but take no other actions. Hindsight is 20/20, but it sounds like you may have pushed back less than other people the chair asked. I think if you say something like “I’m deeply uncomfortable with how this course is structured and graded and if I were to teach it, I would assign regular homework and give an exam” and you’ll find yourself reassigned. Obviously it’s not great to run the risk of offending the chair, but this is less bad for you than appealing above the chair’s grad. Alternatively, look at some of the syllabi of courses outside the college of arts and sciences. I think you’ll find that in a lot of majors the standards for a 3 credit course are much lower than you think they are. I doubt that this course is fraudulent or as extreme an outlier as you think it is. I wouldn’t feel comfortable teaching it myself, but I’m skeptical that it’s actually illegal, fraudulent, or against university policies. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: You wondered "how high does this go?" At my university, the football coach's salary is 7 times the president's. Who do you think answers to whom? The chancellor, the president, the provost, the dean and your chair could all agree with you and nothing would be done. (And if they were the sort of people who agreed with you, then they would not be the chair, dean, provost, president, or chancellor.) You're new and adjunct, and so have a very weak position. I'm pretty sure this is why you were assigned the course. Options: 1. Refuse to teach the course and hope that the there's enough bad publicity when you are fired, that the school quietly removes the course. You'll be unemployed, but will have done a service. 2. Teach the course in such a way that the students actually have to work and learn things. Milk the "participation" for all it's worth. If you do it right, you'll never get the course again. (E.g. Lead a discussion each meeting on the topic of "Why major in STEM." Point out that the very course they're in is robbing them of their opportunity to get a real education. They're essentially slave labor for the billionaires who really own the athletic teams. They're playing pro-football for free and getting in return a worthless degree in "Undergraduate Studies" which won't qualify them to sell used cars. Wouldn't a STEM degree be more valuable and satisfying? That's on-topic for the course and should prevent you from having to teach it again. OR perhaps, choose a nice, science-y book and require that "participation" means taking turns reading aloud from the book. When this uncovers that half your students can't read....) Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: My personal view is that I would willingly teach such a course only if I could be assured that the parameters overall were such that I could give value to the students. I can't judge the situation here with the information given, but it seems worrisome based on some of the edits and comments. The original post seemed to leave enough room to do a decent enough job. The edits, not so much. However, I have two concerns. The first is that if you want to "step away", as is likely your best option, do so very carefully and with a smile. As an untenured faculty member you will have little chance to make changes if heads and deans, etc. are on board with this. I think it would be unwise to flatly refuse, but, with decent personal relationships, it might be possible to express your discomfort with the situation and your reluctance to get involved with it. But carefully. Carefully. The second is more serious. If you agree to do it, or get trapped into it, you are unlikely to be able to find an escape before you achieve tenure. You will become the "go to person" for such courses and will likely be saddled with them for a while. If, indeed, it is a scam, then it would also be a mind-killer. If, indeed, it is a scam, then you are being asked to do this because, being untenured, you find it harder to refuse. On the other hand, if doing this provides a better path to tenure (say in a place heavily influenced by administration) then you have to think about the long term. Hard choice. --- And, for the record, not all athletes are dumb. [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Bradley) of Knicks fame, comes to mind. He earned an MA from Oxford as a Rhodes Scholar. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: One possible option is to prepare a syllabus for the course which adds some legitimate graded work: homework, an exam, a paper or project, anything. Then, email it to your chair, mention that you want to evaluate the students' mastery of the material and hence devised your own grading rubric, and ask for her approval. If she approves, or if she switches your teaching assignment, then problem solved. And if she says "please use the syllabus I gave you", then you have established a paper trail. Finally, keep the following in mind: in my discipline, I've seen advanced graduate courses where the grading rubric is openly "everyone gets an A". The rationale is that graduate students have more important fish to fry, and should be able to set their own priorities. Whether athletes should be able to do the same is debatable -- but keeping this in mind might mitigate your distaste, if you end up having to use the syllabus you were given. Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_6: I'd bet pounds to pesos that this course is akin to the Geology 101 course my brother took (at a major football university) with most of the football team (he wasn't a student athlete, just took the course) that was commonly referred to as "Rocks for Jocks". However, that doesn't mean (as username_4 mentioned) that the course can't benefit the students. If I were in your shoes, and I would try to make the course give some benefit to the students. If you are allowed to change the syllabus to include some assignments (be they tests, homework, or projects) that get graded and give the students feedback, the students could actually learn something. When I was teaching (at the high school level), I taught a "Descriptive-level" Chemistry course; the basic concept was Chemistry without math. My goal was to help the students learn concepts that would help them (e.g. why you need special coating on screws used in pressure-treated lumber.) OTOH, this worries me: > > ...I have now discovered that there is > not only one version of this class, but three (XXXX 3910 Explorations > I, XXXX 3920 Explorations II, XXXX 3930 Explorations III) versions of > the class. > > > The classes meet concurrently in "different" rooms, however it is > really just one big room that can be subdivided into three classrooms > with accordion curtains. (Each section of the room has a separate door > to the hallway and a separate room number). So the "Explorations" > classes can effectively be taken all at once by signing up for all > three classes and then just sitting in the big room and > "participating." > > > If this is true (a student can take three courses at the same time and earn credit for them), that would constitute fraud (at least in my book). Given your non-tenured position, I leave it to you to determine if burning the bridge to this opportunity is worth it to you to report the fraud. (I suspect that, should you report, your position with the university will be terminated, or made very uncomfortable.) Lastly, the attendance policy is something I would examine in greater detail. If your school is as sport-centric as you fear, I wonder if the athletes are considered exempt from attendance (or automatically get credit), should they be on the road. (I.e. if they get automatic points for attendance when they are away, it is another very damning piece of evidence that this is a fraudulent class.) Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_7: Course content doesn't have much to do with the credit count, but more about the level of the course (i.e., schools usually offer a code by which courses below some number are introductory, and courses above some other number are advanced). Credit count is more related to contact hours and the amount of hours a student must put into the course outside the classroom. It's perfectly acceptable to offer a low-numbered course that requires the appropriate amount of student hours. It's less acceptable to offer students credit for work that isn't done. Different schools may offer different auditing requirements for course credits, but a good rule of thumb is to divide a 40-hour full time work load by the normal credit load per semester. Thus, if the "normal" credit load is 15 credits, a 3 credit course should involve 40\3/15 hours per week, some of it inside and some of outside the classroom. If you don't think the course meets a standard like this that is university-appropriate, you have a valid complaint. Similarly, if you think the course is numbered at a higher level than it effectively is (e.g., and advanced number for an intro course) then you have another valid complaint. If the course is listed at the intro level, and the appropriate number of hours are required by the student, proudly teach it knowing that you are probably doing a valuable service, perhaps introducing students to a field. The next level of "protection" for the value of a degree is the requirements to achieve the degree. This a a matter for the faculty, the department, the university leadership, and any accrediting bodies that apply. If it's possible to take only low-level courses to get a degree, I suspect that situation won't last very long. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_8: TL;DR: get the department riled up about this - this is not just your* problem, but a matter of department image and prestige. This is a really tough situation to be in, but it would be much tougher if you try to handle it by yourself. If I were in your position I would probably go ahead with taking the course (anything else would be outright rebellion, and may seriously hurt your chances of promotion). I would however 1. Garner support from others in the department - the existence of these classes is detrimental to the department as a whole: it lowers departmental prestige, hurts it in the rankings, makes it more difficult to attract undergrad and grad students, etc.. Moreover, if you are going to make enough noise, this class will be passed on to someone else, who'll face the same problem. This is not just affecting you. 2. Try and assess the department's attitude towards this class. If everyone is on board with this and you're the only one seeing the problem, then you will have a much tougher time moving forward. If there is a significant number of people who do not like this class, then you may be able to make your case (significant here may be one person with a lot of influence, or a lot of people with less). It may not be a bad idea to openly discuss this with your department chair: they can offer you an interesting perspective of departmental politics and the requirements handed down to them (and very well convince you of the unfortunate reality of these classes). If you have a good amount of backing, then perhaps you can generate enough momentum to change something. 3. If all else fails, and you feel like this is seriously affecting you, then this may be a good reason to consider your prospects elsewhere - not being given a choice in teaching a class, or control over its syllabus/grading method, is not reasonable in my opinion. Good luck! Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: As an adjunct, I LOVED situations like this. (I didn't have something exactly like it, but I got paid for 4 credits for what was (on my end) a 3-credit class, and the students had other teachers for the 4th "credit" and they taught study-skills and such. My only extra obligation was a few lunches with the other instructors.) Getting one of those was like a "prize" and meant the department head liked you, I felt. But back to yours -- can you add useful content, both inside and outside your discipline? For example: study skills! Resources on campus (include the counseling center and that there's no shame in it --I always pointed out the "happy" things there, like the Zen room or massages, so people could feel like they had a "plausible excuse" for entering that building.) What your options are when personal stuff (death, divorce, illness) means completing a semester is tough. (We had a rule students had to ASK for Incompletes -- officially we couldn't suggest them.) Balancing schoolwork, personal life, and student-athlete obligations (at my university they had a mandatory study hall, mandatory "general gym" time, plus whatever specific practices they had). Another option is to partner with graduate programs on campus (if relevant), and if the students need a student-teach experience or to practice a lecture before a conference, they can use your class for practice. (I had a teaching college composition course -- classmates had a hard time finding classes to guest-lecture in, but they could do something for any major -- so for a chemistry course, we would be able to talk up how to clearly write lab instructions (tech writing type guidelines), "rocks for jocks" we could do something about organizing observations and how looking deeper can result in better writing.) Do know any former student-athletes from other classes? Maybe ask them about the Explorations classes? Or what they wish they had learned earlier about coping with college? --- I just saw the all-3-explorations at once thing -- yep, fraud. But I taught at an online college where they KNEW the homework answers and such were all online, and they didn't care if I busted them for plagiarism (100% word-for-word copy-paste all semester) or not. Sigh. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: I have to ask whether you're a recent immigrant to the US, because I don't understand how else you could avoid knowing that this is absolutely the norm at pretty much every US university that has a significant sports program. There is no whistle to blow: it is a widely known practice - searching on "fake college courses for athletes" returns ~64 million hits - that is, as you've seen, tolerated & encouraged by the multitude of college sports fans that only want "their team" to win. So the answer, unpalatable as it may seem - is just to teach the course (enjoying the benefits of not having to grade assignments &c) and hand out As and Bs to the athletes. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_11: Call a journalist and make him/her do the dirty job for you. Simple as that. Maybe some alumn from your department ended up writing about it. If so, that would be a good choice. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_12: When I was a TA, there was a rumor that [Very Famous Athlete] wanted to be a math major at a rival school and had to be talked into studying basket weaving instead so that he wouldn't be distracted by homework from [Big Money Sport]. If you feel like making big waves, the mass media (journalists) are your only hope, and you should probably figure your future job choices will be limited to smaller institutions without semi-professional athletic teams. You could also try the NCAA Enforcement Division, but they seem to be most interested in safeguarding the financial profitability of athletics; e.g., looking for hidden cash benefits to athletes. Academic Fraud is unlikely to matter. By the way, the Explorations Structure is probably so that this course can be taken three times in different quarters. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_13: You know, I think I'm going to take a different stance on this than most of the answers: you should dive in! This class sounds like it has pretty much no expectation for quality. I mean, it's just a way for athletes to get their credits, right? But that actually gives you a freedom you don't have with a regular class. If you're teaching "Data Structures in OOP", well, guess what: you're not going to be able to discuss much that isn't a Data Structure in OOP. But you're being asked to literally teach an exploration class about science (which honestly sounds pretty freaking sweet to me!) So ask yourself this: if you could take an average everyday person and have them be smarter about one or two science things, what would they be? * "I wish people could understand the difference between Correlation and Causation!" Great! Then do a few sessions on that. Make a gameshow, where the contestants have to take a factoid like "Cancer rates have increased proportionally to cell phone use" and hold up one of three cards: "Causation", "Correlation", or "Coincidence". * "I wish people understood planning fallacy." Then go ahead and actually do a mockup of one of the famous studies in your class. Ask them how long it'd take you to drive to the football stadium and lay on the 50 yard line. How long for 90% certainty? For 99% certainty? ... and how long did it actually take you? * "I wish people understood the scientific method better." Awesome! Break out a bottle of supercooled pop, and show them how it freezes over when you open the lid. Ask them to come up with an explanation why - and then, come up with a way of testing that explanation. And go ahead of do some of those tests in front of them. Show them a scientific phenomena each session, and not only make them come up with a guess why, but a test that would give evidence whether their guess is right/wrong. There's the possibility that this class could give you a lot of freedom to teach some really important things. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_14: I'd say, start off by offering your objections to teaching the class up front -- knowing that you probably May as low-man-on-the-totem pole get ultimately stuck teaching the class. Now, it seems like the 'participation' grading is up for debate -- you can decide what and how to grade it as you'd like. I mean you could divide the class into Presentation groups and have each group present a mini-lecture on a topic that's interesting. Or everybody has to chime in during a group discussion Or some kind of written evaluation based on something they're required to have read. Or, a final project/exam/essay at the end. I'd define participation by a standardized rubric that makes some sense... e.g. attendance = x% of the grade, final = x% of the grade, participation is x% of the grade and defined by y tasks The course doesn't need to be super-easy (e.g. Everybody gets an A for showing up 8 times),though it should be fair...not necessarily too hard as it seems like it's more of an intro-level course. As people said, like "rocks for jocks" or whatever for non-majors, where you don't preconceive that anybody knows anything about the topics. I'd have no problem with saying everybody starts with an A and drops it as they go through...and can improve a bad grade by doing extra work (and/or showing interest). Give them a reason to Want to learn about whatever you're teaching. And, hopefully make it a non-fraud class... Or, go in, and if you find you can't legitimately give students a quality class based on what you're given (e.g. your fair rubric is shot down) and you think it's fraud...then find legit but fair ways to give lower grades - e.g. not all A's...and become the hard ass professor who nobody wants and make it so they don't want you teaching it anymore. Upvotes: 0
2019/06/06	1,495	6,791	<issue_start>username_0: To review a paper that was submitted to a good journal, what am I required to do? Must I understand everything presented in the paper? Must I check the details and verify each argument/proof? Or is it sufficient to check that the paper is generally well-written, contains no obvious mistakes, and is interesting?<issue_comment>username_1: The following is all highly dependent on the field being mathematics or something closely similar. It makes no claim about any other fields. Sorry, but if that's all you do, then your reviewing career is likely to be short, ending (with that journal) the first time you approve a paper that is revealed to have an error that you should have caught but did not. That journal at least is unlikely to consider you in the future. If you have the same attitude generally then other journals will also drop you early. In and attempt to avoid further misunderstanding, let me try to be more clear. In mathematics we really really like published material to be correct. But people do make mistakes. Reviewers serve as a bulwark against poor work that looks superficially good actually making it in to print. But unless you take the job very seriously, as mathematics, you are highly likely to miss errors that should be caught in the review process. You are the last real guard against errors getting published. You may also be the first independent look at a paper other than the author(s). And the errors can be subtle. Errors also reflect on the reputation of the journal as well as the authors. That makes editors very unhappy. Editors want a stable of reviewers they can trust to get it right. That means, first, that you can assure them that papers are correct, to the best of your ability to determine. They also need some assurance that you actually have the ability to determine correctness and treat the job seriously. So, if an editor sends you a paper and you treat the reviewing task casually (just "generally well written" and "no obvious mistakes") and you miss an error that should have been caught then that editor, and by extension, that journal, won't be well pleased and you are unlikely to be offered additional papers. Of course you are generally anonymous to everyone else, but when other editors, from different journals, give you a try and you also do the same, then your opportunities decline, journal by journal. If you don't completely understand the paper and its arguments then you are probably not the best person to review the paper. In math, which is very balkanized, this can be a problem. It has been around a hundred years since any individual was able to understand all of mathematics. Editors will, therefore, try to send papers to people with the same specialty whenever possible. Mathematics is subtle and deep. Editors expect high standards both from authors and from reviewers. The writing style and presentation are important, but not nearly on the same level as correctness. And even with diligence, errors do pass through the system and get published. If a paper is so poorly written that even a field specialist can't follow it, then it needs a serious re-write at a minimum and it may be hiding serious errors. I have had to turn down editors for papers outside my current interests as I felt that I was unable to verify the claims and all of the steps in the proofs. Neither was it fair to the authors to spend the time to come up to speed in the area covered by the paper as it would delay publication for too long. Best for everyone that I just stepped back and passed the job to someone more current in that field. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: My experience as a both reviewer and author in pure math suggests the following: * there is no universal standard for refereeing (some referees check papers thoroughly, some are much more cavalier) * editors may have different expectations/desires of reviewers, depending on the situation and on the editor * the typical expectation is that you assess a paper from several aspects: importance of the paper (this includes factors such as usefulness of the results/methods and novelty), correctness, and presentation/clarity. * refereeing is a process, not a "yes/no" assessment * refereeing well takes a fair amount of time, and results in little personal recognition, but is important for the community Based on your specific questions, here are my suggestions for how you might go about refereeing a paper: 1. First assess the results claimed in their general context. If they do not seem interesting enough for the journal in question, or are clearly wrong, you can simply say that (preferably with more details) and recommend rejection. 2. Understand the general argument of the paper. Read the introduction in detail, and then try to understand the main points of the paper. (You might not read the rest of the paper in order, particularly for long papers.) Assess the novelty and feasibility of this approach. 3. If all seems good so far, convince yourself of the correctness of the paper. This might entail checking all details, or you might be convinced after only checking certain details. While you should definitely assess the correctness of the result, ultimately the burden of correctness lies with the authors. Of course it's great if you can check the paper completely, but in my experience most referees don't. How much effort you put into this may also depend on the situation (e.g., for a completely novel approach with an amazing result, you probably want to put more effort into checking details). 4. Very often in this process, there will be things you don't understand. There could be a couple of reasons for this: (i) you aren't an expert in the methods being used, (ii) the authors' explanations are lacking. In both cases, you can simply ask the authors for more explanations or explicit citations of the results they are using. It's not necessary to understand everything for a first report, but hopefully you will mostly understand the paper after a successful refereeing process, which may include several revisions. However, if (i) is a very serious issue, you might consult with the editor. E.g., if you can read though the details in Parts I and III but Part II is a complete mystery to you, the editor may find someone else to referee Part II. (Possibly this is a conversation you could have when agreeing to referee the paper.) 5. In the above process, you'll likely come up with a list of questions/suggestions, both about the mathematics and the writing. While you should of course include these, these are typically of secondary importance in the referee report (though sometimes if you have some really good suggestions, it can dramatically improve the paper). Upvotes: 5
2019/06/06	1,660	7,457	<issue_start>username_0: I’m about to enter my ultimate year of a physics BSc at a top university in the UK, and have done a computational physics internship with a research group at the university and am currently doing an internship at Harvard that requires strong machine learning skills. I was hoping this would be enough qualification to justify being able to get an entry level job in ML or AI and use that to one day lead myself into a job working with DeepMind, OpenAI, IBM Watson - places like these. I also have some fantasies about working in game design randomly, although I think that needs less a graduate degree and more a portfolio of coded games perhaps. However, with those ML and AI jobs I was citing, does it behoove me to get a graduate degree if I want to one day get hired by them? I personally am quite drained from exam stresses and don’t think academia suits me as much as I used to think it does, but if it’s necessary for my goals in industry it might be worth considering.<issue_comment>username_1: The following is all highly dependent on the field being mathematics or something closely similar. It makes no claim about any other fields. Sorry, but if that's all you do, then your reviewing career is likely to be short, ending (with that journal) the first time you approve a paper that is revealed to have an error that you should have caught but did not. That journal at least is unlikely to consider you in the future. If you have the same attitude generally then other journals will also drop you early. In and attempt to avoid further misunderstanding, let me try to be more clear. In mathematics we really really like published material to be correct. But people do make mistakes. Reviewers serve as a bulwark against poor work that looks superficially good actually making it in to print. But unless you take the job very seriously, as mathematics, you are highly likely to miss errors that should be caught in the review process. You are the last real guard against errors getting published. You may also be the first independent look at a paper other than the author(s). And the errors can be subtle. Errors also reflect on the reputation of the journal as well as the authors. That makes editors very unhappy. Editors want a stable of reviewers they can trust to get it right. That means, first, that you can assure them that papers are correct, to the best of your ability to determine. They also need some assurance that you actually have the ability to determine correctness and treat the job seriously. So, if an editor sends you a paper and you treat the reviewing task casually (just "generally well written" and "no obvious mistakes") and you miss an error that should have been caught then that editor, and by extension, that journal, won't be well pleased and you are unlikely to be offered additional papers. Of course you are generally anonymous to everyone else, but when other editors, from different journals, give you a try and you also do the same, then your opportunities decline, journal by journal. If you don't completely understand the paper and its arguments then you are probably not the best person to review the paper. In math, which is very balkanized, this can be a problem. It has been around a hundred years since any individual was able to understand all of mathematics. Editors will, therefore, try to send papers to people with the same specialty whenever possible. Mathematics is subtle and deep. Editors expect high standards both from authors and from reviewers. The writing style and presentation are important, but not nearly on the same level as correctness. And even with diligence, errors do pass through the system and get published. If a paper is so poorly written that even a field specialist can't follow it, then it needs a serious re-write at a minimum and it may be hiding serious errors. I have had to turn down editors for papers outside my current interests as I felt that I was unable to verify the claims and all of the steps in the proofs. Neither was it fair to the authors to spend the time to come up to speed in the area covered by the paper as it would delay publication for too long. Best for everyone that I just stepped back and passed the job to someone more current in that field. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: My experience as a both reviewer and author in pure math suggests the following: * there is no universal standard for refereeing (some referees check papers thoroughly, some are much more cavalier) * editors may have different expectations/desires of reviewers, depending on the situation and on the editor * the typical expectation is that you assess a paper from several aspects: importance of the paper (this includes factors such as usefulness of the results/methods and novelty), correctness, and presentation/clarity. * refereeing is a process, not a "yes/no" assessment * refereeing well takes a fair amount of time, and results in little personal recognition, but is important for the community Based on your specific questions, here are my suggestions for how you might go about refereeing a paper: 1. First assess the results claimed in their general context. If they do not seem interesting enough for the journal in question, or are clearly wrong, you can simply say that (preferably with more details) and recommend rejection. 2. Understand the general argument of the paper. Read the introduction in detail, and then try to understand the main points of the paper. (You might not read the rest of the paper in order, particularly for long papers.) Assess the novelty and feasibility of this approach. 3. If all seems good so far, convince yourself of the correctness of the paper. This might entail checking all details, or you might be convinced after only checking certain details. While you should definitely assess the correctness of the result, ultimately the burden of correctness lies with the authors. Of course it's great if you can check the paper completely, but in my experience most referees don't. How much effort you put into this may also depend on the situation (e.g., for a completely novel approach with an amazing result, you probably want to put more effort into checking details). 4. Very often in this process, there will be things you don't understand. There could be a couple of reasons for this: (i) you aren't an expert in the methods being used, (ii) the authors' explanations are lacking. In both cases, you can simply ask the authors for more explanations or explicit citations of the results they are using. It's not necessary to understand everything for a first report, but hopefully you will mostly understand the paper after a successful refereeing process, which may include several revisions. However, if (i) is a very serious issue, you might consult with the editor. E.g., if you can read though the details in Parts I and III but Part II is a complete mystery to you, the editor may find someone else to referee Part II. (Possibly this is a conversation you could have when agreeing to referee the paper.) 5. In the above process, you'll likely come up with a list of questions/suggestions, both about the mathematics and the writing. While you should of course include these, these are typically of secondary importance in the referee report (though sometimes if you have some really good suggestions, it can dramatically improve the paper). Upvotes: 5
2019/06/06	862	3,527	<issue_start>username_0: I'm planning to submit papers from my completed PhD thesis (finished less than a year ago) but recently found that unfortunately, my supervisor who had a significant contribution to my thesis is not well and not available for a review, preparing for chemotherapy :( What would be the ethical way of publishing papers and respecting their intellectual contribution without inconvenient communications with them at this stage? Thanks, in advance, for sharing your suggestions<issue_comment>username_1: My suggestion is that you submit in the normal way, but several days (say a week) beforehand, send her/him a note that you are submitting, along with a copy of the paper. You seem to indicate that the supervisor should be a co-author (field dependent)and if so, do that also. In your note say that submission is pending unless you are advised against it. Make the note itself short so that little effort needs to be spent to make a quick decision. In particular, don't ask for a review and revision of the paper. "I expect to submit the enclosed next week unless you advise differently... I will wait if you prefer.". If you don't get a request to wait then just submit it. If they are well enough to review it, they probably will. Of course, if there are no time constraints/limitations, you can also just wait. But note that if the situation is dire and your advisor is near death then it is time for you to step in to the legacy along with his/her other students. You will have sole responsibility for these situations soon enough in that case. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: My suggestion would simply be to respectfully ask your advisor, or your advisor's family, what they would prefer. They may give you a go-ahead to handle everything, or not mind having something familiar to review to take the mind off the impending treatment. Overall though, be prepared to be patient. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: <NAME>'s "Last Lecture: Achieving Your Childhood Dreams" (<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ji5_MqicxSo>) shows that cancer needn't make one unavailable. I cannot speak for your PhD supervisor, but you should consider the possibility that they are continuing to work. (The precise situation is unclear from your question.) If they are, then you should communicate as per usual. (Whether you mention cancer depends on the relationship you have with your supervisor.) Otherwise, username_1 has [some good advice](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/131560/22768). The [OP comments](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/131559/submitting-manuscripts-from-a-phd-thesis-when-my-supervisor-is-not-available-to/131562?noredirect=1#comment349872_131562): > > you're right I cannot decide for my supervisor to continue working on the studies or not but the question is how can I get the answer without inconveniently communicating with them about this unrelated issue at this challenging stage of their life > > > Your supervisor may not consider communication inconvenient; they may expect you to proceed as usual. Perhaps you can establish your supervisor's preference without communicating directly. (E.g., by contacting someone from their department.) If you do follow username_1's advice, then "several days (say a week) before[ submission]" is not enough, since your supervisor may be busy during that period (e.g., receiving and recovering from treatment, on holiday, working, ...). Give them at least twice that, maybe even a month. Upvotes: 1
2019/06/06	1,251	5,138	<issue_start>username_0: I'm new to this forum and am mainly asking for advice. -- From a conflicted rising junior in undergrad (at an Ivy). I'm an engineer majoring in ECE with interests in CS (definitely planning on a minor, and if sanity is sacrificed a bit, a double). I've been doing research with a professor in my major and his lab since last summer, after freshman year. So far, I've coauthored one paper that has already been presented at a conference by the first author grad student but hasn't officially been published yet. I know a lot of the advice I've read is to experience industry at least once, which I'm planning on doing the summer before senior year. However, I'm conflicted as to whether I'm actually fit for grad school. A lot of the questions I ask myself are, "Do I like research enough? Am I motivated enough?" I definitely enjoy doing research and the topics I can explore with it, as well as the flexibility of hours and such. Often during the semesters I find myself wanting to put more time into research and less on my equally important classes. Part of me tells myself I should just find a job and settle, perhaps go for a masters. However, another ambitious part of me tells myself to go for a Ph.D. I'm quite conflicted about my path since my past semester was a wreck. My grades were unsatisfactory (1 C and 2 C+'s in major-related classes and a math class) due to my taking of 22 credits (includes 2 research credits -- an A) which tanked my GPA to a 3.1, which isn't horrible, but not ideal. How do I decide whether I should start prepping for grad school? (Consider that there is an M.Eng program at my school that does not require a GRE, but does require a higher GPA ~3.5.)<issue_comment>username_1: A 3.1 undergraduate GPA is indeed low (even from a top school) among successful applicants to a PhD program. But there are over 130 R1 universities in the US, so it seems likely someone will take you. I can't advise whether you should get an MS and work for a while before thinking more seriously about a PhD. What I can tell you is that very few people who start with that intention actually do it. It's possible to get a master's part-time while you're working but realistically, a PhD requires a full-time commitment and therein lies the problem: Once they begin working full-time, pulling in the typical $100K+ engineering salary, most people begin spending it. Worse, they get committed to continuing to spend it. They take on loans for cars and condos or houses and so on, and then they're handcuffed. They can't easily leave. In my own 40+ years in industry, I've known lots of engineers with PhDs. But I can only recall one person who quit to go get one. And he had only been working for a year and hadn't yet started spending. Sure, there may have been others, but I can't remember any others. So, if you are thinking about a PhD, the best time to do it is probably immediately after you finish your bachelor's. When I advise engineering students here at Michigan, I point out that I wish I had done that. I never got a PhD and I regret it. (And at 68, I think that ship has sailed.) YMMV. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There are many similar questions on this site already, and many of them have become closed due to the inability of users to make personal life decisions for each OP. I will address the last question, “How do I decide whether I should start prepping for grad school?” because it seems to affect many undergraduates without a clear path. I will try to answer it as generically as possible. One of the first steps in making this decision is to find out what exactly grad school prep consists of, and what level of schooling (Master’s or PhD) grad school means to you. Applications generally require transcripts, GRE scores, letters of recommendation, and some version of a statement of purpose. Depending on your particular circumstances, you may be asked to provide other things (English proficiency, a CV, writing sample, research work, etc.). If you determine that you could provide these materials, you may consider applying to schools. Preparation for grad school may also consist of outside study and genetic preparation. Whether you decide to go to industry or on to more schooling, any extra learning will not hurt you in the long run. Deciding where to apply to grad school is another matter. If there is a particular program or professor that you feel would be a good research fit, you may consider contacting the department/professor to learn more. Alternately, deciding where you would hope to be after undergrad is another way to make this decision. If it is in industry, consider where exactly you would hope to be. If a particular industry path requires higher schooling to advance, this may influence your decision as well. Asking your advisor their opinion on the matter is probably the best course of action if you are genuinely unsure of which path you should take. They will be able to assess your progress in school thus far and may even have specific suggestions for people in your situation. Upvotes: 0
2019/06/06	3,735	13,126	<issue_start>username_0: There are various reports about full-time, on-campus MBA programs closing its doors, e.g. from LinkedIn: > > MBA programs are getting axed: The number of full-time MBA programs in > the U.S. declined by 9% between 2014 and 2018, the Wall Street Journal > reports. Wake Forest, Virginia Tech and the University of Iowa are > among several universities that have decided to shutter their > full-time programs, opting to offer online programs and specialty > business masters instead. Applications to full-time MBA programs — > even at elite programs like Harvard and Stanford — have declined in > recent years, > > > and also reports about applications dropping steeply, e.g. in summarizing from a [2018 report [PDF]](https://www.gmac.com/-/media/files/gmac/research/admissions-and-application-trends/gmac-application-trends-survey-report-2018.pdf): > > Applications in the United States are down 6.6 percent -- while they are growing in Asia, Canada and Europe. > > > [![enter image description here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Kp1sW.png)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Kp1sW.png) > > > –["M.B.A. Applications Drop (Except Outside the U.S.)"](https://www.insidehighered.com/admissions/article/2018/10/08/applications-mba-programs-us-are-falling), (2018-10-08) > > > Why is this happening?<issue_comment>username_1: Demand is counter-cyclical. During recessions, demand rises as people seek additional training, hoping to prepare for new careers. But US unemployment is currently at only 3.6%. We haven't seen unemployment that low in decades, so people are not feeling the pressure to seek additional training for new careers. Here are some references that describe this counter-cyclical behavior of applications to graduate school. <NAME>, ["Fewer People Are Applying to U.S. Business Schools"](https://www.usnews.com/education/best-graduate-schools/top-business-schools/articles/2018-11-05/what-fewer-applications-to-us-business-schools-means-for-mba-hopefuls), US News, Nov 5, 2018 > > From a U.S. domestic prospective, historically, U.S. business school > application volume has run countercyclical to the economy," Basye > wrote in an email. "In times of higher unemployment or job loss, > people often go back to school. In times of full employment or high > GDP growth – like right now – opportunity costs are higher to leave a > job and return to school. > > > <NAME>, ["Harvard, Stanford, other top MBA schools see applications drop"](https://www.foxbusiness.com/features/harvard-stanford-other-top-mba-schools-see-applications-drop), Fox Business, October 1, 2018 > > <NAME>, president and CEO at GMAC, notes that historically > business school application volume have often run counter cyclical to > current economic trends and indicators. And the current low > unemployment rate means “young professionals have an increased > opportunity cost of leaving their jobs in pursuit of an advanced > degree,” Chowfla said. > > > <NAME>, ["Is Enrollment into Graduate School Affected by the Business Cycle?"](http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.648.7093&rep=rep1&type=pdf), Department of Economics, Stanford, May 11, 2009 > > The findings show that the effect of the business cycle on First-time > First-professional enrollment follows a relatively consistent > counter-cyclical pattern. More specifically, a 1% increase in > employment growth is associated with a 4.09% decrease in enrollment, > while a 1% increase in GDP growth corresponds to a 2.04% decrease in > First-time First-professional enrollment. Finally, 1% increases in > personal income growth and personal disposable income growth are > associated with 1.68% and 1.30% decreases in First-time > First-professional enrollment respectively. > > > <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, ["Rethinking the MBA: Business Education at a Crossroads"](https://books.google.com/books?id=tweeShyvdCwC&pg=PA6&dq=counter%20cyclical%20enrollment%20in%20mba%20programs&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjVhfm4ndbiAhUFDq0KHdpLD3gQ6AEIUzAI#v=onepage&q=counter%20cyclical%20enrollment%20in%20mba%20programs&f=false), Harvard Business Press, April 22, 2010 > > Because MBA programs are often viewed by young people, especially > those with few other career options, as a safe harbor for weathering > economic storms, business school applications have historically been > countercyclical. > > > Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: I would know nothing about this issue except for the link that BrianH provided in a comment to an [Inside Higher Ed article](https://www.insidehighered.com/admissions/article/2019/02/04/new-data-help-explain-decline-mba-applications). I found it quite interesting; here are the top perceived reasons for the fall in admissions from a survey of admissions officials at 150 MBA programs: > > * International students are "concerned about the current political climate" in the U.S.: 31 percent. > * The strong job market in the U.S.: 30 percent. > * The cost of an M.B.A.: 17 percent. > * Questions about the value of the M.B.A.: 13 percent. > * The lack of one-year M.B.A. programs in the United States: 7 percent. > * The perception that fewer jobs require an MBA than in years past: 3 percent. > > > Regarding the top reason in that list, the very last line of that article has what I think is an important qualifying detail: > > A study by the Graduate Management Admission Council found declines in > application volume for M.B.A. programs but gains for those in Asia, > Canada and Europe. > > > Here's a link to the article on that specific topic, titled, ["M.B.A. Applications Drop (Except Outside the U.S.)"](https://www.insidehighered.com/admissions/article/2018/10/08/applications-mba-programs-us-are-falling). Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: From watching the MBA market for over 15 years: 1. Applications to MBA programs tend to be countercyclical to the economy. The economy is still (remarkably) strong today, and many people choose to keep their jobs. When we get an economic shock like the 2007-2008 era, app volumes to business schools go up. Apps tend to go down when the economy is stable(r). [![admissions data - Harvard Business School](https://i.stack.imgur.com/OwPjN.png)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/OwPjN.png) 2. The current US political environment has had an impact on interest in US schools from international applicants. That's likely behind the large swings in app volumes in the US going down, and going up elsewhere, including Canada, the UK, and Asia. The factors include not just the political climate and, since Charlottesville especially, a concern about safety in the US and that it's unwelcoming to foreigners and non-whites (source: anecdotes shared by applicants privately), and also the reticence of major US employers in taking on the visa process for internationals (this has been tracked by organizations like GMAC and NACE, among others). 3. Average starting salaries have gone UP at most top American schools for the Class of 2018 and, probably will prove to be at an all-time high for the Class of 2019; data TBA. The MBA and other practical, business-focused master's degrees are still very valued by employers in this economy and by Millenials and Gen Z. 4. Top business schools tend to be profitcenters for the parent university based on ability to attract big fees through executive education (see: [HBS financial reports](https://www.hbs.edu/about/financialreport/2018/Pages/default.aspx)). This caused many lower-ranked schools to pile into the bschool market. There are somewhat different factors at play but it's similar to the crash of the law school market, in that lower-tier schools won't survive when the market shrinks; they're the ones, obviously, who suffer the most when application volumes decrease. Haven't seen news of any actual MBA programs closing down recently though, so not sure where OP got that part of the headline. tl;dr: App volumes are going down for U.S. schools due to politics, American corporate hiring practices, and due to predictable and expected economic factors. This doesn't mean that the MBA is not still in demand or valued by either employers or by students themselves, nor is there any evidence that the best American business schools are in trouble or at risk of failing. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: In [this comment](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/131572/why-are-mba-programs-closing-in-the-united-states#comment349688_131574), you say > > ... to the point where b-schools would shut down, though? That suggests more than just the result of low unemployment, no? I have in mind a permanent shift away from b-school education, but I'm not sure; it's not like the skill sets gotten from b-school are analogous to skills in ... coal mining? investment bankers, private equity analysts, marketing / product managers are still very much needed, and MBA programs train for those careers, right? I don't have an MBA so am not sure. > > > ### Uneven distribution I think that you misunderstand the problem. Let's say there are three business schools total. They are called * Wharton (University of Pennsylvania). * <NAME> (Duquesne University). * Rosemont College. I got these from [this list](https://www.topmanagementdegrees.com/rankings/best-mba-pa/). I picked Pennsylvania because I know that Wharton is often ranked first in the nation. So I am using these as proxies for a very good, average, and weak business school (which may not be true about Rosemont). Now, let's say that each school can support a thousand students. So in a year with good demand of more than three thousand, they are all turning away students. Now, let's consider a year of subpar demand. Instead of more than three thousand applicants, there are only two thousand. What happens? Wharton continues to take a thousand applicants. Because everyone wants to go there. It's the best. Palumbo takes a thousand applicants who either didn't get into Wharton or didn't even try. Because it's preferred to Rosemont. Rosemont gets zero applicants who don't go to either Wharton or Palumbo instead. Rosemont goes out of business. Now, in reality things aren't so clear. Some people will want to go to Rosemont because it is common to pursue an MBA while working and Rosemont happens to be near their job. And Wharton may not lower its standards to take the full enrollment. And price may matter as well. Wharton may charge more. But all this just shifts the problem. If Ivy League schools have to maintain a certain minimum standard, then the tenth best Ivy might take the place of Rosemont in this example. But it doesn't really matter. If a college has to lower its standards and still only gets half as many applicants, it can't keep the program running. Because even if the industry is only off 10%, you will find that a large number of schools keep their enrollment steady while a few schools drop a lot. Those few schools go out of business. ### Business is not a career choice Another issue is that investment bankers and private equity analysts aren't necessarily business school graduates. Equity analysts are often [physicists](https://physicsworld.com/a/quantitative-finance-whats-it-really-all-about/), because there is hefty math needed. Investment bankers may be lawyers or accountants (or have a degree in banking, finance, or economics). An MBA is not so much for a career choice. An MBA is more of a tool for someone who has experience in a job and has started into management. Now they get the MBA so as to be able to get promoted into a better managerial position. That's why people with jobs get MBAs. But if someone is laid off, they might also pursue an MBA. Because if the job market is tight, they can't find a job right now and might just as well try to improve themselves. It's that group that is counter-cyclical. An MBA might be that thing they never had time to do. But in a slow economy, they have that time. Another issue is that if there is a shortage of business school graduates, many of the jobs that they do do not actually require an MBA. If the MBA provides useful training, it might be possible to replace it with on the job training. Because an MBA is necessarily a general degree, while a specific job might only need a small subset of that education. Another issue is that to some extent, the schools have to compete with businesses for professors. In a good economy, professors' salaries may increase because they get offers from businesses. If the schools want to keep their professors, the schools may have to increase salaries. Which can be problematic if they are also facing falling enrollment. Increasing costs and falling revenues is a recipe for bankruptcy. In a bad economy, the reverse happens. People who have the qualifications to be professors get laid off from their jobs and return to academia because it happens to be hiring. And now a college might launch a business school because they can. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/06	1,544	6,567	<issue_start>username_0: In this forum, I am reading this great question ([What is required of a mathematics referee?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/131532/what-is-required-of-a-referee)) by a user with the name mathprofessor. There is an answer by a user with the name Buffy which starts with: > > Sorry, but if that's all you do, then your reviewing career is likely to be short, ending the first time you approve a paper that is revealed to have an error. > > > I am wondering now: How exactly can somebody's career as a reviewer end after some paper they reviewed is revealed to have an error? Sure, the editor who assigned the reviewer may not assign them ever again, but how exactly are other editors (maybe from different journals) notified not to take them as a reviewer ever again? Is there some way the editor who knows is allowed to reveal the reviewer's identity? Or some higher authority they can talk to? Or how does that work out in practice? Let us assume the following: If the answer is field-specific, let us assume we are talking about math. Moreover, as in the other question, let us assume there is no fraud going on -- the author made a honest (but big) error in the paper, and the referee was too sloppy in their report and did not note the error. Additional question: Are there known cases where reviewers had to end their reviewing career because they did not notice an error? Again, I am assuming no fraud is going on. Edit: I want to say that the user with name Buffy edited the answer in question and made a much weaker claim. This solves my confusion. Thank you very much, Buffy!<issue_comment>username_1: No, the answer is simply that @buffy is wrong. In reality, editors work hard to find anyone willing to review a paper. They will be hesitant to exclude anyone. In most fields reviewers are anonymous, so only one publisher will know if a reviewer does a bad job. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: The answer-fragment OP quoted is incorrect. Making a mistake while reviewing is not likely to lead to the end of your reviewing career. This comes from several angles (we neglect the possibility that the editors are hard-pressed to find reviewers): 1. In most fields you can't realistically be expected to verify everything in the paper yourself. For example if you receive a paper about a new discovery at the Large Hadron Collider, you can't be expected to build your own Large Hadron Collider, run the experiments yourself, and verify the discovery. It's simply not possible. 2. In most fields, there is [some level of good faith](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_affair#Publication) assumed between the authors and the journal. The journal will not assume the author is actively attempting to deceive them (until proven otherwise). They will assume the author did perform the experiment. Therefore if [you accept a paper that turns out to be a fraud](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sch%C3%B6n_scandal), nobody is going to hold it against you. 3. Finally, only the journal that you review for is likely to know your identity. No other journal will know (unless you go public). It's possible [editors will tell each other not to invite a certain reviewer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/117583/is-it-ethical-to-share-a-controversial-reason-for-declining-to-review-with-other), or perhaps if they are sharing the same reviewer pool, but there's no central repository of "bad reviewers" or anything like that. In practice you'll only start receiving fewer reviewer invitations (i.e. reviewing career ended) if: 1. You retire or pass away. 2. You make it known that you're not reviewing anymore, e.g. with a notice on your website. 3. You become research inactive, e.g. by not publishing new papers for a while. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Well, not feeling obliged to review other people's papers anymore sounds like a nice deal so if you figure out an answer tell me. Unfortunately, there won't be one. Not only do I know plenty of mathematicians who have approved papers with errors in them but I've known a number of mathematicians who were well-respected in the community despite the fact that everyone figured there was something like a 1 in 8 chance that the main claim of any paper of theirs would turn out to be fatally wrong. I can't say for certain that I've done it since obviously I would have flagged the error if I'd seen it and errors are so common that no one even mails the author for non-critical errors and a reviewer likely won't even be told if a fatal flaw in the proof is later found. Hell, I've been halfway through extending people's published work only to email the author a question and find out that the proof is in shambles and they are struggling to find a patch. So it's literally the exact opposite situation where the total absence of errors is what would be unusual. Indeed, I don't know anyone who has reviewed more than one or two math papers who hasn't approved a paper with an error. Studies suggest that something like 80% of published math papers contain some form of error (that's not a fatal error but still). Sorry if I don't remember the source on that study but I'm sure if you google it you can find the relevant info. --- Note that I think this is a compelling reason that mathematicians should completely abandon the blind peer review process in favor of something like a math social network with up and down votes. Yes, still have two independent individuals read the paper and submit comments and demands for clarification but don't throw out all that the reviewers have learned by collapsing the judgement down to accept/reject. The mathematician I was thinking of with the frequent errors still did good work but often pursued proofs that were particularly knotty and difficult to check. The reviewers were well aware that certain parts of these proofs raised yellow flags but they couldn't specifically show there were any flaws and, since tenured professors aren't always willing to break things down to a tedious level or formality, I agree publication was the right call. However, a math social network could have passed along the reviewer's sentiment that they still have some reservations about the argument in part X moreover, the initial review will matter less since the accumulation of comments and the ability to use all professional mathematical readers of the paper as a crowdsourced continuing review will do more to help us build a mathematical edifice we are sure is true. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
2019/06/07	697	3,127	<issue_start>username_0: I know I graduated from the university many moons ago, but my wife has been attending community college for awhile and wants to transfer to an online program with Arizona State University (ASU). My understanding is when you transfer from one institution of higher learning to another you transfer your transcripts. I am not sure how did conversation asking my wife for her high school transcripts from her country of origin, where she has to get them notarized and translated and what not ended up as part of the conversation. It's a given she did this once already as that is how you get into a US accredited local community college already. So can anyone help me out here because otherwise I am thinking they are hearing an accent and asking her what they shouldn't and just going down a road of treating her like she is some international student who is trying to apply to school here.<issue_comment>username_1: You may be suspecting racism where there is none (just lack of common sense and/or inflexible procedures). I have in the past had to submit transcripts and diplomas in the most non-sensical circumstances, independently of whether I applied in a foreign country or where I am a natural born citizen. Examples include having to provide high school diplomas in addition to undergraduate and graduate degrees, having to provide diplomas and transcripts to the same university that originally issued them, and being asked for diplomas that were not required for the position and that I never claimed to have. All in all, asking for a specific, and not necessarily well-maintained, checklist of documents is part of the normal procedure for admission and hiring processes. Unless it is particularly annoying or expensive to deliver these documents I would just comply and think no further of it. If it is very cumbersome to acquire the documents you can see if they can make a "common-sense" exception. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The latest degree matters ------------------------- She's joining a new institution from scratch. If she hasn't graduated anything else, the new college is admitting a high school graduate, and they want to see these transcripts to verify that she is a high school graduate. They have no reason to assume that some other organization did the verification in the way they require. They may have some process to transfer (partial) credits for courses completed in the previous college, but that happens after she's been admitted. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I can add some weight to what username_2 has mentioned but from a Canadian perspective. My highschool chemistry teacher initially did his degree in pharmacy, opened his own business, and lived a life as a fairly successful pharmacist. Once he got bored with that, he went back to university as a teacher (at the same school he got his pharmacy degree in) and they were admitting him based on his highschool qualifications. It seems silly, but the system needs to be easily applied to every applicant to handle the volume that a university does. Upvotes: 1
2019/06/07	594	2,491	<issue_start>username_0: According to my offer, I am admitted to the Ph.D program and funded by a Research Assistantship by Professor X. Nevertheless, I am interested in other research directions, and we are supposed to decide our adviser by the end of the first semester. Is it appropriate to change adviser in my case, as I am funded by Professor X?<issue_comment>username_1: By rights, you can (in most universities). However, it will be super-awkward. It seems like you did not enter the program through a scholarship but with a job (RA-ship) to fund your studies. This is an academic way of saying, "I give you a job. I also admit you in the program." Therefore, you are free to choose any supervisor but you need to keep your job as your source of income (you eat, wear-cloths and sleep under roof, right?). Your current supervisor is your reporting officer for your job. Best is to have an open-talk with your current supervisor. Usually, they are understanding and (though hard to believe) supportive. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: It is usually possible, but plan for two things to happen: * [Almost certain] You will lose this RA-stipend. RAs are usually in the context of specific projects and under the supervision of specific advisors, so when you decide to work on an entirely different project with a different position (which is typically your right as a PhD student) you become ineligible to be funded in this way. You need to understand that most RAs come from projects, where a PI has promised to a funding agency or company that a certain project will be delivered within a time frame. If you then decide to work on something else, the PI needs to find another person to actually do the work that has been promised. Note that this does not necessarily mean that you won't have a stipend anymore, but it will likely need to be a different source (e.g., either a TA position or an RA sponsored by your new advisor). * [Possible] There may be some fallout with the PI sponsoring the RA. I guess most people can accept that sometimes the first year shows that you are not an ideal fit and switching advisors is the best solution for everybody, but planning to switch all along when accepting the offer may understandably lead to some bad blood. In essence, you are trying to milk a year of funding out of a project you have no intention of actually contributing to long-term. Many people will find this highly disagreeable. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2019/06/07	2,155	9,559	<issue_start>username_0: During my bachelor I did a research internship in another country for a few months and contributed to a research project which is now, a few years later, going to be published. The research is in a specific field of computer science, but the responsible professors' main interest is focused in another STEM area. So now his grad student approached me and asked if I would review the paper. I read it and I think the quality is not good. There are many writing errors, the papers to which the results are being compared are quite old (around 6 years) and the datasets used to evaluate the algorithms are from the 90's. This is quite old in a fast growing field like computer science. The techniques which were used are correct, as far as I can judge, but not new. I know that the professor and his grad student are no experts in this field but I now pursue my masters degree in this specific field of computer science. I recently learned about more modern approaches and I think that their methods are not worth being published in a paper. I wasn't experienced enough to notice this when I was with them in this internship. It would also be too much work for me to fix all these issues I named. Now I wonder if it could give me, as a computer scientist, a bad reputation to eventually co-author a paper which (I think) is outdated and poorly written. Can I decline being named but allow them to publish it? On the other hand, if I would be named as a co-author, this would be my first publication and maybe this would count as "better than nothing", or people would acknowledge the fact that I contributed to some okay-ish research in my early bachelors. I am not sure yet if I want to pursue a career in science or in the industry.<issue_comment>username_1: First, if you think the manuscript is not worth submitting even after major revisions, or in other words, if you as a referee would recommend its rejection, then the answer is clear - you shouldn't be coauthor. However it seems that you evaluate the manuscript as ok-ish, and the main concern is that its content is somehow outdated. I would do what your old group asked you to do: review and possibly improve the paper. Do this to the maximum extent you can - given the fact that your are likely busy with other tasks and research - and then leave the main responsibility to the first author and your old group. After all, you are still a young student / researcher. This paper could be your first entry in your publication list, and some more time and more papers have to come before you get concerned about your papers being all of the very best quality. A published paper normally cannot be too wrong, and various journals can accommodate different quality or differently tailored papers. So perhaps try to influence also the choice of where to submit, especially to avoid a non-ending revision phase. At this stage of your career, you can only benefit from a published article. To those who read it, it will show that you actively entered the research of a group even when you were younger than now. To the rest of the community, it will be just a publication. And that is better than no publications. The main point is how much you can improve it, and if there is space for it. As a "publish as it is" decision seems to be highly unlikely, you must be prepared to work on it further. But again, leave the responsibility to the group from which the research originated. See it as an opportunity to publish, and not as an annoyance. The above applies to a salvageable manuscript. For a better and definitive answer I should be a specialist in your field and evaluate the manuscript myself. Rejection would also fix the issue. Although I always tried to avoid rejection even as coauthor, I don't think it should be your concern at this stage. Nobody will know except the referees, and even they won't blame or remember you. edit: I want to make clear that the recipient journal should not be a predatory one, or one with such a low reputation that is not worth working to publish therein. The above answer assumed this. Also, above I wrote " A published paper normally cannot be too wrong, and various journals...". Beside that "normally" means what should be the normality, this doesn't mean that errors and, even worse, frauds, have no room in literature. It must be seen a concern for the whole community and is not related to the OP situation. If the manuscript will be accepted, it will most likely stand as an acceptable paper, indeed. Not to say that the manuscript is in the hands of the OP. With this respect, the paper cannot be too wrong already. Otherwise there wouldn't be this thread. Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Being co-author on a paper is formal acknowledgement that you endorse the publication of the paper. I would not accept this if you feel there are major errors. Can you request an acknowledgement (in the acknowledgements section) so you have some formal record of your contribution to this work, but without exposing yourself to potential issues of being an author of a bad paper? Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Another thing to consider: depending on the fine details of the publication in question, it may be possible for you to fix as much as you can before submission, wait for the feedback, and then make additional fixes. I'm not suggesting that you submit a paper with errors in methodology/conclusions, but rather that reviewers may be willing to work with a paper that has a good method / conclusion, but needs to be improved for readability. No, it's not an ideal submission; yes, it's more likely to get rejected if it's too hard to read. But, spending your time on methods / conclusions while ignoring readability errors might be a way to move forward and take advantage of the opportunity while not devoting more time than you currently have. In other words, can you prioritize your time and submit, knowing that it's a process, rather than thinking your initial submission will be what goes into the publication? Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I would write them a letter saying that my name should be removed from the excellent paper, because I cannot find in it any contribution that came from me, and therefore it would be dishonest for me to obtain credit from it. In other words, hide your real motive under a generous heap of its precise opposite. If they give you assurances that it's okay, insist that you might be questioned about that paper (for instance in some future interview), which will create an uncomfortable situation for you. The real reason (wanting to withdraw from a mediocre paper out of embarrassment) will likely create a bad feeling. It is unnecessary "collateral damage" in pursuit of the simple goal of getting your name removed. In life, try to get things done without collateral damage, whenever possible. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: > > On the other hand, if I would be named as a co-author, this would be my first publication and maybe this would count as "better than nothing", or people would acknowledge the fact that I contributed to some okay-ish research in my early bachelors. > > > In general these considerations are probably more important. The "not-too-bad" (although you have assessed the paper as "too-bad") is better than the ideal. Most people don't have ideal situations and need to make the best of what they have. Potentially publication might give you something to work on further. If you are unsure about pursuing academic work, it kind of doesn't matter. Most of my work life a single published paper on work I did as an undergrad was helpful in interviews in industry. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: As you have described the situation, you have been offered inclusion as a co-author in exchange for reviewing the paper. My feeling is that a courtesy has been extended to you, and where no obligation to do so exists. If you feel comfortable enough in your relationship with the actual authors, voice your concerns in as diplomatic manner as possible. You should probably be prepared for any criticisms you offer (positive or otherwise) to be ill-received. Regardless, the paper will - in all likelihood - be submitted for publications, and with, or without you as a co-author. That choice is solely at the discretion of the principle investigator. Additionally, poor quality will not necessarily be a bar to publication: if 'where' it is published is a concern for you, (that is also outside of your control), perhaps you should decline to be included amongst the co-authors. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Applying known stuff to applications outside of your field is of much value, especially for theoretic fields like Math, Computer Science, or Physics. For such papers its less about being on par with the latest research in the original field, but to identify problems where new methods can be applied. It is often difficult for people from applied fields to understand all the theory and to grasp the downsides or subtle problems that might prohibit the use of a method. You helped them with this difficult task. It might not be difficult for you, but they seems to value it. Accept the paper's co-authorship and rest assured, there will be people graceful that you shared your knowledge and translated to a way they can understand. And for the future, always look for possibilities to apply your knowledge. Others might not know about and can profit from it. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/07	1,282	5,493	<issue_start>username_0: I am a third year PhD Student in math. I am studying abroad from my country. I need some advice. I have three main problems that I would like to share with you. 1) It seems, I will be graduated with 1 published paper. As you know, finding postdoc position is so difficult even though I would really like to keep doing research in mathematics. Do you have any advice to me for 1 year left of my PhD so that I can get postdoc position easier than now? 2) My supervisor would not like to work with me. Moreover, he is so busy. Whenever I can ask questions from him, he thought about my questions at that moment, not anymore. I found out I have to work by myself. Unfortunately, I do not have enough experience to work myself and I need to work with someone. I decided to work some mathematician who I met them in some conference. I had some bad experience. Would you please tell me how can I talk to some mathematician so that we make a paper together? In particular, I will meet a great mathematician that I have been following his work since 2017. I made some progress and i would like to show him and convince him to work with me. 3) How much I am good in my field, I am terrible in other branches of mathematics. Let me give an example that show that my question clear. I do high level things in mathematics but I forgot some basic things from other branches that I have learnt several years ago, such as graph, Algebra,number theory,... Is it bad things? What is your advice?<issue_comment>username_1: It seems to me that none of your problems are especially unusual. They just come together to make it hard to advance. First, not being very adept outside your specialty is very common. It has been about 100 years since anyone could understand all of mathematics. Extreme specialization is normal. Of course, it is good to retain basic things, but deep knowledge in your specialty is the most important thing for a researcher. My own experience is that mathematical insight is not general, but specific to some small set of fields. For me, Analysis and Topology came fairly naturally, but Algebra was always a struggle. Second, I think it is also common for students visiting other countries to find difficulties. Especially if there are language or cultural differences, though you don't indicate that as a problem. But your advisor not having enough time for you or being willing to give you some efforts is a serious problem. If you are inexperienced and not finding help it is difficult to advance. My advice would be to try, somehow, to solve the advisor problem, either with this same person or finding another. It might not be too extreme to move to a different university to find the help you need, actually. Expensive and disruptive, of course. But in today's market, you do probably need some more publications, but that might depend on the quality of the one you have. One way, that you already recognize, is to collaborate and, perhaps, write joint papers. If there is no one at your current university suitable for this then it is much harder, so again, another university might be a better option. But, as for contacting other mathematicians, you need to ask, but you also need to give them a reason to want to look at your work. This might be hard or not, but it is easier if you are familiar with their work and can make suggestions about how it might be improved and extended. You don't explain the bad experiences you already had with this, of course. But, you could send this new potential collaborator your work and ask for feedback on it. If the feedback is positive, you could ask whether collaboration is possible. But even if it is negative, you can ask if the person can give you some direction for your studies - papers to read, for example. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I was in your exact position couple of years back, not that the supervisor didn't want to work with me; rather he left the university and I had no supervision!; and I had to finish up and defend my thesis. So here's my advice to you: 1. Start Your Thesis: You have to start writing your thesis right now! It is a toxic environment when you are 2+ years in and the supervisor is not responsive; and you are still trying to figure things out. So, have a template, and start adding things; and so on. Time is running out and you are responsible for your thesis at the end of the day. 2. Regular Meetings: Send calendar invite to your supervisor for a weekly meeting. If he is not responsive you must inform the head of research group. If you don't you cant say "well my supervisor is unresponsive for the last 4 years and I need to finish my PhD" they will ask you why you didn't inform them sooner. You might ask: what about papers? Well, you could take part of your unfinished thesis and turn it into a paper. Ideally we want to make papers and write a thesis about it. But when time is running out and you have no direction by the supervisor, you must start writing your thesis, to see what parts of your work need more focus. That's it! Two important points to finish up your PhD. Finding a postdoc position is not your problem at the moment! You need to finish off your PhD first. Being a Postdoc is not that different from a PhD, what are you going to do if the supervisor is busy again? You need to develop your skills first. So, finish up your thesis and think about defending it, as soon as you can. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/07	862	3,736	<issue_start>username_0: My girlfriend and I am in the same college, but different major. She is a law school master student. She just graduated from the master program and wanted to transfer to juris doctor in the same college. I am wondering if it is appropriate for me to write the dean of law school a letter in support of her application. Also, I am not sure what to write in the letter if appropriate. I would imagine saying that I would love to be able to continue studying with my girlfriend in the same college and things like that. Would you have any suggestions? Thank you in advance!<issue_comment>username_1: I think it would be a bad idea, actually. Letters supporting applications normally come from professors or employers. The institution is interested in her prospects for success as represented by her previous record and what people in a position to evaluate those prospects have to say. Your personal relationship actually gets in the way of that. At best it would be noise in the application process. At worst, they might look at her in a less favorable right. Ethically, you would have to reveal your relationship and that would make it a bit awkward. Wish her well in her application, but keep out of the process. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You may. But is it going to help? Usually, the recommender has a higher qualification than the person to be recommended. Apparently, this is not the case in your situation. Also, it would seem that personal distance is a factor as well -- of course one recommends friends and family members. In my opinion, the recommender should be related to the person to be recommended on a professional level. And finally, I doubt that it being nice and convenient if your girl friend could continue her studies is the reason for recommendation they are looking for -- it should be more about skills and experience. As to what belongs into a letter of recommendation, there are several samples you can find on several help pages. In my opinion, the items mentioned above are the most important: * Where do you know the person from and how long? (Work, school, university, ...) * What is your relationship to the person? (Teacher-Student, Boss-Employee, ...) * What are the qualifications of the person and why can you recommend her? Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Just say no. No, it's not appropriate. This is not even close. She might as well ask her mother to write the LOR. "She was such a good girl growing up." It's possible it might not get discovered but if it is, I expect it would (should!) quickly tank her application before most admissions committees. She needs to find references who can speak to her qualifications without this obvious conflict of interest. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: You are "allowed to", but you would disserve her by doing so, for several reasons. First, unless by some chance you are a relatively senior person in her field, your opinions on her prospects for success are of little interest to people making admissions decisions. Second, the very fact that she would have no one more helpful than you to write a letter for her would signal to the admissions committee that she is not a good candidate. In fact, her apparent willingness to have such an unhelpful and inappropriate letter writer would signal a serious misunderstanding on her part about "how things work". No doubt: don't do it. You "can" do it, but it would harm, rather than help, her case, in a huge way. There are indeed certain quasi-unspoken rules, if you like... and, whether or not one likes it, the game is played by rules not set by the novice players... and not so easily changed by any of them. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
2019/06/08	322	1,326	<issue_start>username_0: It is often the case that the proposal of a specific idea or approach to a problem (or whole field of research) triggers a sequel of papers discussing and extending this idea. In this sequel there are papers (probably two or three) that are established as "basic", as points of reference. Each one of them may be usefull in more than one directions of research. However the whole set of "basic" papers is characteristic of the discussion. In this perspective the most efficient way to follow an approach or school of research is to search for articles that cite these (two or three) "basic" papers. However, according to [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/28164/how-to-search-for-list-of-papers-citing-both-papers-a-and-b) question this option is not available, but one has to write some Python code. That was a year ago. Is there any new user-friendly alternative?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes... sort of. Use a custom search in Google with a combination of operators like exact terms, 'and', etc. Not necessarily Google scholar. It will give general answers that can be used to get what you want. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Do a search in proper websites, like Science direct. Also, have a look at the ranking of the journal the article was published in. Upvotes: 1
2019/06/08	623	2,827	<issue_start>username_0: I submitted a paper to a low to mid-tier online-only journal in my field last January. I did not receive any acknowledgment from the editors that they received my paper and the journal has already published papers that were submitted after I submitted mine. Having been busy since January I forgot to ask the editors for an update. I was only able to send an email a week ago, and I still did not receive a reply. Should I submit my paper to a different journal or should I wait a bit more for a reply?<issue_comment>username_1: Give them another week, then decide. Sending two messages within one week may be considered as pushy, I would try to avoid this. However, if you have serious concerns about the status of the paper it may be justified nevertheless. Whether or not your concerns are serious depends on the history so far: if you have not received any notification at all (via any submission system or similar), then maybe the paper actually got lost. Personally, I would have contacted the editor earlier since in my field the review duration is 2-3 months -- of course, this may be different in your discipline. Some journals state certain statistics on their web page, such as the time from submission to the first decision. This gives you a hint what time spans you can expect until your paper is reviewed. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Not receiving an email reply after a week isn't unusual, but not receiving any communication for five months is. A short (days) wait for that email might be worth it, but simply waiting generally is unlikely to be fruitful. I would take steps to prepare to submit elsewhere while you wait for the reply. But if you do decide to submit to a different journal, make sure that you formally withdraw your paper from this one to avoid problems of multiple submissions. But, it is possible, perhaps even likely, that something has gone wrong and your paper was either submitted incorrectly or somehow lost. You should have gotten at least an acknowledgement that it was submitted. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I agree that 5 months is a long time without any information. Definitely inquire and in the meantime, prepare it for another journal. I would even consider calling someone (editor? administrative personnel?) if you can find a number, but honestly if it comes to that, I would consider submitting it elswhere. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: I would contact the journal first if I were you. Bear in mind, submit one manuscript to two journals at the same time is a big no-no in the academic field. So contact that journal, ask what happened, or even request to cancel your submission. You haven't heard anything from 5 months, this is highly weird. I've never met this kind of problem. Upvotes: 1
2019/06/08	1,242	5,064	<issue_start>username_0: Next november I will face my third and last year of my PhD. However, my percourse has been torturing and twisted. I started my PhD in a different group because I was kind of tricked out. My background is molecular biology and microbiology and I ended up in a group about biosensors, which was essentially sensors - nothing bio. The group did not have any senior researcher nor postdoc so essentially we were alone and the supervisor was not there. I switched group after almost a year to food microbiology. In that period I got another PhD position but I was so stupid to refuse it. However, I was doing fine during the first month in the new group. After some time, I got results that were the contrary of our hypotheresis and I am stuck without any result since then. I must mention that my cosupervisors do not help and mostly critisice my work without knowing about that particular techniques. However, when I do something wrong they are supposed to know, they do not tell me anything, which causes losing months of time. One of them even tried to down my work in front of our boss. Also another important fact, is that our university is so bad organized that the reagents and stuff take 2 motnhs to arrive after you order something. At this point I have no results after more than a year and a half and my PhD last for 3 years. My cosupervisors are causing me incredible delay and I am just seeing a big failure at the end because they require three submited papers. I end up in a psicologist, I work every weekend and I dont remember the last day I had free since months. I started applying for jobs because the PhD is not giving me any knowledge at all, just monkey lab work togheter with people who disturb and try to mess around with my very small outcomes. I just write here because I dont know whether if I can keep going like this anymore. Should I just quit even if I am jobless afterwards? Should I keep pushing harder? Is this even normal? I dont see any other PhD like this here..<issue_comment>username_1: Would it be possible to switch labs again? It sounds like the the problem with the first lab was the research area/topic was inappropriate and it sounds like the people in the second lab are being inappropriate. As for your results, well, that happens sometimes and a good PI should be able to know how to handle that (it's kind of required for grant writing, after all). Do you have an advisor that is part of the PhD program but not connected with your research. If you have a thesis committee, there really should be someone that fits that description already. Perhaps that person could advise you and give you specific advice. It's hard to give advice without knowing your location and more about your background, capabilities, and goals. Sticking with the PhD program or leaving is always a difficult decision to make for anyone, regardless of the circumstances, if that helps at all. It sounds like your situation is legitimately bad, so good luck and let us know what you decide! Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: > > I started applying for jobs because the PhD is not giving me any > knowledge at all, just monkey lab work togheter with people who > disturb and try to mess around with my very small outcomes. > > > This is called a toxic work environment! It is not specific to research/academia only, but it is a general problem. Unfortunately, it is not good for mental health to stay in this kind of work environment. > > I just write here because I dont know whether if I can keep going like > this anymore. Should I just quit even if I am jobless afterwards? > Should I keep pushing harder? > > > Pardon my words: if your supervisor is not aware of the status of your work, you shouldn't be a laboratory mouse for your supervisor. However don't jump out of PhD without any plan. 1. Discuss with our supervisor about the situation and your limits (time, funding, psychological issues). 2. Spend minimum 1 (and max. 2) hours every day for: 2.1 confiding to your friends that you are looking for a positive change by switching to a full-time proper scientific job; preparing your CV and looking for opportunities. 2.2 forging new connections and contacting recruiters, by using online platforms e.g. linkedin etc. A smooth transition may take sometime. So don't panic, don't be impatient. AND don't be apologetic for this tough time. Be confident when talking to people for job, otherwise the chances are very low that someone with low self-esteem will get a chance. > > Is this even normal? I don't see any other PhD like this here.. > > > Unfortunately this has become normal, and there are many victims. Not all are innocent, but without supervisor's support its almost impossible to complete PhD. So his role is critical. --- \* P.S: whatever is written above, is not hollow. I had to quit my PhD in 4th year due to amalgam of problems. And this is how I could rescue myself from PhD-whirpool and change to industry. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/08	968	3,557	<issue_start>username_0: I am using Mendeley to save my reference. And I find it seems that Mendeley does know the format of arxiv format. I find many papers use a format like this: ``` <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, et al. Searching for mobilenetv3. arXiv preprint arXiv:1905.02244, 2019. ``` Here is the link for the paper: <https://arxiv.org/abs/1905.02244> I wonder how can I get it to Mendeley? Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: Would it be possible to switch labs again? It sounds like the the problem with the first lab was the research area/topic was inappropriate and it sounds like the people in the second lab are being inappropriate. As for your results, well, that happens sometimes and a good PI should be able to know how to handle that (it's kind of required for grant writing, after all). Do you have an advisor that is part of the PhD program but not connected with your research. If you have a thesis committee, there really should be someone that fits that description already. Perhaps that person could advise you and give you specific advice. It's hard to give advice without knowing your location and more about your background, capabilities, and goals. Sticking with the PhD program or leaving is always a difficult decision to make for anyone, regardless of the circumstances, if that helps at all. It sounds like your situation is legitimately bad, so good luck and let us know what you decide! Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: > > I started applying for jobs because the PhD is not giving me any > knowledge at all, just monkey lab work togheter with people who > disturb and try to mess around with my very small outcomes. > > > This is called a toxic work environment! It is not specific to research/academia only, but it is a general problem. Unfortunately, it is not good for mental health to stay in this kind of work environment. > > I just write here because I dont know whether if I can keep going like > this anymore. Should I just quit even if I am jobless afterwards? > Should I keep pushing harder? > > > Pardon my words: if your supervisor is not aware of the status of your work, you shouldn't be a laboratory mouse for your supervisor. However don't jump out of PhD without any plan. 1. Discuss with our supervisor about the situation and your limits (time, funding, psychological issues). 2. Spend minimum 1 (and max. 2) hours every day for: 2.1 confiding to your friends that you are looking for a positive change by switching to a full-time proper scientific job; preparing your CV and looking for opportunities. 2.2 forging new connections and contacting recruiters, by using online platforms e.g. linkedin etc. A smooth transition may take sometime. So don't panic, don't be impatient. AND don't be apologetic for this tough time. Be confident when talking to people for job, otherwise the chances are very low that someone with low self-esteem will get a chance. > > Is this even normal? I don't see any other PhD like this here.. > > > Unfortunately this has become normal, and there are many victims. Not all are innocent, but without supervisor's support its almost impossible to complete PhD. So his role is critical. --- \* P.S: whatever is written above, is not hollow. I had to quit my PhD in 4th year due to amalgam of problems. And this is how I could rescue myself from PhD-whirpool and change to industry. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/08	978	4,223	<issue_start>username_0: I usually have a good instructor-class relationship, but I am also an admittedly easy instructor - in previous classes my assessments have been on the easy side of fair. This term I have set very high expectations for my class and the class is doing exceedingly well. I am very impressed by their progress and their learning and professionalism is showing very clearly. Unfortunately, the students aren't as happy as I'd like them to be. I am getting the feeling that I've encouraged excellence through fear, and I'm cultivating frustration. Students who were expecting an easy class are instead being challenged more than in previous years, and the workload is considerable. I would like to continue setting these expectations for my students, since I think the learning and progress is worth it. However, I also feel very strongly that the students should like and trust the instructor. What are some strategies I can use to increase student satisfaction while also maintaining very high standards? I should note a few things: * I'm asking this in general, but the current class I'm talking about is a required course that students in this major have historically not seen as being relevant. I am working to increase the relevance to their discipline. * I have communicated to the students that I'm very happy with their progress and very impressed by it.<issue_comment>username_1: Consider two aspects: 1. Students work hard without (too many) complaints and respecting the professor if they perceive that the professor is working hard too and that non only does they set expectations but also give a lot to the class, in terms of content (e.g. do you teach things they cannot easily find in textbooks or other similar classes?) and time. 2. If your class has been known by the students to be an easy class, it will take them two-three years to adapt to the new situation. Or, as once a student told me some years ago after an exam:"I feel ashamed for having studied so poorly after all the effort you put in the course". That said, you will always find unhappy students who would have liked to study less. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Let me second the post of [username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/131645/75368) and especially point 2. there. But you can do more. One way to keep students happy, both the really hard workers and the strugglers, is to give them a second chance when they fail to live up to standards. One way to do that is to permit students to resubmit work with corrections after grading. My experience is that you can be as demanding as you want to be as long as students don't feel trapped or disadvantaged by what they see as small errors. I've permitted students to resubmit work even after I've discussed the correct solutions in class. Just going through the motions of typing out the correct answers is an educational experience - reinforcement. I've usually permitted more than one resubmission of the same work. You need to set a limit, though, if students neglect new assignments to re-do old ones. A bit of balance is needed. To be fair to those who get it right, it is also useful to extract a bit of tax on the re-work. Say, only 90% of the difference between the first marks and the full marks can be achieved through rework. This also keeps people from being lazy about deadlines. Note, of course, that regrading requires that the number of students not be excessive and that you develop efficient ways to see what has been changed when re-work is submitted. I just had students submitting new work also submit the old (with my comments) as well as highlighting changes. --- But with respect to the point of students needing a while to learn to live up to new and higher standards, I also experienced this when I brought new and higher standards to a new job. Students in a Masters program had gotten the idea that good grades were pretty automatic. They were a bit shocked when I told them that it was possible for all to fail and that I would read and comment on all of their work. It required backup from the Dean, actually. But it didn't take too long in my case. Word spread quickly. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2019/06/09	3,772	14,960	<issue_start>username_0: In the next year I will (hopefully successfully) graduate from a PhD programme in pure mathematics. The location is (continental) Western Europe, the topic of the thesis is arithmetic geometry, if it matters. During my PhD experience I have found out the following things * being a pure math PhD student is a relatively stress-free existence for me. I can just waste all my time learning some math and occasionally writing some papers; * the stipend does suck but I am frugal person from a very poor country so I do not care that much (nor do I have a family to feed); * if I could, I would not mind spending what is left of my life in a PhD programme. In particular, I do not feel any intrinsic motivation to try to get a tenure-track position. The question is: is it feasible for me to keep applying and getting accepted to pure math PhD programmes before I die or decide to retire? To clarify, I don't really think that I will be a problematic student; during my PhD programme, I got 3 publications accepted in reasonable journals (rank A in AustMS ranking) and I think I could maintain a similar rate of work. Are there any "magic words" I could tell the committee that considers the applicants to improve my chances?<issue_comment>username_1: Holding a PhD in math would usually disqualify you from being admitted into a PhD program in mathematics. Even if it does not do so officially, I'd consider it next to impossible to get scholarships. That said, being a postdoc in math is not really much different from being a PhD student. However, even being a postdoc forever is not easy. Many funding sources have restrictions on how long ago your PhD may have been - after 5 years you already have fewer options, and continuing long after 10 years will see you face exclusion from many funding sources, as well as a strong social pressure to get a "proper" job (i.e., a faculty position). Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_2: In the U.S. at least, maybe also Canada and Western Europe, in science (math, physics, chemistry, etc.), contrary to legend, graduate school can be a very wonderful, low-stress, idealistic time of life, if one has no partner, no children, no mortgage, no car payments... to worry about, and simple tastes. On one hand, yes, in some ways grad students are exploited by The System (low pay), but, on the other hand, there is a short-term (5-year!?!) job security, interesting work, and no increase in (student-loan?) debt. And grad students are not terribly experience teachers nor researchers, so there is some kind of quid-pro-quo apart from the low salary. At my university, it is possible to maintain that lifestyle and employment style by being a "teaching specialist": low pay forever, substantive uncertainty about employment from term to term, but very low stress/responsibilities otherwise. Some people do apparently deliberately choose such a lifestyle. Why not? But, as @Karl mentions, if nothing else, what about planning for old age? Low pay-ins to pensions (and/or Social Security in the U.S., apart from other complications) will result in low pension payouts later. Part of the point here is that aiming at "postdoc in perpetuity" almost universally at best would collapse back to "getting paid like a grad student, with no security, no pension". In particular, not getting paid nearly as well as post-docs, in any case. So it's not that it's impossible to have that lifestyle, but that there are details and complications that would almost surely make you very unhappy later, without any option to go back in time and change things. (And, yes, I'm sympathetic to your impulse, not being very materialistic myself, etc., but the realities of aging (not to mention having a partner and kids or other dependents, possibly including one's own parents at some point) have long ago burst that bubble for me.) Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: As the others mention, staying in math would be hard, but if you keep jumping to closely related fields, then it should be possible. For instance, you might find a professor in Eletrical engineering or one of the other "mathy" fields who is working on a topic that requires only a little bit of domain-specific knowledge. I know a few people (less than 5) that have 2 PhDs. I think one of them was applying for a 3rd. They lived in a poorer Eastern European country, so the pay actually wasn't that bad. Furthermore, finding a job in industry would have been difficult due to their advanced skillset. So although getting more than one PhD sounds crazy, it wasn't actually that crazy if you think it through. In principle, the others are right though... a Postdoc is intended for people who want more academic training in the same field. EDIT: There are 2 overarching scenarios that I have seen lead to someone getting more than 1 PhD. We might as well enumerate those: 1. Vanity. In Germany, when you get a PhD of a certain type, you can call yourself Dr. (e.g. Dr. Foo). If you get 2 PhDs, then your title is Dr. Dr. Foo. And this could technically go on ad nauseam. Once I saw somebody who insisted on being addressed as Prof. Dr. Dr. XXX. In principle, you could be Dr. Dr. Dr. if you really wanted to (although this doesn't seem to be the desire here). 2. Some countries have very little industrial technical sophistication. So if somebody wants to stay in their country after a PhD, then they are almost forced to either take a mind-numbing job in industry, or try to find something in academia. However, due to the high number of people in a similar situation, jobs for professorships or other paid academic jobs are hard to come by. So in principle, if one is curious enough to explore other disciplines, then getting a PhD in another field is not such a bad option. I would imagine that at some point a professorship would open up to a person with 2+ PhDs, but there is also the question of whether you would want to become a professor. The work of a professor is often quite far removed from pure research. So if you want to only do research, being a professor is not necessarily a good path. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: There's no point in trying to do repeated Ph.D. programs in the same field when you can easily replicate the lifestyle you want in the normal way. If you don't want to pursue the tenure track, go to a less good institution and get a part-time teaching job. It won't be much money but it will likely be more than you made as a Ph.D. student. Continue your studies and publishing. You can work with folks from other insitutions in order to keep up your intellectual progress. There is no easier thing than finding a lifestyle that works for a smart, hard(ish) working, highly skilled person who is happy with an extremely low salary in a developed country. There is nothing special about a Ph.D. program except that it prepares you for better things. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I'm not going to answer the explicit question as others have done it pretty well, but I'd like to address the underlying assumption. > > being a pure math PhD student is a relatively stress-free existence for me. > > > But first, let me congratulate you for that! I don't have any data but I'm pretty sure that most PhD students wouldn't describe their PhD experience as stress-free... so good for you! > > During my PhD experience I have found out the following things > > > You have discovered things about yourself during the PhD. You will also discover new things about yourself after the PhD... even if what you do after the PhD is another PhD. What I mean is that you shouldn't be afraid of what happens after the PhD: you feel comfortable in this environment now so it's natural to wish to keep it, but actually it's likely that you will like other environments as well. Actually it looks like what you like is simply academia, so why not give a try to postdoc positions? A friend of mine used to say that a PhD is like an initiation ritual into "academic adulthood". For many PhD students the end of the PhD is a time for questioning: self-doubt is very common, fear about the future, sometimes even depression. While it's common to go through this stage, it's important to keep in mind that we might not always see things clearly about ourselves, especially at the end of a long-term project like a PhD. In my experience most people realize what they really have learned (including about themselves) during their PhD only after graduating, because it takes a bit of perspective to see the whole picture. In conclusion my advice is: don't be afraid, be open to opportunities and keep enjoying the science :) Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: There is someone who works in my office who actually seems to be doing just that. She is doing a second PhD even though she apparently already has one, but I'm not sure if there is some loophole because she obtained the first one in a different country or something like that. In general, it's not a viable option though. It's like having multiple Bachelor's degrees. Some people do have two Bachelor's degrees, where they somehow re-trained and paid for the second degree in order to change career paths. In the same way, they are likely people who have two PhD's (or equivalent) for some reason related to change of career path or something like that but in general living from one PhD to the next is not going to be possible any more than a person could just perpetually live doing one Bachelor degree after another: at some point funding is just not going to exist as you can't just fund someone to be a perpetual student indefinitely. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: To improve your chances, I would suggest you to move to a country where multiple doctorates (and titles) are seen as a positive. As far as I can tell, this is the case in my country, Austria (and especially in the humanities). I know a few people with two PhDs and also a few people with three. It's also not uncommon to see signs from lawyers or (medical doctors) displaying two PhDs. And, there is this guy: <https://www.nachrichten.at/oberoesterreich/Das-ist-Doktor-Doktor-Doktor-Doktor-Doktor-Doktor-Norbert-Heinel;art4,843952> (article from 2011 in German, professor with 6 PhDs, two more are planned). Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_8: You might consider making, for example, a PostDoc in some more or less computer science field. I guess you will be able to find a connection between arithmetic geometry and some kind of theoretical computer science. (I know [<NAME>](http://www.lix.polytechnique.fr/Labo/Emmanuel.Haucourt/publications--preacutesentations.html), a bright researcher and a very nice guy who made the connection between topological algebra and computer science) Then, I do also recommend to not only care about theory, but also a bit about practice (at least, being able to develop some [free software](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software) research prototype). I know excellent mathematicians who became computer science professors with a stellar-level software engineering ability (one of them is [<NAME>](http://www.cs.unipr.it/~bagnara/), the architect of the [PPL](https://www.bugseng.com/parma-polyhedra-library)....) With such a resume, even if you don't stay in pure academia, you will continue doing a lot of math. Both in industry (think of large corporations like IBM or Google or MicroSoft or SAP) or in applied research institutions (like [Fraunofer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraunhofer_Society) institutes). The point is that, at high enough level, computer science is a sort of math. I'm guessing that [arithmetic geometry](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arithmetic_geometry) is strongly related to [cryptographic](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptography) techniques. And these have a lot of highly qualified jobs, even in industry. The lifestyle is almost PhD like (but the pay and job stability is better, with of course more pressure). As others told you, getting a second PhD might worth it only if you want a tenure-track, purely academic (university) career. If you want anything else, the second PhD is a loss of time. But a PostDoc in a different field is very different story. So my suggestion would be to *start a PostDoc in Computer Science*** (in a theoretical field close to your current skills). NB. Not even wanting some kind of job stability could be consider as dumb behavior (and is hurting you). PS. I am almost 60 years old and still employed at [CEA](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Alternative_Energies_and_Atomic_Energy_Commission), in France, and in 1985, when I entered it, the lifestyle was PhD like (I actually started my PhD at university, but defended it while at CEA). But not more today. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: It would be a pretty pointless endeavour. After circa 50% -> 100% of one (1) PhD you should probably have managed to crank up your general study speed and techniques so that you can perform quite a bit faster on your own without distractions like 1. teaching courses to MSc and BSc student, 2. dealing with rewriting papers, 3. finishing your courses, endlessly nagging on you. To voluntarily head back in for a second or even third one would be a huge waste of your productivity. ( If you're any good, that is. ). The reason people don't quit when they feel they have reached this level where self study would be more efficient is that they are simply a bit scaredy-cat:y of looking like "drop out"s. It's quite natural. Most humans are a bit scared of that. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: It is immoral and anti-social of you to try this. So don't. ----------------------------------------------------------- You're asking about feasibility, but are ignoring the detrimental effects such an attempt, or practice will have on the academic community and PhD candidates in particular. 1. Universities and academic staff members invest resources - including time and money - in PhD programs. Young graduates aspiring to train as researchers need those resources. You'll be taking other PhD candidates' positions. 2. You would be making PhD-level researcher skills available to universities for the price of a PhD salary/stipend. That undercuts us - everybody else - who have expenses and need to support a family, or buy a home (someday...) and so on. You would be hurting us. 3. You have an obligation to pass on your knowledge to other, younger and less experienced, students and researchers. From your description, it seems you expect not to have to teach nor to advise younger students during your subsequent PhDs. Don't shirk that community responsibility. I suspect it many not be psychologically beneficial for you to be "stuck" in that place in life, but that's very speculative and I don't have evidence, so I'll just put it out there as a possibility. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/09	3,736	14,807	<issue_start>username_0: > > I am not sure if it is the right place to ask such a question, but I don't know any other place that would provide a serious answer or advice for me. > > > I am an undergraduate student (and a Sophomore starting in September this year) in Logistics field. Before entering the University, I wanted to study in the field Computer Science and Engineering (CS&E) which is offered at my University. But due to some reasons, (one of which was a fear of failing at Physics to enter CS&E) I had to apply for Logistics field and transfering students from a field to a field is not offered at the University. I really want to get a PhD in Artificial Intelligence (I am very serious about it), but considering that I am studying in a field completely unrelated to Artificial Intelligence, I am being depressed and worried that I wouldn't be able to get a PhD in AI. But I still want to ask: will I be able to get a PhD in AI field? I haven't yet stopped my habit of learning higher Mathematics, Electronics, and I am planning to read plenty of books on Computer Science.<issue_comment>username_1: Holding a PhD in math would usually disqualify you from being admitted into a PhD program in mathematics. Even if it does not do so officially, I'd consider it next to impossible to get scholarships. That said, being a postdoc in math is not really much different from being a PhD student. However, even being a postdoc forever is not easy. Many funding sources have restrictions on how long ago your PhD may have been - after 5 years you already have fewer options, and continuing long after 10 years will see you face exclusion from many funding sources, as well as a strong social pressure to get a "proper" job (i.e., a faculty position). Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_2: In the U.S. at least, maybe also Canada and Western Europe, in science (math, physics, chemistry, etc.), contrary to legend, graduate school can be a very wonderful, low-stress, idealistic time of life, if one has no partner, no children, no mortgage, no car payments... to worry about, and simple tastes. On one hand, yes, in some ways grad students are exploited by The System (low pay), but, on the other hand, there is a short-term (5-year!?!) job security, interesting work, and no increase in (student-loan?) debt. And grad students are not terribly experience teachers nor researchers, so there is some kind of quid-pro-quo apart from the low salary. At my university, it is possible to maintain that lifestyle and employment style by being a "teaching specialist": low pay forever, substantive uncertainty about employment from term to term, but very low stress/responsibilities otherwise. Some people do apparently deliberately choose such a lifestyle. Why not? But, as @Karl mentions, if nothing else, what about planning for old age? Low pay-ins to pensions (and/or Social Security in the U.S., apart from other complications) will result in low pension payouts later. Part of the point here is that aiming at "postdoc in perpetuity" almost universally at best would collapse back to "getting paid like a grad student, with no security, no pension". In particular, not getting paid nearly as well as post-docs, in any case. So it's not that it's impossible to have that lifestyle, but that there are details and complications that would almost surely make you very unhappy later, without any option to go back in time and change things. (And, yes, I'm sympathetic to your impulse, not being very materialistic myself, etc., but the realities of aging (not to mention having a partner and kids or other dependents, possibly including one's own parents at some point) have long ago burst that bubble for me.) Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: As the others mention, staying in math would be hard, but if you keep jumping to closely related fields, then it should be possible. For instance, you might find a professor in Eletrical engineering or one of the other "mathy" fields who is working on a topic that requires only a little bit of domain-specific knowledge. I know a few people (less than 5) that have 2 PhDs. I think one of them was applying for a 3rd. They lived in a poorer Eastern European country, so the pay actually wasn't that bad. Furthermore, finding a job in industry would have been difficult due to their advanced skillset. So although getting more than one PhD sounds crazy, it wasn't actually that crazy if you think it through. In principle, the others are right though... a Postdoc is intended for people who want more academic training in the same field. EDIT: There are 2 overarching scenarios that I have seen lead to someone getting more than 1 PhD. We might as well enumerate those: 1. Vanity. In Germany, when you get a PhD of a certain type, you can call yourself Dr. (e.g. Dr. Foo). If you get 2 PhDs, then your title is Dr. Dr. Foo. And this could technically go on ad nauseam. Once I saw somebody who insisted on being addressed as Prof. Dr. Dr. XXX. In principle, you could be Dr. Dr. Dr. if you really wanted to (although this doesn't seem to be the desire here). 2. Some countries have very little industrial technical sophistication. So if somebody wants to stay in their country after a PhD, then they are almost forced to either take a mind-numbing job in industry, or try to find something in academia. However, due to the high number of people in a similar situation, jobs for professorships or other paid academic jobs are hard to come by. So in principle, if one is curious enough to explore other disciplines, then getting a PhD in another field is not such a bad option. I would imagine that at some point a professorship would open up to a person with 2+ PhDs, but there is also the question of whether you would want to become a professor. The work of a professor is often quite far removed from pure research. So if you want to only do research, being a professor is not necessarily a good path. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: There's no point in trying to do repeated Ph.D. programs in the same field when you can easily replicate the lifestyle you want in the normal way. If you don't want to pursue the tenure track, go to a less good institution and get a part-time teaching job. It won't be much money but it will likely be more than you made as a Ph.D. student. Continue your studies and publishing. You can work with folks from other insitutions in order to keep up your intellectual progress. There is no easier thing than finding a lifestyle that works for a smart, hard(ish) working, highly skilled person who is happy with an extremely low salary in a developed country. There is nothing special about a Ph.D. program except that it prepares you for better things. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I'm not going to answer the explicit question as others have done it pretty well, but I'd like to address the underlying assumption. > > being a pure math PhD student is a relatively stress-free existence for me. > > > But first, let me congratulate you for that! I don't have any data but I'm pretty sure that most PhD students wouldn't describe their PhD experience as stress-free... so good for you! > > During my PhD experience I have found out the following things > > > You have discovered things about yourself during the PhD. You will also discover new things about yourself after the PhD... even if what you do after the PhD is another PhD. What I mean is that you shouldn't be afraid of what happens after the PhD: you feel comfortable in this environment now so it's natural to wish to keep it, but actually it's likely that you will like other environments as well. Actually it looks like what you like is simply academia, so why not give a try to postdoc positions? A friend of mine used to say that a PhD is like an initiation ritual into "academic adulthood". For many PhD students the end of the PhD is a time for questioning: self-doubt is very common, fear about the future, sometimes even depression. While it's common to go through this stage, it's important to keep in mind that we might not always see things clearly about ourselves, especially at the end of a long-term project like a PhD. In my experience most people realize what they really have learned (including about themselves) during their PhD only after graduating, because it takes a bit of perspective to see the whole picture. In conclusion my advice is: don't be afraid, be open to opportunities and keep enjoying the science :) Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: There is someone who works in my office who actually seems to be doing just that. She is doing a second PhD even though she apparently already has one, but I'm not sure if there is some loophole because she obtained the first one in a different country or something like that. In general, it's not a viable option though. It's like having multiple Bachelor's degrees. Some people do have two Bachelor's degrees, where they somehow re-trained and paid for the second degree in order to change career paths. In the same way, they are likely people who have two PhD's (or equivalent) for some reason related to change of career path or something like that but in general living from one PhD to the next is not going to be possible any more than a person could just perpetually live doing one Bachelor degree after another: at some point funding is just not going to exist as you can't just fund someone to be a perpetual student indefinitely. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: To improve your chances, I would suggest you to move to a country where multiple doctorates (and titles) are seen as a positive. As far as I can tell, this is the case in my country, Austria (and especially in the humanities). I know a few people with two PhDs and also a few people with three. It's also not uncommon to see signs from lawyers or (medical doctors) displaying two PhDs. And, there is this guy: <https://www.nachrichten.at/oberoesterreich/Das-ist-Doktor-Doktor-Doktor-Doktor-Doktor-Doktor-Norbert-Heinel;art4,843952> (article from 2011 in German, professor with 6 PhDs, two more are planned). Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_8: You might consider making, for example, a PostDoc in some more or less computer science field. I guess you will be able to find a connection between arithmetic geometry and some kind of theoretical computer science. (I know [<NAME>](http://www.lix.polytechnique.fr/Labo/Emmanuel.Haucourt/publications--preacutesentations.html), a bright researcher and a very nice guy who made the connection between topological algebra and computer science) Then, I do also recommend to not only care about theory, but also a bit about practice (at least, being able to develop some [free software](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software) research prototype). I know excellent mathematicians who became computer science professors with a stellar-level software engineering ability (one of them is [<NAME>](http://www.cs.unipr.it/~bagnara/), the architect of the [PPL](https://www.bugseng.com/parma-polyhedra-library)....) With such a resume, even if you don't stay in pure academia, you will continue doing a lot of math. Both in industry (think of large corporations like IBM or Google or MicroSoft or SAP) or in applied research institutions (like [Fraunofer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraunhofer_Society) institutes). The point is that, at high enough level, computer science is a sort of math. I'm guessing that [arithmetic geometry](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arithmetic_geometry) is strongly related to [cryptographic](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptography) techniques. And these have a lot of highly qualified jobs, even in industry. The lifestyle is almost PhD like (but the pay and job stability is better, with of course more pressure). As others told you, getting a second PhD might worth it only if you want a tenure-track, purely academic (university) career. If you want anything else, the second PhD is a loss of time. But a PostDoc in a different field is very different story. So my suggestion would be to *start a PostDoc in Computer Science*** (in a theoretical field close to your current skills). NB. Not even wanting some kind of job stability could be consider as dumb behavior (and is hurting you). PS. I am almost 60 years old and still employed at [CEA](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Alternative_Energies_and_Atomic_Energy_Commission), in France, and in 1985, when I entered it, the lifestyle was PhD like (I actually started my PhD at university, but defended it while at CEA). But not more today. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: It would be a pretty pointless endeavour. After circa 50% -> 100% of one (1) PhD you should probably have managed to crank up your general study speed and techniques so that you can perform quite a bit faster on your own without distractions like 1. teaching courses to MSc and BSc student, 2. dealing with rewriting papers, 3. finishing your courses, endlessly nagging on you. To voluntarily head back in for a second or even third one would be a huge waste of your productivity. ( If you're any good, that is. ). The reason people don't quit when they feel they have reached this level where self study would be more efficient is that they are simply a bit scaredy-cat:y of looking like "drop out"s. It's quite natural. Most humans are a bit scared of that. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: It is immoral and anti-social of you to try this. So don't. ----------------------------------------------------------- You're asking about feasibility, but are ignoring the detrimental effects such an attempt, or practice will have on the academic community and PhD candidates in particular. 1. Universities and academic staff members invest resources - including time and money - in PhD programs. Young graduates aspiring to train as researchers need those resources. You'll be taking other PhD candidates' positions. 2. You would be making PhD-level researcher skills available to universities for the price of a PhD salary/stipend. That undercuts us - everybody else - who have expenses and need to support a family, or buy a home (someday...) and so on. You would be hurting us. 3. You have an obligation to pass on your knowledge to other, younger and less experienced, students and researchers. From your description, it seems you expect not to have to teach nor to advise younger students during your subsequent PhDs. Don't shirk that community responsibility. I suspect it many not be psychologically beneficial for you to be "stuck" in that place in life, but that's very speculative and I don't have evidence, so I'll just put it out there as a possibility. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/10	1,387	6,151	<issue_start>username_0: I am asked to start from scratch and develop a new under-graduate course this fall. I still have about 2.5 months left but since there are tons of research commitments ahead, I am basically a bit unpositive on whether I can get all the course development task done before that.. The central hurdle is to make slides for about 12 weeks' teaching load. I am writing to inquire some conventions on course development. In particular, can I pay someone to make slides in my situation? If so, then: 1. do I need to acknowledge certain authorship for such cases? 2. where should I find such services?<issue_comment>username_1: In effect, it sounds like you want to sub-contract course design, or at least part of it. In theory, I don't see an ethical issue with this as long as nothing happens that will disadvantage the students taking the resulting course. The important issue is that the students get a high quality course, whether delivered by you or someone else or developed by you or someone else. Of course it will be your responsibility to judge accurately whether the resulting course meets appropriate standards and to guarantee that it does when delivered. You are, in effect, taking on a management role in course development and are completely responsible for the result. But the process is less important than the result, IMO. It will also be your responsibility to deliver the course in an appropriate (say, flexible) way. Students, as usual, need reinforcement and feedback no matter how the materials were developed. I will note, I hope accurately, that courses delivered by Open University UK are (a) high quality and (b) developed by large teams, including, in many cases, the production facilities of BBC. The process is very involved and takes quite a bit of time, but the results are high quality. I suspect that other online courses have similar team development structures. Normally it is good to acknowledge such help, but that can be a contractual issue and may need to be if it seems unwise to have students contacting the developer for any reason. Sorry, but I can't help in finding such a developer. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Theoretically you can, but practically I doubt you will find someone qualified who is willing to do it for a reasonable price. Designing a course is hard work and pretty individualized. Look at how many different ways there are to teach the same course. Everyone does it differently and I hate teaching to someone else's syllabus and cannot image using someone else's unaltered slides. As for acknowledging the author, you probably need to let your department know that you have outsourced this aspect of your job. You will need to make sure that the material is appropriately licensed so that you and the department can use it as needed. As for telling students, I believe there is a fair amount of leeway regarding the reuse of material. Specifically, for many courses, you are not presenting "original ideas" so it is not plagiarism in my opinion. That said, when possible, redirecting students to the original source can be helpful. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: If it was not stated implicitly that you are required to write your own slides, you may outsource the task. However, don't expect students to be attentive and rate your teaching positively should you fail to provide a suitable syllabus, which may create stress for yourself. I personally find that this would not provide you with advantage, as assuring quality of the slides, managing your commissioner, and teaching the material might be a harder job than if you've done it yourself. Not to mention trying to find the right person to do this for you. If I were you, I'd talk to those who have previously create new undergraduate courses to get a feel of what may be expected of you as a teacher. I have personally experienced getting taught by an individual who didn't put much effort into teaching our class, and a lot of students have raised complaints about him apart from generally not treating him very nicely during his lectures due to the frustration of feeling like he isn't trying at all. I believe it was stressful on his side to go through a room of 100 plus students who despise his lectures, and I don't wish it on you. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: In my disciplines of math and computing, most of the undergraduate textbooks come with instructor resources including prepackaged lecture slides, to assist with exactly this concern. I find that the quality ranges from bad to barely-adequate. About half the time I can use them as a starting point (and otherwise need to restart from scratch). So unless you are developing a very nonstandard course, you could research textbook options and pick one that comes with lecture slides as a start. I would expect to be editing, refining, and customizing those slides for future semesters as you learn more about teaching the course. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: Does your school have a Faculty Development Center or something that helps people improve their teaching skills? They may be able to suggest resources. Some that come to mind: * Many publishers have slides that go with textbooks - they may know which ones are worth examining. * They may know a colleague you can work with (maybe brainstorm together, one summarizes the bits to include, the other is more graphically oriented, and you share notes & slides?) * They may know "master teachers" in your field (some are better at research than instruction, and it's ok if you're one or the other), and connect you for some mentorship. * They may have strategies that you can use, so there's less "information" on each slide, but more "teaching cues" -- prompts for the students to discuss or solve. This may lead to less advance-prep, and you can adjust the content to fit the latest findings. Basically, don't worry about getting help. In the non-academic world, people hire content-creators and editors all the time. Find out what resources you have available, starting with your own university. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/10	257	1,051	<issue_start>username_0: I noticed an obvious minor mistake in an in-press article. It is related to the description of symbols in an equation, but it does not alter the rest of the manuscript in any way (they were used properly in the rest of the manuscript). Also, any attentive reader could note (and fix) it. Should I contact to the editor or what to do? --- EDIT: I also thought in contact directly to the editorial team due to the smallness of the changes.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, contact the editor. Everyone has an interest in getting things right. Whether it is possible or not at a late stage is up to them, but offer the correction and do it soon. Apologize. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: If your article is in press, don't contact the editorial board. Their role of handling peer review is over. What's left is for the publisher to publish the paper, and they're the ones who can fix this. You can fix this, and any other minor issues you find, when you receive the proofs from the publisher. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2019/06/10	691	2,964	<issue_start>username_0: Going round conference poster sessions, I notice the occasional poster where the presenter has used a bit of creativity to help with their communication/networking, perhaps related to linking in some way to online information, or giving people something to take away that will help them to remember the person or information. What methods have you used or come across that add value to a poster in that sort of way? I'm interested in things outside of the basic content of the poster - by "basic content" I mean the text and images that communicate your research (there are some good answers to [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/2330/46184) that cover that kind of thing).<issue_comment>username_1: Trying to avoid basic content organization that is already mentioned by [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/2330/56594). From the added values point of view, I have seen/would have appreciated: * option to take a print-out with an abstract, arXiv/full paper that the poster is based on * have business cards ready/available to be freely taken (you might have to be creative on how to attach/arrange things around your poster/poster board depending on conference organization) * QR code in the poster with a link to a relevant website (source code, open data, etc). I tend to take pictures of posters that I am interested in. And I like QR codes. * have a note (somewhere visible) that you will be available (and be there!) in the coffee shop of the conference location at a specified time if somebody wishes to discuss the research. Reason: sometimes you are presenting research that attracts a lot of people, so you are always busy talking and presenting. So, not everyone gets a chance to talk to you – and their time near the poster is also limited, so they might not come by around the second time - only to find you busy with another person questioning you on some irrelevant topic. * If you are presenting something for which "you can print a simplified 3-D model", not necessarily up-to-scale - that is always fun. I do not mention the "freebies" that you can giveaway without creating obstruction since they might attract people to your poster but probably will not add value. However, certainly, have them if you can :) I would not complain. Nobody would complain. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In some cases I have created a simplified version of an experiment and brought it with me to a poster presentation. In my case the experiment lit up, so it attracted quite a lot of attention. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Often, academics focus too much on the content and forget (or have never learned) about the effects nice colors/nice images or just a nice arrangement of the content has. Try to talk to professional designers and ask them for help. (It goes without saying that you should not replace content by nice images, they should support the content.) Upvotes: 1
2019/06/11	1,182	5,074	<issue_start>username_0: I'm in a rough place right now in the homestretch of my PhD, and I'm looking for advice. I've recently reached out to my advisor about this, but they are not responding to my emails, hence me asking this question here. My advisor is on sabbatical this year (my final year of my graduate program). Three months ago, I sent my advisor a more-or-less complete draft of my thesis, and I have not heard anything at all from them since. No edits, no comments, nothing. In part, I feel responsible for this situation; I was slated to finish last year, before my advisor left, and now they are having to edit my thesis while on sabbatical. I realize that this is a big burden. I am not sure whether or not I have the right to be upset about how long this has taken as a result. My main concern that I have is that I want to defend before September 1st, as I have an academic job that is set to begin on that date (contingent on me actually being awarded a PhD). In order to give committee members enough time to review my thesis and for my university to process the necessary paperwork, I will likely need to have edits incorporated into my thesis by the first week or two of July. Given how long this is taking, I am not sure if this is possible anymore, and I am not sure who is ultimately to blame here. My main question is this: Is it out of the question for someone in my position to ask their new employer whether or not it is OK to defend their PhD after the start date of their new job? Would I most likely have the offer revoked if I do so? I realize that there is know surefire way of knowing without actually asking, but I'm looking for some advice before potentially shooting myself in the foot here.<issue_comment>username_1: I'm going to just guess that meeting your tight deadlines will be impossible with an advisor on sabbatical. So you need some short term action that will preserve your position. You can certainly ask a new employer about starting before you have officially received the degree and they might be fine with that, or not. But it would be more likely to be a positive decision if they had some quasi official assurance that your timely and successful completion is not in doubt. You might try one or both of the following. Ask your advisor for a letter, assuring the reader (your potential employer) that completion is a pretty much pro forma situation. "We need to dot some i's and cross some t's etc." Go to the department head and get confirmation of the above and even his/her help in getting that letter from your advisor. The head might also include an additional supporting letter, confirming that your progress is on track, etc. Many employers would be supportive as long as the situation doesn't seem like it will go on and you wind up ABD or unable to do the job you are being hired for. Of course, there may be some situations in which there are firm, legal, requirements that you get the degree before starting the job, but those are likely rare. But I'm assuming this is an industrial job, not an academic position, which might well have firm requirements to start. Another option, perhaps, is to ask the employer for a delayed start date. But that request would also be positively supported by the sort of letter(s) mentioned above. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I fear that if you have got to this point in mid-June, it will now be too late for you to submit in early July - at least unless any changes are very minor. However, provided that you have tried a number of times to contact your advisor, it is reasonable for you to escalate this elsewhere. After all, whether or not your advisor is on sabbatical, it is reasonable for you to expect that somebody in the department will review your thesis. I would identify an appropriate person (depending on country and university this might be a head of department, or a director of studies, or somebody in charge of postgraduate research students, or similar. Or just ask a member of staff that you know well for their advice and they can probably point you at the right person). I would approach that person, explain the situation, and ask for their help. Do not complain about your advisor, or blame them - just outline what has happened to date, explain why it is urgent, and ask the department to make arrangements for somebody to give you feedback (this may be your advisor, or maybe they will appoint somebody else). It might be wise to warn your prospective employer of the problem. If they have offered you the job contingent on your completing your PhD in time, they obviously want you, and if you can explain that the delay is not your fault then there is a good chance - though of course not a guarantee - that they will make allowances. It is important to discuss it with them soon, both out of politeness and so that if they say "no", you have time to look for a different job. If they want evidence, then the person you speak to in your department above may be able to write a letter for you. Good luck! Upvotes: 0
2019/06/11	594	2,365	<issue_start>username_0: I submitted a manuscript to a journal, but due to some issue with that I asked the Editor-in-Chief and Associate Editor to withdraw the manuscript from further consideration. Despite several emails, they are not still responding me nor ended the process. Now, what should I do? Can I submit the manuscript to another journal?<issue_comment>username_1: > > what should I do? > > > Send another email stating that you will consider the article retracted if you do not receive a response within one week. > > Can I submit the manuscript to another journal? > > > Yes, after one week. --- Responses to comments: > > I would likely do this but I am not convinced that it precludes troubles. Imagine the same referee getting it twice. It would be confusing at least. Just to mention one case. > > > Referees regularly receive manuscripts twice, for instance, when a manuscript is rejected. Admittedly, this situation is different, since the reviewer may not have been notified of rejection. However, such a reviewer will likely assume that the paper has been rejected. Even if they don't, they will likely contact the editor, who will be able to promptly deal with the situation. This could even be pre-empted, for example, an unacknowledged retraction could be explained in a covering letter. > > [this] does not avoid...issues such as when the first journal and second journal both publish it...For all you know, the author may ALREADY have assigned copyright to the first journal. > > > From the question I assume copyright hasn't been assigned nor is the manuscript camera-ready. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Just to add to the answer from @username_1: when you submit the manuscript to another journal, mention in your cover letter what happened with the previous submission (including your one-sided correspondence with the editor). I would write this in as neutral a tone as possible; the point is not to hurl accusations at the editor of the first journal, but to avoid any appearance of deception on your part in the eyes of the second editor. It's impossible to say in general that this will not be an obstacle to your second submission. As an associate editor myself, I believe it should not, but this kind of thing would definitely be looked at by the editor-in-chief. Upvotes: 4
2019/06/11	2,834	10,894	<issue_start>username_0: This [question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/131523/teaching-a-class-likely-meant-to-inflate-the-gpa-of-student-athletes) and the pertinent answers suggest that, as a rule, college athletes in the United States are not held to the same academic standards as other students. It also seems that this is well-known. If so, employers and graduate school admissions committees can be expected to discount the degrees and the GPA of college athletes in order to control for an informal "athletes' bonus" when screening applications. Do employers and admissions committees, in fact (but likely not formally), discount athletes' grades and degrees? What is the approximate "discount rate", as it were (e.g. the average athlete's bonus)?<issue_comment>username_1: > > employers...can be expected to discount the degrees...of college athletes in order to control for an informal "athlete's bonus" > > > If an "athlete's bonus" is equivalent to the value add of their sport,\* then no discount is necessary. \Competing as an athlete demonstrates attributes not necessarily demonstrated by others. E.g., non-athletes may not have shown the commitment an athlete has. > > Do employers...discount athlete's grades...? > > > Such a discount could be considered as discrimination, which is illegal in many jurisdictions and likely something employers should avoid. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: "College athletes" is much too broad a brush. The kind of double-standard you're referring to is mostly focused on a much smaller group of men's basketball and football players at Division I schools. These are essentially full-time professional athletes. A lot of the very best athletes among this group do not stay long enough to graduate anyway. I also think you're overestimating the value of academics and underrating the value of athletics to employers. It takes incredible dedication to become one of the best people in the world in a sport. That's genuinely valuable to employers. Finally, even in the revenue sports, there are many fantastic students who get good grades in rigorous classes. I've had great students who are world-class elite athletes. Looking at the major and the grades gives a pretty clear indication of the level of rigor involved. And of course there are plenty of non-athletes with non-rigorous majors and mediocre grades. This last point is especially clear in the context of graduate admissions. Graduate applications include letters of recommendation and a full transcript. It is easy to see directly whether someone is taking rigorous advanced classes and doing well in them. There’s no reason whatsoever to discount athletes based on the existence of easier classes when you can see what classes they actually took. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: > > If so, employers, and graduate school admissions committees can be expected to discount the degrees and the GPA of college athletes in order to control for an informal "athlete's bonus", when screening applications. > > > I have rarely been asked my GPA (Grade Point Average) when applying. So I suspect that college athletes grades aren't discounted because they simply aren't evaluated. If athletes' GPAs were evaluated, then it's not really necessary to devalue them. When the answers to [that question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/131523/109672) say that GPA is inflated, they don't mean from a 2.0 to a 4.0. They mean that the GPA is inflated from a 0.8 to a 2.1. [A summary of the requirements](https://www.ncsasports.org/ncaa-eligibility-center/gpa-requirements): > > ### Maintaining NCAA eligibility > > > There is another element to NCAA academic eligibility, and that is maintaining your eligibility once you are in college. While you should have the full support of your college's compliance office to ensure you maintain eligibility, here is a rough breakdown of the academic requirements once you are in college: > > > By the START of sophomore year, you must: > > > have a cumulative GPA of 1.8 > * have completed 36 units > > > By the END of sophomore year, you must: > > > * declare a major > > > By the START of junior year, you must: > > > * have a cumulative GPA of 1.9 > * have completed 72 units (40 percent of your total degree requirements) > > > By the START of senior year, you must: > > > * have a cumulative GPA of 2.0 > * have completed 108 units (60 percent of your degree requirements) > > > By the START of a fifth year, you must: > > > * have a cumulative GPA of 2.0 > * have completed 144 units (80 percent of your degree requirements) > > > A 1.8 or 2.0 is a mediocre GPA. A student with much lower grades will be flunking out of school. The NCAA (National College Athletics Association) is basically saying that students have to be students passing classes on their way to a degree, not just athletes pretending to attend the school. This is especially a problem in college football (American rules, not soccer). Because football doesn't have a minor league system where an athlete can turn professional straight out of high school. So the only place where someone who wants to play those sports professionally can go is college (unless they are so good that they can skip college, which is nearly unheard of in football). In terms of GPA then, there is little need to discount the GPA. For the relevant students, their GPA is already lousy. I would also agree with [this answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/131739/109672) that college athletics has value of its own that may offset bad grades. College athletes demonstrate that they can maintain a high level of efficiency in an endeavor. For some careers, that may be sufficient. I would not want someone like this to be my boss, but I wouldn't mind seeing such people in sales. The ability to get good grades does not necessarily indicate that someone is good at sales. My position and my boss' position would require a stronger athletic background. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Speaking from the perspective of hiring in industry, I've neither asked for nor considered GPA as a factor when evaluating a resume. The reputation of the school plays a small role (commercial for-profit schools, in particular, warrant further scrutiny), but mostly for an entry level position I'm looking for work experience and extracurriculars. The existence of a degree and (to a lesser extent) a relevant major is a first-pass filter, but mostly I want to know if it's someone who can work in a team and learn quickly. Athletics might actually be a benefit in that regard, since it requires working with a team and time management skills, but even better would be internships or other work experience, particularly if it's related to our industry. To put it somewhat bluntly, I don't discount the value of the degree because the degree honestly has very little value in industry, other than as a checkmark in an HR filtering process and possibly as a conversation starter for the interview for an entry level candidate. This isn't to say that the process of earning that degree isn't personally valuable and might not develop valuable perspectives and life skills, just that academic performance is, in and of itself, largely irrelevant to industry. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I don't think that employers will discount the degree of a college athlete merely because they are an athlete, but there is a chance that in some cases an employer might discount the degree because of the major that the college athlete had. I couldn't find recent statistics (or any statistics which cover all college athletes) but [this article](https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2521779-most-popular-academic-majors-for-2015-power-5-conference-football-players#slide2) looked at the most common majors for major college football programs. Not surprisingly, STEM disciplines as well as the more rigorous humanities such as history and philosophy are under-represented. There is a chance that a degree in General Studies (whatever that is) might fail to impress prospective employers. On the other hand, if someone is applying for graduate school, then more likely than not they didn't take an easy route to graduate and are furthermore applying either to the same or a related field as their major. In this case, the choice of major won't be an issue. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Mildly, yes, they are. Even if you get high grades and in a tough major, people know you had to spend significant time in a side area and likely did well by disciplined time use versus immersion in the major. That said, there are some fields (sales, military, etc.) where the athletics may give you a benefit as well. Overall, I don't think it's a huge deal. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: In the industry I work in (software development), the standard practice is to test candidates, by giving them practical tasks to complete in a real programming language, either on paper/whiteboard, or on an actual computer, and then review their solution. It's also done through complex technical discussions, where it's usually clear whether the candidate knows his stuff or not. How he got the knowledge or skills is much less important. University, work in other companies, open source projects, whatever - the point is whether he has the skills and knowledge or not. This will naturally filter out those who didn't really study - regardless of whether the reason for it is them getting some sort of athlete special treatment, or any other reason, without the company needing to take each of these causes into account. I'm not saying that >> every << company does this, but most of them do. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_8: @Johnny question to @NoahSnyder's excellence answer. > > I also think you're overestimating the value of academics and underrating the value of athletics to employers. In 20+ years of > hiring, I have never once noticed an applicants athletic skills nor > used such skills to make a hiring decision and as far as I know, known > of my colleagues have been doing so either. But I've been hiring for > technical positions, do other fields pay attention to athletics? > > > During a talk of <NAME> to the students at CMU Silicon Valley campus (you may try looking for some recording). * He liked to hire PhDs, not because he thought they were more talents than others, but because those people often had a lot of passions on what they do. * For sale positions, he liked to hire (well-known) athletes, for exactly the same reason in @NoahSnyder's answer: to be at the top of their game, it required incredible dedication and self-discipline, which was very useful in sale. I know nothing about sale, I only repeat what I heard. So please don't ask me anything. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/11	2,882	12,369	<issue_start>username_0: I applied to a foreign university. I was interviewed and now I am waiting for the result. I had also applied to another research opportunity abroad, which is organized by my current department head. I was very hopeful that I would be selected for this opportunity because I am the first-ranking student and my English is very good. I spoke respectfully with the head professor about it on several occasions, but it seemed like he was making excuses and was not fairly considering me. I recently found out that my classmate was selected for the opportunity abroad. He had performed much worse than me on classes we had taken together, and his English is very weak. I lost control and told the head of the department where there is a research opportunity that I would report this obvious injustice to the leading mathematicians at the university that had interviewed me recently. I did indeed e-mail my interviewers. Now that I have calmed down, I realize that I should not have emailed my interviewers in this manner. Could it affect the outcome of my application? Appendix: Thank you for your suggestions and advice. In fact, I have realized that I should always remain academically professional. I also sent a follow-up email to my interviewer and expressed my regret at my previous email. Appendix 2: Now that I am more calm, I realize that my act was childish. I was not the employer to decide whom to hire. I emailed the head professor and and the one at the institution where there is a research opportunity expressing my regret. But now I feel like I need to try even much more than before to become successful. Good luck specially to me<issue_comment>username_1: I am going to just be honest in this response. Why would the researchers at the British university you applied to care about what professors do at another university? If I received an email from an applicant to my university about a matter at another program, I would think it was strange. Why would I care? "Leading mathematicians" at a university unaffiliated with the research program you were not accepted for likely do not have time to become involved in petty politics and fights that are irrelevant to them. Now, as for how it will affect your application, your email might likely mean nothing in the end. The interviewers will likely blow it off or do very little about it. This plays in your favor. Least said, soonest mended. This being said, sending an email like you did could give an indication to the interviewers that you are whiny and immature. I would consider sending a follow up email to the interviewers saying that you acted in haste and have realized that it is obviously not their job to referee such disagreements. More often than not, the interviewers would think it odd that you had initially emailed them, but will also move on with their day as normal if you recanted what you said and just moved on. At least for me, I do not have time to psychoanalyse every applicant I come across for maturity. Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Throwing accusations around without proof of wrongdoing will not make you any friends, not at your university and neither where you applied. First, let's address the accusations and why you should have kept them to yourself: * You didn't attend the interview of the chosen student. He/she might have shown desirable traits beyond academic prowess * Maybe the student had relevant experience that you were not aware of * Most people are a poor judge of their own ability Even in the case where you, objectively, were the better student, it still is not proof of any wrongdoing and learning to take defeat graciously reflects much better on you than throwing a tantrum. Finally, this email you sent will definitely affect the way you are seen by the interviewer. At best, it will be seen as childish/petty, but it could also reflect a troublemaker personality. I suggest you immediately retract what you said in this email unless you have proof, along the lines of 'I now recognize I was too hasty in throwing such accusations, and I'm sorry for involving you in this matter'. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: I had some troubles following your question, but if I understood correctly then I would assume that: 1. The professor interviewing you is highly confused right now. They seem to have literally nothing to do with your university, the program, you (other than having interviewed you recently), and the person that you accused of being unjust - and yet they are drawn into a conflict that they have no stakes in nor responsibility for. 2. You may indeed have lowered your chances of getting accepted considerably. In the best case your email would be seen as odd. In the worst case it would be seen as grossly unprofessional, painting you as a trouble maker who will randomly lash out whenever something happens that you consider unjust. I have seen students like that, and I know of no professor / admission committee that wants to bother with this kind of drama. > > However, now that I have calmed down I have realized that I should not have let even injustices affect me and it was unnecessary to email my interviewer. > > > I think your reflection should go deeper than that. It is true that part of being a professional is also being able to absorb smaller perceived unjustices like that (empathy and an ability to accept that grades aren't everything helps here), but I also can't help but wonder what you were trying to achieve with this email in the first place. To me (and note that I am only going by your short recap) this sounds rather vindictive, serving no other purpose than to get back at the person not recommending you. If that is indeed the case, you should take a good hard look at your actions in this case and learn from that for the future. Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_4: It seems you are missing a few key points here. The most important one is that people sent to this "research opportunity abroad" are ambassadors of your current department. Don't shoot the messenger: You have shown that you are entitled, vindictive and hot-headed. Taking this into account, it seems that your head professor chose wisely by not picking you as an ambassador. A motivated student with basic English skills can become fluent abroad in a few months. Your behavior surely affected negatively the outcome of your application, and will continue to do so if you don't work on your social skills. Good luck! Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: Firstly, thanks for being brave enough to make this post and seek advice. The responses you will get are going to be critical of your behaviour, so let me pre-empt this by saying that the fact that you are now seeking advice is a good thing. With great respect, everything you describe in your post is way out-of-line, and yes, quite obviously *your email is going to severely* harm your application*. Even before we get to the email, losing control at your Department Head over his selection of another student for a research opportunity is not an appropriate response to that circumstance. This selection may seem like an "obvious injustice" to you, but there are many possible reasons it could have been made, notwithstanding your superior grades and English language skills. A Department Head is an experienced academic, and they generally have sound judgment on these matters, so it would have been far better to find out the reasons for the selection of the other student. It would also have been far better to seek feedback on your own short-comings, and how to improve your chances for later opportunities. If there was indeed some unfairness in the selection process for that application (and you do not specify what the nature of that unfairness might be) then there are ways to raise this in a professional manner. There may have been some opportunity to complain or seek a review of the decision under university rules, but even if there was not, "losing control" at your Department Head, and threatening (and then carrying out) a campaign of defamation, is not the appropriate response. As to your email, this is also totally out-of-line, and it reflects terribly on you. The university selection panel you have written to has no role scrutinising the decisions of your Department Head, so what this email demonstrates to them is: (1) you are prone to lash-out and defame others when you do not get what you want; (2) you only see your own assessment of the "injustice" of a decision, and are not adept at seeing the matter from the point-of-view of others; (3) when you have a grievance, you take a "scorched Earth" approach rather than raising your grievance in a professional manner and with regard to appropriate procedures; and (4) you expect unrelated bodies to weigh into your grievance. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_6: I'm sorry to add insult to injury, but @Guest1, just reading your (edited) question suggests* that you are impulsive, hot-headed, fiery and, most concerning of all, entitled. Please do a little self-introspection and analysis, and more importantly, ask those people nearest to you: family, friends, peers, and professors an honest assessment of your character. Get that precious feedback, assure them that you will not be offended, hurt or be upset, and while they are talking, listen, do not interrupt them. If the feedback is generally positive, then chalk the email up to inexperience and a moment of poor judgement. It will still serve as an invaluable lesson in humility. If the feedback is mixed or shockingly bad, it will be easier to comprehend the self-inflicted damage that email has probably committed. We don't know what words were used in the email nor its tone, but if I had received an email from an “unknown” applicant who accused a professor of bias and another candidate of being unqualified, I would certainly think twice before considering that person's application. However, in your post you mentioned that the professors to whom you forwarded the email, had actually interviewed you > > I would report this obvious injustice to the leading mathematicians at the university that had interviewed me recently. > > > Perhaps you performed well in your interviews, perhaps you left a positive impression, in which case these mathematicians will probably overlook your (spiteful?) heated email, and seeing you have since apologised, that too should also play in your favour. A person who is humble enough to apologise when they have realised their mistake is, in my books, commendable, unless the email was clearly written by someone in the throes of a conniption fit, only you know the answer to that. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: I think that most of the answers give you pertinent advice. You applied for a research program. In the future, you will probably apply for post-doc, permanent positions if you decide to stay in academia, otherwise you will still have to apply. The majority of the applications will fail, which is normal and there can be some disappointment. In order to be not too much affected, here are some advice. * First, we have to keep in mind that there is no total ordering of the candidates. It is surely not so often that there is a candidate who is better than all the others in all the possible aspects which are required for a position. It is also hard to say "A is better than B" otherwise the role of the commissions would be easy. * Second, as pointed out in other answers, there is a big part of unknown: about the profile of other candidates for examples and also how their interview went. Somehow surprisingly, there is also a part of unknown about your interview. The member of commissions are usually not emotional hence you do not know exactly how an answer to a question was received. * Third, we have to consider that we only need one application which works and that when one failed, we did not lose any thing because we had nothing before (having the position was not a debt). It seems that it is the fact that you were affected that led you to write the email. Next time, it would be better to ask for example the aspects of your curriculum that you could improve instead of putting into question the choice of the commission. Upvotes: 1
2019/06/11	836	3,532	<issue_start>username_0: My friend is in a new postdoc position. Her PhD thesis is unpublished. Her new adviser hired her with the mandate that she get it published (or a paper based upon it) in a good journal, with his help. He also expects to be last author on that paper (she is first), something at which my friend has balked, and is now fighting. To me, this sounds very reasonable. He stated it upfront, before she was hired, and she accepted. He has certainly put in time helping her to rewrite it and address reviewers. As a related question, the current version of the paper has no other coauthors. Her committee is not included. To me this sounds odd. The field is Engineering, and this is happening at an R1 in the USA. Thoughts? Should her postdoc advisor be on a journal article published out of the postdoc's PhD Thesis? Should her committee? Update: She and I spoke this weekend, and she agreed to let me post this.She has removed him as an author mid-'revise and resubmit'. He was gracious, and has not contested this with the journal. The journal rejected shortly after the resubmit; she will need to find a new outlet. She further negotiated that she be sole author on all future pubs. The situation is certainly to the detriment of their relationship, but I think she feels much more comfortable with the situation going forward. A second and third piece planned are now shelved: she does not have a the statistical skillset to reanalyze the data for these pieces. She now looks toward one day hiring her own postdoc to do so. Her role has been changed to one more focused on writing proposals for funding and data acquisition, toward future projects with publication. She does not believe her postdoc was threatened by this change beyond the inherent risks of a mid-position role change. I certainly learned a few things.<issue_comment>username_1: No, not unless he made a significant scholarly contribution. Your friend's institution almost certainly has a co-authorship policy that prohibits this type of honorary co-authorship, urge her to look it up. However, she should be aware that this might permanently harm her relationship with her post-doctoral adviser. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I like the definition from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, that is applicable to all fields, in my opinion: <http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html>: The ICMJE recommends that authorship be based on the following 4 criteria: 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. Note that this is an AND definition: just revising critically does not confer authorship. I realize that it is usual in many fields to have honorary authorship, but this practice must be stopped! I find it highly unethical for the postdoc advisor to have made this a condition of employment. I would start looking for a new job soon, as this situation will only get worse. She should also consult with the university or institutional ombudsperson for good academic practice. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/11	1,194	4,989	<issue_start>username_0: We are starting a new computer lab and expect to have data that is 50-100 TB of text, images, and maybe videos to process. We will need to run tasks occasionally (10-30% utilization per month), so mostly it will be used for storage. Should we go for a server or cloud computing? Some points to consider (I am not expert in hardware): Server pros: * Last for years * Cheaper Server cons: * Maintenance, upgrade problems, and other issues are common given that our expert is always busy Cloud pros: * Easier to use (no hassle) Cloud cons: * Might be expensive to host large data * Need to pay for it after 1-2 years (some funds needs to be spent within 1-2 years).<issue_comment>username_1: Local servers are likely to be substantially cheaper and also faster to access the data over LAN rather than the internet for data on that scale (just for a quick count from AWS you're looking at $2400 per month if you ignore the deep-storage options that are not appropriate for data in-use; for the same price you could pay for local servers in a couple months with the same capacity). Given similar choices, the labs I've worked in have always opted for local storage, but we also utilize cloud options for sharing data both for personal use (i.e., having access at work and home) and between other labs. However, this is only a subset of the data, for example data extracted or summarized from raw data. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This isn't an answer - because the correct answer, if there is one, will depend on your circumstances and what exactly you need to do with all that data - but here are some things to consider: * If you have your own server, then in addition to the CapEx to buy the system you must budget for somebody's time to maintain it (maybe a group member, if somebody has the requisite knowledge, or maybe somebody from your institution's IT department), electricity (if you pay for that), backups, and so forth. (do not neglect backups - if your main need is storage, this may nearly double the cost) * If you use a cloud facility then you have all OpEx and no CapEx - but the operational costs will be substantially more. * In my experience looking into this for compute-based HPC tasks, if you can't keep your own system busy then it's often better value to use cloud offerings, during the life of the project. If your main need is storage, this may well not apply. * Once the project has finished, if you have bought a server then you have an outdated server that you may, or may not, be able to usefully repurpose. If you have used a cloud system then you have nothing. * Consider transfer speeds to/from the storage. If your data and your processing are both in the cloud that's fine, but don't plan on copying tens of terabytes between local and cloud systems on a regular basis. So far, those are considerations that apply everywhere - not just to academic projects. But here are some additional considerations for research: * If the need is mostly for storage and not serious computation (not clear from the question) then up to 100Tb isn't that much storage by today's standards. It's more than a university IT department is going to offer for free, but you might be able to pay them out of project funds and not have to worry further about it. That way you get a resilient system that's looked after by professionals within your institution. They'll probably be buying the same hardware that you'd be buying yourself, so this isn't a cheap option - but it may be a good one. * Consider whether, at the end of the project, you will still need to store that 100Tb - or whether the archival need is less. Consider whether, and how, this relates to any funder data archiving policy, and/or any instutional archive facilities. * Some funders like to be able to take pictures with a thing that they bought (though you're probably talking about bigger computers than this before that kicks in). Similarly, some funding streams will only cover CapEx and some will only cover OpEx, so this may be the deciding factor. There are probably some other factors that I haven't thought of - if you've thought of one - especially for the second section - that you don't think is worthy of its own answer, leave a comment and I'll edit it in. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I would first look to see if there are HPC (high-performance computing) resources associated with your university (or funding agency, or wherever you're eligible to apply for an allocation). Not all of them are for pure number crunching - some are very suited (even designed) for data intensive tasks. Usually that doesn't give you long term storage, but getting an allocation with temporary scratch storage on the order of 1-10 terabytes is quite feasible. And you could probably pay a bit to extend the storage, if needed. Should still be cheaper than setting up your own cloud solution, and less work than a custom server. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/11	2,354	9,759	<issue_start>username_0: As an editor, how appropriate do you think it is to send a referee request to an author who currently has a paper under review at the same journal (with you as the editor with final say on whether that paper is accepted)? Because of the power imbalance, it seems as though the author might feel compelled to agree to review the paper even if they didn't otherwise want to. Or maybe they will feel an instinct to say the paper is terrible if they believe fewer other papers being accepted might increase their own chances. Context: I am an editor myself and I never do this on principle. But as an author it has happened to me on a number of occasions, and I'm not sure how justified I am in finding it so annoying. For further context (in case it matters) this is in pure mathematics. Bonus question: Is asking for a "quick opinion" (rather than a full review) in this context more or less appropriate than asking for a full referee report?<issue_comment>username_1: I think this is normal. > > Because of the power imbalance > > > I think the power imbalance is a bit overstated here. Editors want good papers for their journal; a good editor is not primarily just farming out the job of peer review with as little effort as possible. If I... 1) submitted a paper, 2) received a request to review a paper, 3) denied that request for good reason, and then 4) had my paper rejected by the editor, ...either those outcomes are unrelated and the paper should be submitted elsewhere, or the journal is crap and the paper should be submitted elsewhere. > > it seems as though the author might feel compelled to agree to review the paper even if they didn't otherwise want to. > > > I think this is not really a very crucial ethical issue, although I am not in mathematics where maybe the burden of review is greater. Certainly if this compelled someone to review a paper they were not qualified to review, that would be a problem, but I don't see this being a substantial issue. If you are submitting papers you should also be reviewing them. If all papers were single-author papers, then the number of papers you review should be greater than the number you submit. If a journal is in your area of study such that you submit papers to it, you are among the people in the best position to review other submissions applicable to that journal. > > Or maybe they will feel an instinct to say the paper is terrible if they believe fewer other papers being accepted might increase their own chances > > > I can see this being an issue for grants where there is a limited pool of money and a zero-sum game. I don't know of any journal where it is a practice to rank order articles and then reject one for publication because it wasn't the 12th best article submitted this month. Journals just don't operate on that time scale, and if a journal did decide to be more or less permissive due to overall submission and acceptance rates, that would be over a longer time scale than the review of a single paper. --- In summary, feel free to feel annoyed: feelings don't necessarily require justification. However, I don't think there is an ethical violation here. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Let's take the null hypothesis that this is ethically fine, and then examine reasons why the hypothesis might be wrong. You raise two: > > Because of the power imbalance, it seems as though the author might feel compelled to agree to review the paper even if they didn't otherwise want to. > > > This is a legitimate concern. However I think it's fair to say that most editors have seen so many reviewers decline to review that they won't bat an eye at yet another reviewer who declines. Of course you should give a reason for declining. Something like "I currently already have 2 manuscripts to review for other journals" is more likely to lead to empathy than derision. If you don't feel qualified to review that's also a fair reason. I'm confident most editors will prefer a good review over a poor one, even if they have to work a bit harder to get that good review. Is it possible the editor will reject the paper because the author didn't want to review another paper? It's conceivable, but not likely: ultimately declining to review is quite minor, and the editor will want good papers. It would take a pretty annoyed editor to reject a good paper because he doesn't like the author (see [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/116834/how-to-handle-a-paper-by-a-reviewer-who-wants-to-be-paid) and the reactions of most people to the would-be annoyed editor). > > Or maybe they will feel an instinct to say the paper is terrible if they believe fewer other papers being accepted might increase their own chances. > > > This on the other hand isn't really justifiable. If a paper is rejected it's far more likely that it didn't meet the minimum standards required for publication in the journal than it is because the journal has run out of space. In the latter scenario, it's much more likely the journal will hold the paper to the next issue, and if the next issue is also full, then it might consider increasing the number of issues a year. tl; dr: I don't think there's a ethical concern here. If it troubles you as an editor then don't, but there are reasonable people who aren't troubled, both as an author and as an editor. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: This is normal, and even expected, especially for conferences. > > Because of the power imbalance, it seems as though the author might feel compelled to agree to review the paper even if they didn't otherwise want to. > > > Few people really want to review papers; doing it well is a lot of work for relatively little direct payoff (esp. compared to just reading a published paper). However, it's understood to be an important part of participating in the scholarly community, and the [golden rule](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule) (classic definition) applies. By submitting a paper to the journal, an author is clearly expressing a desire to be part of whatever very specific scholarly community that journal serves. It is quite reasonable for an editor to request that a submitting author become a reviewer, if the editor believes they could do a reasonably good job of the review. (If the author's submission was crackpot nonsense or way off topic, they may not be a good reviewer candidate.) > > Or maybe they will feel an instinct to say the paper is terrible if they believe fewer other papers being accepted might increase their own chances. > > > If they want to be persuasive, they will need to say specifically why the paper is "terrible" and if you reject what they are reviewing it should be because those are valid points. Similarly, if you as an editor reject what that reviewer authored, it should be because of valid shortcomings pointed out in the reviews of that paper, and a completely independent decision made without considering whether they agreed to review other papers. Authors submitting to or published in a particular journal have an incentive to set the bar for that publication to a high level (so as to enhance the reputation of their own work, by association). Some authors may wish to qualify this, setting the bar high but not so high that their own work can't get in. Ultimately, it's up to you as the editor to decide where the quality bar is for that venue, and the reviews are just input to guide you. > > I am an editor myself and I never do this on principle. > > > As long as the venue does not have any specific policy against doing this, I would have no qualms about it, as long as I know my editorial decisions are separated from authors' responses to review requests, and that the content-based reasons for the editorial decisions are clearly expressed in the decision letter. > > As an author it has happened to me on a number of occasions, and I'm not sure how justified I am in finding it so annoying. > > > As an author, I don't find any extra annoyance from a review request because it comes from a venue where I've submitted. The opposite is actually more likely, especially when I'm a new submitter to a venue that I believe to be high-quality: I take it as a step of being welcomed into that scholarly community as a qualified peer. I'm also considerably more likely to accept review requests from venues where I've submitted, because I've already reached the decision that this is a venue worth supporting. I'm also not nearly as likely to lump such a request in with the academic spam clogging my inbox with requests to review or edit for what I assume are generally low-quality venues looking for good names they can use to build their reputation and/or further a scam. > > Bonus question: Is asking for a "quick opinion" (rather than a full review) in this context more or less appropriate than asking for a full referee report? > > > It depends: is that a normal step/activity in the venue? You might get better full referee reports from reviewers who also have work submitted at that journal, and/or who recently received good-quality reviews (positive or negative) from a submission to that journal; such reviewers may be more cognizant of the [golden rule](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule) when doing their review. As an editor, I'd be more inclined toward requesting full referee reports where possible and appropriate, only asking for the "quick opinion" reports if I were needing more of those reports for a step in the venue's process, and lacking in reviewer candidates likely to give those but unlikely to do full referee reports. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/12	2,311	9,756	<issue_start>username_0: We have just received reviews on a paper, and in reading through one of the "borderline" reviews, I recognized that the "voice" of the review sounded like a researcher I associated with at a conference a few years ago. In particular, they use a certain terms in parts of their review customary to this researcher's homeland. I checked the review committee, and this individual is indeed listed. Upon reading further, they suggest some past work which may be useful -- one of which I recognized as this researcher's work (we have some overlap in our fields). I have not reached out to this researcher, nor have I shared my suspicions with any co-authors. This researcher and I socialized in a group setting a few years back, but have had no subsequent contact besides being in the same circles on some social media. While the paper this researcher authored is tangentially related, it is not one that I would consider particularly relevant in our discussion. However, being quite certain of this reviewer's identity, it is tempting to "play up" the relevance of that paper in the hopes of swaying the reviewer. My question: Is this ethical? I do not have any concrete evidence of this reviewer's identity (nor will I ever look for it), but the fact that I feel compelled to respond in a way different than I would otherwise has my alarm bells going off. Reworded bonus question: If I believe I've discerned the identity of a reviewer, should I report that to the PC? Note: This question is intended to be about my conduct, not the reviewer's. I do not believe the reviewer has done anything unethical.<issue_comment>username_1: Don't speculate about who the reviewer(s) of your manuscript are. Nothing good can come out of having the knowledge. In fact thinking you know who the reviewers are can [cause you quite a bit of grief](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/122486/how-to-force-a-journal-to-address-an-associate-editors-scientific-misconduct). Forget about who authored the review and focus on the facts. You think the paper suggested is tangentially related and not really relevant. Therefore you think you shouldn't cite it. As in similar situations, [the next most natural thing to do would be to not cite it, giving your reasons](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/127171/inappropriate-reference-requests-from-journal-reviewers). It would take a pretty unscrupulous reviewer to reject your manuscript because it doesn't cite his paper, and even if the reviewer attempts this, he would also have to convince the editor that he's actually rejecting your manuscript for valid reasons. Remember the editor can see who the reviewer is, and will notice if the reviewer is pushing his paper even if the relevance is tangential. Further, remember that the editor can accept a paper even if the reviewer recommends rejection. Finally, about whether to report this, there's no point. You won't learn anything about it anyway because the editors can neither confirm nor deny the identity of the reviewer. Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: > > [The reviewer suggests] some past work which may be useful --- one of which I recognized as this researcher's work... I have not reached out to this researcher, nor have I shared my suspicions with any co-authors. ... Is this something that should be reported to the PC? > > > Let's assume that you're right that this recommended paper was written by the reviewer --- so what? There is nothing unethical about a reviewer recommending citation of his own paper, so long as he believes that work is relevant to the topic. Indeed, reviewers are often selected precisely because they have published papers in the field they are reviewing, so it is common for reviewers to be aware of work they have published that bears on the research they are reviewing. It is therefore quite natural that a reviewer will be aware of some piece of work they have written that bears on the topic they are reviewing. If this is the case then it is quite reasonable for them to recommend citation of that paper. You say that this paper was just one work embedded within a broader set of past works. By your own description, this work is "tangentially related" to your paper. Whether you decide to cite the recommended paper therefore depends on the desired scope of the literature discussion in your own paper ---i.e., the degree to which you wish to relate your own work to parts of the literature that are only tangential to your work. Whatever your judgment here, there is room for reasonable people to disagree on the proper scope for references to other works, so it is entirely reasonable for the reviewer to recommend the paper in his list of past works. > > While the paper this researcher authored is tangentially related, it is not one that I would consider particularly relevant in our discussion. However, being quite certain of this reviewer's identity, it is tempting to "play up" the relevance of that paper in the hopes of swaying the reviewer. ... Is this ethical? > > > Just write your paper the way you think is best --- if you think the recommended paper is tangentially relevant then you can mention it if you want, and if you think that is too much of a stretch, and you'd prefer not to mention it, then say that in your response. Reviewer recommendations are not mandatory, and if you decide not to follow the recommendation to cite that particular paper, that is up to you. There is no reason to try to pander to the (suspected) reviewer. > > Bonus question: Is this something that should be reported to the PC? > > > Sigh --- this is the kind of question that really makes me despair for academia. Here we have a story of an outside academic acting as an unpaid journal reviewer, who has taken time away from other duties to do work reviewing your paper. Among a list of potentially useful past work he has provided to you, he has mentioned one paper that you think is probably his, which even you concede is "tangentially related" to your own work. Rather than expressing thank for the time this reviewer has taken to provide you with a list of related works, your instinct is to have "suspicions", and you want to know whether to narc on him for the "unethical" conduct of having mentioned potentially relevant research. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I share the instinct to be a tiny bit wary of the situation. Namely that it is, at the very least, plausible that the motivation for suggesting citing the paper is to increase the citation count of that paper, not because it helps your own. From a step back, it would clearly be better to avoid that from being a factor. However: * It would be very hard to completely remove this possibility (even some kind of meta-review would eventually be subject to the same issues). * The question is about your behaviour. It is a failing of the system if following a suggestion to improve your chance of publication is a conflict of interest. * Absolute worst case: citation figures change by one, in a borderline case. I don't think there is any cause to lose sleep over this. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: It's not that big a deal. I would just do it (and I am prickly as hell if my text, ideas get affected). Just attach the questionable reference. But make sure there is a relevant one right next to it. So people see both. Not much harm done. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: I'd like to address two different points here. --- Is it ethical? Nobody can give a definite answer here. One can only try to articulate what one perceives as some sort of consensus among researchers. And this is difficult, because it may depend on the field, on who the author of the other paper is (regardless of whether he is the reviewer!), and most importantly: What the actual contents of the paper is. For example, there are some papers that are groundbreaking, seminal, visionary, and - although they are only tangentially related (in a technical sense) to more recent works - often cited by saying something like "The work by [Foo] has inspired many other researchers" (and in fact, not much more than that). On the other hand, I'd like to emphasize what was already mentioned in the excellent [answer by username_2](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/131771/86692): Even if the work is only tangentially related, it could be worth mentioning it, and explaining the differences between their approach and yours. Of course, there is no point in listing a dozen papers and bluntly saying: "They are all doing something else", but a critical discussion and analysis of related work and identifying the differences and commonalities between approaches is something that I'd consider as an essential part of the literature review. --- Now, since the first question cannot be answered with a clear "yes" or "no", this raises another question: Should you do it? One could argue that if it's unethical, you should not do it. But I wonder how far one can stretch this. The limit is in the question of whether it is "ethical" to do anything that ("only") brings an advantage for yourself. And at that point, one has to say: You can always act ethically if and only if you can afford it. Or to put it that way: If you think that it helps your progress and career, you should do it. In the world of mutual citations, mutual reviews (that are only formally but not factually "double-blind"), mutual conference invitations and other forms of "mutual approvals and justifications" of small groups of researchers, a single citation in a single paper is one of the things that you should least be concerned about. Upvotes: 1
2019/06/12	930	4,291	<issue_start>username_0: What is a proper way of showing academic knowledge with assignments when your professors and or school is not on par with a particular students knowledge, so-to-speak? A student is extremely smart but lacks communication skills due to a disability and is completing advanced work when it is not required. In return, the professors have become egotistical and grade his papers for made up biased issues which have been confirmed to be incorrect grading from other members of the field. How might a student handle a situation such as this and yet still prosper and graduate with a network of potential workplaces when the professors cannot handle someone who knows more then they do and go after him to encourage failure?<issue_comment>username_1: If you have communication issues because of a disability, and it is interfering with your coursework, at least in the US, you would approach the office that handles disabilities. They will work with you to get the disability officially documented, and then you will work with them to discuss appropriate accommodations with your coursework and your instructors. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There are a couple of things that can be going on here. The short version is that you have a disagreement with your instructor about how your work is being graded. You have interpreted the grading one way; I'm sure we would get a different version if your professor were here. It's entirely possible you are answering questions that are not being asked (and this is what is causing your low grades). Here's one example: If I were to ask a student to solve a physics problem using only basic algebraic methods and then discuss the benefits of this method and its limitations, and a student solves the problem using methods that involve calculus, they have solved the problem using "more advanced work", except that they have totally failed to answer the question I asked. In an ideal world, I would communicate to this student that, while their math was great, their lack of understanding of the question means they missed the point of the question (and, in fact had not answered it). I have been in the position of being a student and thinking that a question was simplistically put and that it warranted a more complicated solution than what I thought was being asked for. My solution was to go talk to the professor. He had office hours; I went. I started the conversation by saying that I thought two methods of looking at the problem would yield two different answers, and I explained why I thought that the more complicated answer was better. The professor completely agreed and we had a great chat. (He told me to keep the more complicated answer and wrote on my homework a note to his TA to accept it as is.) One of the big challenges of teaching (perhaps the largest) is teaching by increment, and finding the right "sized" increment. I've taught a wide range of science classes; all of them start with some simplifications that you later find are wrong. These simplifications give students a chance to tackle a new concept without overwhelming them. You may be running up against a limitation of this method. Perhaps you (like the student in my example) are more proficient at math than what is being used in your class, but you are focusing on the math and ignoring what the question is really driving at. My first suggestion to you is to go talk to your professor. From your question, I believe that you feel you have some problems in communicating. Getting better at this is going to require you practicing it. You've also stated that the "professors have become egotistical"; this sounds like an assumption to me, and a dangerous one at that. (I'm not saying that it isn't possible that this has happened, but I see no evidence here.) If you have not spoken directly to your professor, you may be interpreting their responses through an inaccurate lens. Lastly, if you have a disability, you should find out if your school has resources that are available to you, and use them. Someone who is trained to be an advocate for students with disabilities working at your school will be able to give you more detailed advice than a bunch of strangers here on the internet. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
2019/06/12	838	3,471	<issue_start>username_0: I’m doing my master’s and I recently had an exam with one of my favorite professors. I spent a lot of time on my paper and got the highest grade and I’m very happy. But during the oral part of my exam, when I was supposed to defend my paper, the professor pointed out I haven’t referenced much literature he mentioned in class and asked if I found anything of the reading material he gave us interesting. I was very tired and nervous and sort of ignored the question/moved on to another subject. I later sort of indirectly asked him to be my thesis advisor because I’d like to do my thesis on a similar topic to the one I did my term paper for his class on, and he said another professor would be better suited (I don’t think that’s necessarily true). The truth is I reaaally enjoyed all of his classes and found absolutely everything interesting and I really wanted him to be my advisor, but I think he got the wrong idea. Would it be crazy to email him and say I feel weird about the way I dodged his question and explain the situation? I feel like I gave the wrong impression, and that might be why he rejected me. On the other hand, I don’t want to look like a complete weirdo for still thinking about this (it’s been three days), and I think he might have went on vacation and I don’t want to bother him with this because it might all be in my head. What’s the right thing to do? TL;DR: A professor I really like said he wouldn’t be my thesis advisor, and I think it might be because I didn’t answer his question when he asked if I found his class interesting. But I very much do. Should I email him about it?<issue_comment>username_1: If I were you, feeling uneasy about your previous conversation, I'd stop by during your professor's office hours rather than sending an email to express your concern. It's more personal. Pick a time when he appears free. Tell him you've been feeling bad that you may have given him the wrong impression, that you want to make clear that you really like the class and really did find the readings helpful. It's pretty likely he'll set your mind at ease, reassuring you that he didn't take offense and wasn't upset but appreciates your stopping by to discuss. Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I would certainly talk to him. It's maybe not necessary to rehash what was said in the exam, that could be awkward. But it's worth asking for an appointment to discuss your research interests and potential thesis advisors. During that conversation, you can "follow your nose" to see if he really isn't a good fit for you as advisor (e.g., because he has too many students already) or if it's something he is open to revisiting. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Go talk to your professor again about who might be an appropriate alternative. This this should lead to a discussion about your interests and will give you a good chance to express how you really felt about his material. With luck, this will present an opening for you to ask again, but do not be indirect or beat around the bush; ask for what you want. There may be a good reason he can't serve as your advisor (he's over-extended, going on sabbatical, etc), that has nothing to do with you. Also, let this be a lesson. It is a terrible mistake to allow yourself to look bad in public; this is always true in a graduate program where you are being judged by faculty every time they see you. Good luck... Upvotes: 1
2019/06/12	2,574	9,781	<issue_start>username_0: I'm sure you've seen a dozen variations on this question in this forum, but here's mine: I've just finished my first year in a top US PhD program in the physical sciences, which I never dreamed I would be admitted to (ok, that's not true; I dreamed about it quite a lot!). It's gone all right, I guess--I wrote some code for my lab, got As in classes (although grades are utterly beside the point). But I'm not sure it's working out, or that I can make it work out. I'm not sure I have what it takes. I mean, I can hold my own in technical conversations with senior coworkers--even (tactfully) point out flaws in their methods, suggest new approaches, pitch new experiments, and things like that. I've often heard "yeah, good idea!", only for nothing to ever come of it. What's that about? Are they being merely polite? Or am I supposed to be more "enterprising," somehow (whatever that means)? Is it my personality? I'm sometimes told that I need to be more aggressive or self-assured or something like that, but I don't really know what that means (other than "act like more of a jerk"), and don't feel comfortable trying to artificially change my personality in that way. What's wrong with saying "sorry?" It seems like I'm missing something fundamental, maybe socially. It's been extraordinarily hard for me to get into the flow and be part of the team. Some other students walk into a room where people are discussing a project, make some goofy offhand comment, and get a coauthorship. On the other hand, I'm somehow having a hard time even figuring out who I report to, or if I have a me-project, or how to answer my questions about things like reporting and project ownership. There is something going on that I'm deaf to. I don't get it. Students at $PRESTIGIOUS\_INSTITUTION aren't supposed to have this problem. I also haven't really made any friends here. I'm on the shy side, but this isn't like me. I never knew I was so socially inept. If I'd been able to make friends, I wouldn't be bothering you kind people. On top of it all, I'm no longer very sure that I believe in my subfield. It's not what I want to think about anymore when I go home. But I'm too old now to throw away the last couple years and start over. I feel like I've wasted my year. Like I'll never, ever, ever be able to get a thesis together. Is all this the "bad fit" that people talk about when it comes to picking a lab? Am I just incompetent? Do I like reading about science more than I like doing it? Who do I even talk to about this? What do I say, and how do I get answers? Am I just completely trounced? Why don't I go take a job in industry and >quadruple my salary? Maybe it's as simple as "you're fine; this is normal. Get some sleep and go join a club to find friends. Then you'll get less unhappy, and your work situation will improve." I just don't know. I know there are no clear answers here, but maybe others have had similar experiences. Sorry if this is the wrong place to ask this kind of question, or if there are rules around asking imprecise questions or ones that are similar to previous ones. I also know that it's borderline impossible to infer my actual experiences or mental state from this kind of limited view, so there's no easy way for you to judge what's really going on. But I thought I'd try. Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: > > On the other hand, I'm somehow having a hard time even figuring out who I report to, or if I have a me-project, or how to answer my questions about things like reporting and project ownership. > > > This seems like the real problem. If you don't have a well-defined goal, it's natural that you would feel like you're floundering. Advisors are busy; if you don't tell them you need guidance, they will assume everything is working out (until they realize that it isn't, at which point they'll blame you). So, I would recommend asking for a meeting with your advisor (or whoever is in charge of your lab) and try to better define your research goals. I think everything else you describe comes from this. Once you have a good project and are getting interesting results, you will feel more like a part of the lab and some of the other angst will disappear. Your lab might never be a perfect match for you, but I suspect it will suffice in terms of giving you a PhD and a chance to figure out what's important to you when you choose your next position. > > Maybe it's as simple as "you're fine; this is normal. Get some sleep and go join a club to find friends. Then you'll get less unhappy, and your work situation will improve." I just don't know. > > > Pretty much. I would be aggressive in terms of finding a tractable project as described above. But I suspect the lack of sleep and friends are exaggerating the issue, and this is indeed very normal (as you say, there are dozens of posts here about it). > > On top of it all, I'm no longer very sure that I believe in my subfield. It's not what I want to think about anymore when I go home. > > > This is perhaps the secondary problem -- after you get into a rhythm in your current lab/subfield, you may be able to pivot your projects towards areas you are more interested in. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: > > 1. "I'm sure you've seen a dozen variations on this question in this forum, but here's mine:" > > > Agreed. Hope you have read the others. But no worries on doing yours. > > 2. "I never dreamed I would be admitted to" > > > Little bit of a problem. While it is true that there is an inverse Dunning Krueger impact, you also need to consider that there are way too many Ph.D.s created and a tournament system (google it) exists in academia. So to be par, you actually need to be outstanding. > > 3. "I got As in classes (although grades are utterly beside the point)." > > > Don't completely write off grad school grades. I heard the same thing (nobody cares about grades), but getting a 4.0 helped my get into McKinsey, GE, etc. The strange thing is that there's almost an inverse of the inverse where you go from grades mattering to not, to to. A contrarian to the contrarian. > > 4. "I mean, I can hold my own in technical conversations with senior coworkers--even (tactfully) point out flaws in their methods, suggest new approaches, pitch new experiments, and things like that. I've often heard "yeah, good idea!", only for nothing to ever come of it. What's that about? Are they being merely polite? Or am I supposed to be more "enterprising," somehow (whatever that means)? Is it my personality? I'm sometimes told that I need to be more aggressive or self-assured or something like that, but I don't really know what that means (other than "act like more of a jerk"), and don't feel comfortable trying to artificially change my personality in that way. What's wrong with saying "sorry?"" > > > Academia, R&D, physical science is all about pulling your own sled. That's great, that you are a smart cookie and give people good feedback. But irrelevant and wrong intuition to cite it. You need to do your own work AND GET PAPERS DONE. That's the scorecard. > > 5. "It seems like I'm missing something fundamental, maybe socially. It's been extraordinarily hard for me to get into the flow and be part of the team. Some other students walk into a room where people are discussing a project, make some goofy offhand comment, and get a coauthorship. On the other hand, I'm somehow having a hard time even figuring out who I report to, or if I have a me-project, or how to answer my questions about things like reporting and project ownership. There is something going on that I'm deaf to. I don't get it. Students at $PRESTIGIOUS\_INSTITUTION aren't supposed to have this problem." > > > Do your own stuff. If needed, move to a field where it is easier to do independent work (not reliant on Space Shuttle flights or accelerator time...benchtop stuff). Work world will be even harder in terms of team versus self and getting credit an all that. > > 5. "I also haven't really made any friends here. I'm on the shy side, but this isn't like me. I never knew I was so socially inept. If I'd been able to make friends, I wouldn't be bothering you kind people." > > > It sounds cruel, but you need to be more self directed. Head down, butt up over the lab bench. Get a girl/boy friend for social feedback (feel free to look outside your department). Could you imagine a married person worrying so much about the social support? > > 6. "On top of it all, I'm no longer very sure that I believe in my subfield. It's not what I want to think about anymore when I go home. But I'm too old now to throw away the last couple years and start over." > > > This is a real issue. Maybe getting a computer programming job or the like would be better. What worries me is you're not even suggesting a move to an adjacent or alternate field. > > 7. "I feel like I've wasted my year. Like I'll never, ever, ever be able to get a thesis together." > > > Anyone can get a thesis together. There are a gazillion, forgettable doctorates year after year. Really, this bar is low. --- Net, net: I think you are a smart but young type. Who probably did a Ph.D. because it forestalled a decision on what to do, and on getting a real job. (Bad call.) You'd probably be better off either bailing or just buckling down and getting the "union card" in minimum time...and then moving to industry. Kind of your call on how close you are. If less than 2 years, push it through. If more, bail. I know this will come across as a non Stack Exchange answer. But remember, you see your question as unique. So, look at completely different ways of addressing your situation as well. Upvotes: 1
2019/06/12	906	3,995	<issue_start>username_0: I'm sure if I work in industry for a couple of years and then apply for grad school, I would not be disadvantaged compared to straight applying to grad school from undergrad. What if instead I go work in industry for 5-10 years? Specifically top Ph.D. programs in CS, like CMU, MIT, Berkeley, Stanford, etc.<issue_comment>username_1: It probably would depend on what you do and how current you are in the field at the end of that period of time. A lot can change in CS in five years. If you stay current through your job or otherwise and can demonstrate it then you are probably fine. But a job in industry isn't usually about research and a doctoral program is. A masters program would be a bit simpler. But like anyone you would need to make the case in your admissions materials that you are a good candidate for success in the program. And you will have a lot of competition from a lot of people who are pretty current in the field. But, after five or ten years your goals may change. And going from a well paid industry job to the life of a poor student can be quite a change. But if you keep evaluating options over a period of time you can probably be flexible in your needs and goals. The direct path is probably simpler overall, of course, provided you can manage it. If you can gain admission now, it might be worth doing it. If you can't get in now, it is hard to see your chances improve except via very special work experience. Being a drone at Oracle won't help a lot. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I work at the first "etc." in your list of CS departments, and I regularly evaluate graduate admission applications. Rather than guess at the answer, I looked through my department's actual Fall 2019 PhD applicant database, and read the faculty comments on the applicants I found with degrees granted more than five years ago. The non-traditional applicants that we offered PhD admission all had most or all of the following features: * They had excellent academic records from strong undergraduate programs (but not necessarily in computer science). * They did not have embarrassingly low test scores. * They had significant recent course work in computer science, typically as a non-degree student, with excellent performance. * They had strong reference letters from academic sources, either their old professors (who still remembered them) or from more recent instructors from non-degree classes. * Most importantly: *They had worked in a research capacity* during their time outside academia*, either within their company or collaborating with academics. (The first four points are not that different from successful traditional applicants.) Non-traditional applicants that missed one or more of these features were viewed with more caution. In particular, some otherwise strong non-traditional applicants without recent CS coursework (or equivalent work experience) were recommended for admission to our MS program instead of directly to the PhD program. Again, this is not that different from traditional applicants. So here's my advice: If your industry job does not* have a significant research component, you are probably better off applying to MS programs first, as a stepping stone to a later PhD. (Keep in mind that there are two types of MS programs in computer science: course-based/terminal/professional programs, and research-based/thesis programs. You want the latter. All online master's programs are the former.) Even before shifting back to graduate school full-time, you should carve out some time to take one or two advanced courses as a non-degree student, and to interact with the instructors enough that they can serve as good references. Always remember: The main thing that PhD admissions committees at top CS programs are looking for is compelling evidence of research potential. As username_1 says, being a code-monkey at Microsoft or Twitter won't give you that. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
2019/06/12	1,077	4,785	<issue_start>username_0: Most of my work thus far comprises two rather long and detailed papers that rely on a common underlying framework. (I know this is not great for a young academic, but it is what it is right now.) This framework is new and often misunderstood, so I find it is important to devote ample time to explaining it when I present my work. Unfortunately, with time slots at conferences being rather short (~20 minutes), I often don't have time to present what I think are the really cool results from this framework. I have been trying out various approaches and formats for presenting this work under time constraints and don't yet feel confident about it. One thing I haven't tried is the following: glossing over the details of the framework and focusing on the cool results instead. My concern with this approach is that I may not be taken seriously; there seems to be an unspoken norm in my field that young academics ought to present painful details in order to prove how smart they are. However, I struggle myself to follow details, and if the main purpose of presenting my work is to entice people to read it on their own time, then I think that highlighting the cool stuff would be more effective in achieving this goal. My question: is this approach (minimize time for details of framework; maximize time for cool results) worth trying out at my next conference, or would I risk hurting my budding reputation? P.S. It may be helpful to know that my work, and the framework in particular, has a large mathematical component.<issue_comment>username_1: Attempting to fit the material of your paper into a talk is a common mistake: even for shorter papers, there is typically simply too much to include all of the significant details. Instead, I recommend thinking of your talk as an advertisement for your paper. Your goal is to present enough of the key interesting material to be able to convince somebody that it is worth actually reading your paper. Once you accept this as your goal, the length of the talk does not actually matter. As an exercise, you might even try making just a single slide for giving a two minute talk (as one might in a "lightning talks" session). What, then, should you put into whatever time you have available? Think of the story of your work, as opposed to the content. Your abstract may help you here. As a starting point, I would suggest this as a general framework suitable for most talks: * Set up the problem, explaining why somebody should care about what you are doing. * Sketch the approach that you are taking, explaining why it is reasonable. * Point out some critical insights that were necessary to make the approach work. * Show your key results and explain why they are significant. * Come all the way back to the set up and explain the progress that has been made on the problem. Depending on the details of your work, there may be some differences, but this may at least help you get started sketching things out. Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: > > My concern with this approach is that I may not be taken seriously; there seems to be an unspoken norm in my field that young academics ought to present painful details in order to prove how smart they are. > > > There are all kinds of norms that are wrong, and this is one of them. Painful details are just painful and nobody can follow them during the talk, anyway. Without knowing your work, it's hard to give specific guidance but the goal of your talk should be to convince your audience that your work is interesting. Proofs are usually boring. Your framework might be interesting. Your "cool results" are certainly interesting to you so you need to make sure that your audience even understands why the area they come from is interesting. But everything needs to be at the level of explaining the big picture and roughly how the system works. Don't be afraid of saying things that aren't quite true, if the precise statement is just too long and hard to follow. For a trivial example, it's OK to pretend that all prime numbers are odd, as long as you mention that this isn't quite true, and as long as 2 being prime doesn't mess up your whole argument. Keep things mostly about intuition rather than about fiddly technical details. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The other answers here are excellent. I will just add that students and young academics "trying to prove how smart they are" by bombarding audiences with rapid and overwhelming technical detail actually has the opposite effect --- it tells the audience that they are not smart enough to understand audience context and present material in a clear and digestable form. This is usually a sign of low intelligence, not high intelligence. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/12	418	1,883	<issue_start>username_0: Say the deadline to register for a conference is now, but the conference doesn't actually run until 3 months from now. During that time, I will have changed institutions. When I register, should I use my current or future affiliation? There have been several questions here about how to deal with changing affiliations on papers, but I think the nature of my question is different, since there isn't a paper or publication at stake, per se.<issue_comment>username_1: There are no hard and fast rules here, and the conference organizers almost certainly do not care. For most circumstances, the only thing that matters is this: which one do you want people to think of you as being from at the conference? Most of the time, this will be your new institution. If you know you're going to be there when you register, why not just give that affiliation? Otherwise, you may end up doing what I've often seen people with recent changes do, taking a pen and modifying their affiliation on the spot. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I would say, it is not a big deal which affiliation you use for this purpose. One case when it might matter is if you are reimbursed for your trip through one of the institutions. Then, using the right affiliation might help in a smoother accounting process. Also, if you are presenting some research at the conference, you probably want to have the affiliation of the institution where this research was majorly performed. This is reflected in your slides and conference proceedings (if present). These affiliations can be handled separately from the one you use for the registration: slides and paper abstract you usually prepare yourself. If you think that having the new affiliation printed on your badge is important, that might be a reason to use the new one. That's what I would go for. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/13	958	4,284	<issue_start>username_0: Or do they do a sort of selective search? If I apply, is there something I have to do in advance to ensure that will my file be opened, at all?<issue_comment>username_1: In my department, postdoc applications are read first by the faculty in the applicant's research area. Each area chooses about five of its top applicants, and those chosen applications, from all areas, are then read by the department's executive committee, which decides what offers to make. Applications for tenured and tenure-track positions are read by members of the department's personnel committee --- not all applications by all members. The best applications are then brought to the attention of the whole personnel committee. Also, faculty members who are not on the committee can and do read applications and bring particularly strong ones to the committee's attention. So the answer to the question, as clarified in the comment "will they open the pdf?", is that all the applications get looked at by faculty who provide input into the search process, though not necessarily by the members of the search committee. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There are job markets where the first challenge for an applicant is that the recruiter even looks at their application (which leads to several recommendations how to achieve this, most of which seem bizarre). The reason for this is that there are so many applicants for each position that it is unfeasible to even have a one-minute look at each application. This mostly happens in big job markets that are filled with candidates. Now, while some academic job markets are filled with candidates, they are certainly not big. Academic jobs are very specialised and there are often only a few people worldwide who have a reasonable chance of getting the job. Therefore, I see no reason why your application would not at least be looked at. Of course, your application may be discarded very quickly due to not fulfilling some crucial criteria, or you may not be seriously considered for the job because this position is tailored to a known person and the job posting is purely pro forma. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Concrete search procedures vary, but (for faculty searches) often follow along these lines: 1. An administrative assistant does a pre-filtering, and discards all applications of people not meeting the formal requirements (e.g., no PhD). 2. One or two people in the search committee (or, sometimes, an external person such as a postdoc) do an initial ranking. Essentially, they compile some basic info on each applicant, such as which school the candidate graduated from, which field they are in, how much and where they have published, and bibliometrics such as the h-index (if the school cares about such things). 3. Based on the list, an inofficial shorter list is created of candidates that warrant a closer look. For these, some or all members of the committee read the entire application package (to varying degrees of detail), and discuss. Potentially, all or a subset of candidates on this list are sent out to external review. The committee decides on an official short list. 4. Candidates on the official short list are interviewed and ranked. At some point during this process recommendation letters may be collected. Note that I am not claiming that this is exactly the process that every university uses, but these basic steps I have seen in three different universities in Europe. For postdocs, the search procedure may be much more informal. To summarize: > > Do postdoc/professor search committees read the files from all candidates? > > > Not necessarily. For a call that receives many applications (and this realistically includes most calls), there is usually some amount of pre-filtering before applications are studied in much detail. EDIT: I guess it also depends on what you mean with "read". I agree with username_1 that it is highly likely that some member of the search committee will at some point have opened each PDF (at least of the candidates that are not filtered out due to not fulfilling basic job requirements), but I would not count on each application package actually being read in any detail by at least one professor. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/13	4,042	17,610	<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student from a small and relatively-new private university that was set up overseas. The main home campus might be quite well known. My supervisor 'left' the university 4 months ago, but he has been helping me all the way until I submitted my PhD thesis. I submitted my PhD thesis 2 months ago, but my Graduate School insists that I should find new supervisor or they will not arrange my viva. They also do not make things clear in writing, but wish to meet me instead. I did not agree to meet as I am concerned about threats to me and behaviours that breach policy and standard and conditions that they do not want to put into writing so I cannot use as legal evidences. Instead, I have discussed everything in writing. I cannot agree to find new supervisor for the following reasons. 1) I already finished all my PhD work and submitted the thesis and therefore would not expect the need for any new supervisor who does not know about me or my work. It is like I submitted my exam paper, and expect it to be marked, no matter if any problems occurred in the school. 2) I have done a lot of novel and important research and technical work so far which I would like to exploit further commercially and academically and do not want the involvement of others newly coming into the scene to stifle, limit or conflict with me. 3) The supervisors that were proposed or allocated to me are not in the area of my work (although the School insists that they are). I would like to pursue job opportunities that require my graduation certificate as quickly as possible. However, I feels that the Graduate School is collaborating with the Faculty to coerce me into compromising my interests that could have been supported according to the Quality manual. I am now very emotionally distressed. I see no logic in the School authorities bullying me into conditions that are against my interests, and are holding hostage my viva opportunity. I already had several email exchanges with the School authorities but they still have refused to allow me to proceed to viva without agreeing to a change of supervisor. On the side, the Graduate School had also forwarded my thesis to some faculty members even when they have not sent it to my examiners, despite my application for thesis confidentiality. The faculty representative for postgraduate students had also accused me of allegations of the Head of School who they want to allocate as my supervisor but I refused and explained the reasons why (he said these reasons are allegations). He cc'd his email to me to the Head of School and other School authorities, even when the school said that we can discuss with this representative confidentiality. His breach of confidentiality also makes me concerned about retaliation from the school authorities. I did have a co-supervisor who should be able to deal with being my supervisor, but it seems that the co-supervisor withdrew from being available after the Head of School discussed with the co-supervisor. Now I am asked to find a new supervisor which is a problem created by the School for me. What can I do? I am self funding while they are holiding up my viva. I am also trying to do some jobs to make ends me for me and my family. I am really struggling to defend my rights and interests in this university, and I appreciate any comments you may have. I have been writing to the home campus to ask for help, but they keep pushing back the school's problems to my campus. Update Dear all, thank you for the comments. I have attended a video meeting. Instead of resolving the problems the faculty representative criticised me for poor communication with the second supervisor. Instead of accepting responsibility they tried to push the responsibility to me. It was like a heated conversation. They also called me on the phone to ask me to change supervision team and later when they wrote email to me to follow up they deliberately did not state this. Instead they wrote in email not consistent with the phone call that my viva will be arranged with the examiners selected and if there is any conflict of interest with the examiners I should submit evidences. However, that was two weeks ago and now there is still no news about the examiner arrangement! I wonder as the English is not their native language they will claim misunderstanding.<issue_comment>username_1: Based on your description I am not convinced that there is as much malice involved as you think there is. This just sounds like bureaucratic rules at work. In that case this is a fight you cannot win. Alternatively, you could try to transfer to the new institution of your old advisor. But then you have to deal with all the bureaucratic problems involved with that. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The first thing you should do in this situation is to get a copy of the rules for your PhD program, and read the rules for supervision and for the viva voce. Usually these rules will stipulate a requirement that the student must be supervised by a member of the faculty, and this would generally include the entire period of the candidature up until the degree requirements have been met. (Even if the thesis is submitted, it has not yet been approved by the examiners, so it would be usual for you to have a supervisor, in case changes to your thesis are required.) The fact that you do not want a new supervisor is really beside the point --- it is most likely a requirement of the degree program. If this is a requirement under the rules of your university, it would not be unreasonable for the Department to take actions to satisfy this requirement. This might also explain why your thesis has been passed around to various members of the faculty (i.e., they are looking for someone willing to supervise you in this area of research). With regard to the viva voce, the degree rules should set out the requirements for being able to sit. This might be something that you are able to undertake at your own discretion, or it may be something that requires the consent of your supervisor (in which case you will need to have a supervisor to proceed). If the Graduate School is requiring you to find a new supervisor before arranging this examination, then you should check that this is a requirement. If it is, then you are going to need a supervisor, but based on the concerns you express in your question, I would recommend looking for one with a "light touch". Finally, with regard to meetings, you mention being afraid of "threats" or other breaches of required conditions, but it is not clear why you are expecting this. Unless there is some good reason to the contrary, I would recommend that you try to resolve this matter cordially and professionally, by meeting with the relevant staff and discussing the requirements of your degree, and your plan to meet these requirements. Make sure you make a file note directly after each meeting, so that you have a record of what happened. If you like, you can also circulate your file note to other participants (make sure it is accurate and neutral), to ensure that there is no dispute as to what was agreed in the meeting. Nothing you have described in your question sounds to me like bullying (although I was unable to make sense of your description of allegations from the postgraduate representative). Nevertheless, it does appear that you are in conflict with your Department over your degree requirements, and you will need to establish exactly what these requirements are. At worst, the university staff are imposing requirements that may not be in the rules, and you should check to see if this is the case. --- In bureaucratic struggles of this sort, the best outcomes often go to the person who has familiarised themselves with the applicable rules, and who is diligent in proceeding according to those rules and documenting all relevant communications. I would therefore recommend you undertake the following actions (in order): * Read the relevant university rules for your PhD program. In particular, find out if it is a requirement for you to have a supervisor, and find out the requirements for the viva voce. Determine whether or not you meet these requirements. * Based on this information, and assuming you meet the requirements for the viva voce, email the Graduate Coordinator for your Department (cc. to the Head of Department) and ask them to arrange this examination, citing the relevant rules, and the fact that you meet these requirements. On the other hand, if you do not meet the requirements for the viva voce (e.g., if it requires supervisor approval), then you will need to proceed with whatever is required to meet those requirements. * If the Department staff want to meet with you, I would recommend meeting with them, and be professional and cordial. If the rules require you to have a supervisor then you are going to need to bite the bullet and cooperate with this. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Don't panic, take a few deep breaths :) First let's back up a little bit: what did your supervisor plan for you before leaving? Normally it was his responsibility to arrange something with the administration with respect to your PhD. Even if there was no plan you say that he has been rather helpful, so maybe you can contact him and ask him for advice? he's certainly the best person to tell you what's best for you and your PhD. If you trust him to protect your interests, it would be ideal if he could recommend somebody from the department as a supervisor. It's very common in this kind of circumstances to have a supervisor just for administrative purposes: they would just sign the paperwork and probably not even look seriously at the content of your work, so they don't even need to be from the same field. It's important that you understand that the requirement to have an official supervisor must be met for you to pass the PhD. It would be the same anywhere, your school is not doing anything special by enforcing this requirement. Even if you had the best reasons in the world, it's a standard rule in academia: you can get any supervisor you want, but if you don't get any you won't be allowed to pass the viva anywhere. So sorry to say that being stubborn about that is not going to get you anywhere, currently it seems to me you are your own worst enemy: by refusing this you entered into a conflict with the school administration, and that's not ideal when you are hoping to pass the viva soon. Apparently you were not aware of this requirement and it's not your fault, it's your supervisor who apparently wasn't very careful and didn't plan things properly. You should contact him and you should also talk to this co-supervisor: normally the co-supervisor is the natural choice when the main supervisor has to be replaced, so there needs to be a clear discussion: if they refuse to supervise you, and it's only on paper for only a few months so it's not a big responsibility, they owe you at least an explanation. --- PS: "It is like I submitted my exam paper, and expect it to be marked, no matter if any problems occurred in the school." Actually a viva is not really like a regular exam. In principle the supervisor is the one asking the committee to consider giving you the PhD diploma, so they kind of vouch for you. This is why the supervisor's approval is required before passing the viva and their presence is required at the viva. You can see it like this: your application to the PhD doctors' club will only be reviewed if it is supported by an existing member of the club ;) Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: One detail in your question that popped out to me was this: > > They also do not make things clear in writing, but wish to meet me instead. I did not agree to meet as I am concerned about threats to me and behaviours that breach policy and standard and conditions that they do not want to put into writing so I cannot use as legal evidences. Instead, I have discussed everything in writing. > > > Unfortunately, written communication can often be a lot slower and less expressive than speaking face to face, so your school might have a perfectly legitimate reason to wish to arrange a discussion in person. If you're concerned about inappropriate things being said "off the record" in such a meeting, I would suggest you agree to the meeting but bring a voice recorder.\* Note that the legality of recording spoken conversations (and the admissibility of such recordings as evidence of wrongdoing) varies between different jurisdictions (and also depending on the circumstances where the conversation occurs). As you have not specified where you live, you will have to check your local laws on this (and/or consult a local lawyer), but generally speaking the rules are likely to fall more or less into one of the following three broad cases: 1. You're free to record any conversation you participate in, even secretly. 2. You're allowed to record the conversation, but must inform the other participants of the fact that you're doing so. After being so informed, they can either speak on record or not speak at all. 3. You will need everyone's consent to record the conversation. If they do not consent, you may choose to turn around and leave. In cases 2 and 3, you will need to start the conversation by stating that you will be recording it, and possibly asking if anyone present objects to it. If so, try to do this in a way that will not come across as unnecessarily confrontational. Useful phrases to work into your statement may include e.g. "to avoid any later misunderstanding", "for my peace of mind" and/or "just in case I forget anything". Don't say anything that implies you don't trust the other people present (even if you really don't). You may also want to explicitly state that you don't object to anyone else present also recording the conversation, either. If you like, you could also ask for permission to bring a third-party observer to the meeting. Of course, unless there's some specific rule saying that you're allowed to bring anyone you like to such a meeting (which there might be, but it may be buried in your university by-laws), this probably requires you to find someone sufficiently trustworthy and impartial to be acceptable to both sides. If the level of trust breakdown evident in your question is mutual, this might be tricky, but your university may have some kind of an ombudsperson [whose job is to mediate such conflicts](https://www.jefferson.edu/content/dam/university/skmc/faculty/overview/ombudsman.pdf) and to whose presence the staff may find it hard to object. Of course, you'd presumably need to discuss the situation with the ombudsperson first (which may be a good idea anyway). Anyway, as other answerers have already noted, your department head and the other people involved may have perfectly valid reasons for requiring you to find a new supervisor for your viva, as your former supervisor is no longer a member of the faculty. Of course, that doesn't prove that they couldn't also be insisting on it for some nefarious purpose, although, as you noted yourself, it's not obvious what they would have to gain by doing so. In any case, in situations like this, it's usually a good idea to at least consider the possibility that everyone (or at least most people) involved might just be trying to resolve an awkward bureaucratic situation in good faith. Sure, don't trust anyone blindly or sign anything without reading it, but also try not to needlessly dig your heels in and create unnecessary confrontation just because you suspect someone must be out to get you in some way. --- \*) Your cell phone probably has a voice recording app preinstalled on it, or you can download one. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: If I were you, I would just choose a new supervisor and graduate as soon as possible, rather than messing up with the HR (or whatever they are called). > > 1) I already finished all my PhD work and submitted the thesis and > therefore would not expect the need for any new supervisor who does > not know about me or my work. It is like I submitted my exam paper, > and expect it to be marked, no matter if any problems occurred in the > school. > > > You only work with the new advisor to complete the viva, and do not produce any research result. Unless you tell everybody you meet, nobody outside your school will know (s)he is your supervisor. It is unlikely that they will put you on your CV as their student for some paperwork. Even if they do, why is it a big deal? In industry, nobody cares who your supervisor is. In academia, people also rarely mention their supervisor (unless the supervisor is a big shot in the field :-) ). > > 2) I have done a lot of novel and important research and technical > work so far which I would like to exploit further commercially and > academically and do not want the involvement of others newly coming > into the scene to stifle, limit or conflict with me. > > > After you graduate, you are free to do whatever you want, e.g. cutting all connections with the current department. About the authorship, it is extremely unlikely that they will try to claim any work you did with your former advisor. > > 3) The supervisors that were proposed or allocated to me are not in > the area of my work (although the School insists that they are). > > > This makes any risks in 2) even less likely. Those supervisors may be as annoyed as you are about the process. Upvotes: 1
2019/06/14	963	4,146	<issue_start>username_0: I'm a teaching assistant for an introductory programming course. A student in the course approached me and asked if I would tutor them for a different discrete mathematics course in return for payment. I grade all of the material for the programming course, and so I feel like there's a conflict of interest in receiving any payment from the student, even if its unrelated to the programming course. Am I overthinking it or is it right to think there's an issue here?<issue_comment>username_1: I personally think it could be managed, but many others would disagree, including some people with direct authority. I think it would be wise if you did a bunch of checking before you take this on. Check with the professors in both courses as well as the department head/chair. If any of them suggest it is a problem, then it is a problem. If all say ok, then it is probably fine, as long as you have some rules for yourself about what you can and can't do. One or more of those people may ok it but suggest some rules as well. You don't want to do anything improper of course, but you also don't want anyone else to think that you might be doing something improper. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You're correct in feeling uneasy. Even if you are not yourself improperly influenced, there would definitely be the appearance of possibility of improper influence, which is as important, in terms of the impact on other peoples' actions, as actual impropriety. Even tutoring \_for\_free\_, since you are in the same dept as the people giving the other course, could be perceived as improper, for various reasons. Best to keep "squeaky clean", I think. Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: In the US university where I was a TA we were specifically instructed not to get anything worth more then $15 from a student while we are responsible for their grades. Otherwise the student or other students in the group can send a complaint to the dean and accuse you that your grading was biased. In other countries, where customs, policies and procedures are different, the situation can be different (e.g., in Russia it would likely be fine). But if you work in the USA - I advise against accepting that offer. The comments to my answer prompted me to add this update: There are two issues here: an issue of personal integrity and an issue of administrative consequences. For the personal integrity, you can answer yourself: can you stay unbiased if you accept the offer? There are methods to handle it, like announcing all the policies in the start of the semester, using automatic grading with transparent standards that you cannot override, etc. You know yourself better than anyone, so you have to answer that question for yourself. Now, the administrative aspect. Even if you know you were fair, someone can suspect and accuse you AND your student of cheating the system - and that's the issue of consequences. Consequences will depend on the local laws and policies and practices of your institution. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: You should not accept... ------------------------ You would be in an unacceptable conflict of interests if you accept payment directly from one of the students whose work you check and grade. Also, you would likely be violating university bylaws/regulations, and could be subject to disciplinary measures and/or termination as an employee. I'm not saying that will happen, but it's not impossible. ... but offer to meet and talk. ------------------------------- Having said that - it's possible that what the student needs is not a paid tutor, but rather, s/he is having difficulty coping (more generally than just with discrete math), and wants the help of someone authoritative, familiar, who seems to have his/her best interest at heart. Consider offering the student to come by your office (\) during reception hours, or at some other time, for a talk. If nothing else, you would be helping him/her with a bit of emotional support. (\) - if you don't have an office, that's a problem. Unionize, strike and get offices. Upvotes: 3
2019/06/14	1,722	7,412	<issue_start>username_0: I have some ideas related to computer architecture/electrical engineering on which I would like to get feedback from academics. A professor at a university I visited has the belief that something I proposed is crackpot, and that I must be delusional for not accepting his arguments. I turned up out of the blue one day for the first meeting, which I suspect many "crackpots" likely do, and I suspect that this fact alone has made him tune out. He has a very fixed mental model of the concepts being dealt with, and makes many assumptions that only hold in certain cases, for particular definitions of a concept, or for what has been observed so far but not tested in the context of the idea. An unfairly high standard of proof is then requested of me, when a much less clear-cut body of evidence, or less-rigorous tests lend support to my claim. Discussions with other people educated in the area are more fruitful, but the same fallacies that only apply conditionally are frequently trotted out. I am not formally educated in the field, and he uses this during every part of the conversation to insist that only a learned person (professor or researcher in the field) has the ability or competence to comprehend the concepts properly (which is false), and that only such a trained person who has built themselves up from the bottom can develop and spot flaws in the difficult concepts entertained. (This is not true, and I believe the following analogy applies to my situation: one can easily run or swim before they can walk.) Competence doesn't always make you strictly better at something in the same way that one number is always bigger than another. If I ask him to not dismiss these options and rebuttals out of hand, he simply says that everyone says that... Bozo the Galileo clown... you're not right because you're laughed at. [A strawman](http://amasci.com/freenrg/arrhenus.html) which I never implied - I am being laughed at (because I am right?) in spite of being right. Since I'm introducing new terminology and modifying existing terminology (while trying to clearly explain what I mean by it) in some of these discussions, I have also been ridiculed for essentially describing something that few others understand, and accused of 'trying to sound smart and be the next lone genius' of the field. Without this new terminology, explaining what I mean by it gets clunky and easy to confuse with similar concepts already employed in the field. What can I do to open some kind of productive dialogue or actually get heard out (should I talk about the details of the ideas here)? Publishing a full academic paper (as an outsider) and going through potential rigamarole during the process seems a poor option to me; though pointers would be appreciated if you feel this is appropriate regardless. I'm quite sure that I'm either right about this idea, or any errors in it have not been brought up yet and are in the more minute details.<issue_comment>username_1: Let's simplify your circumstance into two dichotomous possibilities: either your proposed "crackpot" idea is wrong, or it is right. (There are of course other more graded possibilities, but this strict dichotomy will help me to give a useful answer to your question.) If your idea is wrong then exchanges with these critics might help you to see why it is wrong, which can assist you to reformulate or abandon your idea. If your idea is right (or at least, right enough to constitute progress) then your goal ought to be to demonstrate its usefulness in the face of this criticism. This will entail making some demonstration that your idea explains some aspect of reality better than presently existing theories with which it is competing. In regard to this latter exercise, I would suggest you consider adopting <NAME>'s dictum that a theory is as good as its ability to make predictions about reality. In regard to the construction and assessment of a theory, [Friedman (1966, p. 41)](http://kimoon.co.kr/gmi/reading/friedman-1966.pdf) argued that "[c]omplete “realism” is clearly unattainable, and the question whether a theory is realistic “enough” can be settled only by seeing whether it yields predictions that are good enough for the purpose in hand or that are better than predictions from alternative theories." Friedman argues that people tend to be overly concerned with arguing about the realism of assumptions underlying a theory, when they ought to be more concerned with measuring the adherence of the theory to reality, via its ability to make good predictions. In your question, you state that your disagreement with these learned men is in large part a matter of disagreement about whether various underlying assumptions hold in the context of the problem you are trying to solve. Your critics hold certain assumptions that you say do not apply in the context that is of interest for your idea. Assuming you are right, I will refer to these as the "false assumptions" of your critics. If you are right about your idea, and it is more realistic than present alternatives, then it should be able to make better predictions in those contexts. Thus, a demonstration of the validity of your idea would have three parts: (1) an argument against the false assumptions that you say don't hold in this context; (2) an argument in favour of your alternative idea, and why it is more realistic in the relevant context; and (3) a demonstration that your theory makes predictions about reality that are better than predictions made by theories using the false assumptions. If you are willing to undertake the work to do this, then it will either yield a demonstration that your idea performs poorly, or it will yield a demonstration that your idea has merit. As to the "standard of proof", obviously the more rigorous you can be the better, but if you can give a good demonstration of the practical/predictive ability of your idea, this will go a long way to demonstrating validity of the idea. Finally, you are right to ignore [arguments to authority](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority), or other fallacious arguments that do not deal with the merits of your idea. The fact that you are not educated in the field should not be entirely discounted, but it does not constitute an argument against your idea. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I would recommend that you learn the foundations of the field in which you want to contribute. To do this, I'd recommend taking a university course on the subject, if possible, and/or reading one or more textbooks. If you choose to read a textbook, I'd recommend that you (1) choose something conventional which is widely used in universities; (2) start from the beginning and don't skip anything; and (3) do as many of the exercises as is practical. As you proceed, try to understand the professor's "fixed mental model" and the "fallacies that only apply conditionally". As Nietzsche said, "The thinker needs no one to refute him, for that he suffices himself." Be your own harshest critic and make sure you thoroughly understand potential objections to your theory. Try to think of every possible reason why your theory might be wrong. If you do this, and you still believe your theory to be correct, you will have better odds of persuading others to take you seriously. Good luck. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/14	2,550	10,387	<issue_start>username_0: How useful is the GRE for the academic career/research/daily academic tasks? It's not required in my country but I'm wondering about the intrinsic value of its study material.<issue_comment>username_1: The GRE's effectively only good for one thing - getting admitted to graduate school. You will need it if the program requires it as part of your application package. Most US graduate programs do require it. If you study elsewhere then there's a good chance you don't need the GRE. About whether it's useful study material, note that the GRE is an exam, not study material. You can use the GRE as a benchmark to see whether you're mastering the study material, but not as the study material itself. As for whether it's useful, knowing more things is usually never worse than knowing fewer things. However, will knowing more about undergraduate-level e.g. physics or mathematics help you in your career/research/daily tasks? If you teach physics or mathematics, then presumably so (although at that point you probably don't need the GRE because you are already intimately familiar with the material), or maybe if you work in science communication, provide private tutoring, etc. In most careers though, it will be irrelevant, and you can ignore the GRE. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Any exam is really only useful for whatever organizations look at scores on that exam, so the GRE is itself mostly just good for getting into graduate school. Of course, it could in principle also be used to judge for yourself whether you have the competency necessary for graduate school. That said, [there is some evidence](https://www.sciencemag.org/careers/2019/05/wave-graduate-programs-drop-gre-application-requirement) to suggest that success on the GRE is a poor indicator of success in graduate school, and many graduate schools are dropping it as a requirement. What that means is that the GRE may not be particularly useful as a metric, for yourself or others, regarding your ability to handle graduate school in your chosen field. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: We should distinguish between the different GREs. The general GRE has three components: * Math. If you are in physics, math, or engineering, you should get a perfect or near-perfect score. These are middle-school math questions; you should be able to ace this test with minimal preparation. In non-STEM fields, your ability to do math is unlikely to be considered relevant. So for most applicants, extensive studying for the math section is not needed and will not be helpful after admission. (I cannot speak to the "soft sciences"). * Verbal. These are difficult questions about reading comprehension, logical thinking, and English vocabulary. All of these are nice things to have, but can be difficult for non-native speakers. Further, it is difficult to study for this test; memorizing long lists of vocabulary is tedious, time-consuming, and will have a small impact. Learning to read carefully and think critically is helpful, but the GRE is a dubious measure of this. * Writing. This is the only one I really think is valuable -- being a strong writer really helps your day-to-day life in academia, and the GRE's methodology seems reasonable (write an essay on a given topic and have it scored). There are also subject GREs in physics, math, and other subjects. These are specifically designed for those applying to graduate school in the respective subjects. The physics one allocates 1.7 minutes per question on average. Obviously this is very different from research, where you can spend months working on one problem. Still, this does have some loose connection with your familiarity with certain basic concepts. TL;DR: the general GRE has limited usefulness after you get into grad school and is difficult to study for, so I do not recommend spending time on it. Possible exception for the writing section. Studying for the subject GRE is not a bad way to review certain basic concepts that you may have forgotten, but success on the subject GRE is only loosely correlated with success in research; they are fundamentally different endeavors. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: **tl;dr- If you're planning to go to grad school for one of the fields that has a [subject-specific GRE](https://www.ets.org/gre/subject/about), then the review materials for that subject-specific GRE might be helpful to you. However, the standard-GRE is more like an aptitude test (sorta like an IQ test); it's unlikely to be worth reviewing unless you're just curious how you'd do to boost your confidence. --- ### Two types of GRE: The standard GRE and subject-specific GRE's. There are two main types of GRE: 1. The standard GRE. If someone takes any GRE, they likely take this one. It's mostly meant to be an aptitude test. 2. Subject-specific GRE exams.** These exams focus on specific subjects, usually for students who want to get a graduate degree in that subject. For example, the Math-GRE is for prospective Math graduate students. In the United States, prospective graduate students are commonly required to take the standard GRE. Some departments additionally recommend/require a subject-test. It's worth stressing the huge difference between these. For example, there's an "Quantitative Reasoning" section on the standard-GRE that most people just call the "Math section", but the most advanced math is stuff that most students should know long before graduating high-school. Any student going into a mathematical field should find the study materials to be utterly trivial, or else they're probably in trouble. By sharp contrast, the subject-GRE for Math is designed to test Math majors on what they should've learned in college. From [the official website](https://www.ets.org/gre/subject/about/content/mathematics): > > Mathematics Test > ---------------- > > > ### Overview > > > * The test consists of approximately 66 multiple-choice questions drawn from courses commonly offered at the undergraduate level. > * Approximately 50 percent of the questions involve calculus and its applications — subject matter that is assumed to be common to the backgrounds of almost all mathematics majors. > * About 25 percent of the questions in the test are in elementary algebra, linear algebra, abstract algebra, and number theory. The remaining questions deal with other areas of mathematics currently studied by undergraduates in many institutions. > > > Unlike the standard-GRE, someone who wants to get a PhD in Physics or Engineering could do poorly on this Math test while still being adequately prepared for their PhD program. --- ### Study materials for the standard-GRE probably not useful. There're three parts to the standard-GRE: 1. Verbal Reasoning If I recall correctly, it's mostly a lot of vocabulary questions. They call it "reasoning", but I think the logical aspects of the questions are pretty trivial if you know what the words mean. But, many of the words they choose aren't commonly encountered in regular or even academic texts. 2. Analytical Reasoning This is the "Math section" of the standard-GRE. The math in it's really basic; you probably learned the basic math in early elementary school (Ages 5-7 in the US), while the most advanced math is more middle-school-level (Ages 12-14 in the US). 3. Analytical Writing This is the "essay section" of the standard-GRE. I think the goal's basically to show that you can write a short essay on some topic. Its grading seems more subjective than the prior two sections'. Study materials for these likely aren't too helpful. Because: 1. The *verbal reasoning* (vocabulary) section can be studied by memorizing lots of vocabulary for words that many people don't know specifically because they're rarely (if ever) used. Your time could be better spent by studying just about anything else; I'd put this knowledge as being about on-par with Dungeons and Dragons (D&D) trivia. 2. The *analytical reasoning* (math) section is just basic math stuff. I think most people should be able to ace it if time weren't a factor. If a student were to find this math study-worthy, then they may not be right for graduate-level studies. 3. The *analytical writing* (essay) section has test-takers write a short essay. If any part of the standard-GRE is worth studying for, it might be this one, just because it's practice in basic communication. However, I'd suggest that if you want to practice this material, you might want to try writing some good questions/answers on StackExchange instead. --- ### If there's a subject-test for your major, its study materials could be useful. At current, there seem to be 6 [subject-specific GRE's](https://www.ets.org/gre/subject/about): 1. [Biology](https://www.ets.org/gre/subject/about/content/biology); 2. [Chemistry](https://www.ets.org/gre/subject/about/content/chemistry); 3. [Literature in English](https://www.ets.org/gre/subject/about/content/literature_english); 4. [Mathematics](https://www.ets.org/gre/subject/about/content/mathematics); 5. [Physics](https://www.ets.org/gre/subject/about/content/physics); 6. [Psychology](https://www.ets.org/gre/subject/about/content/psychology). If you're preparing to enter graduate studies in one of these areas, or else you're just interested in what undergrads in those areas often study, then it could be productive to review the study materials for them. For example, if you're interested in getting a PhD in Physics, then you might want to look over the [Physics](https://www.ets.org/gre/subject/about/content/physics)-GRE to review what you may've covered in undergrad and may see again in grad school. However, even though Physics is a math-heavy subject, you don't necessarily need to worry about the content on the [Mathematics](https://www.ets.org/gre/subject/about/content/mathematics)-GRE, which would be more of something for a prospective Math graduate student to review. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: The GRE is useless as anything but a filter for applications. For instance, the ability to do middle school level mathematics in a 1 minute time frame does not reflect on the individual's ability to do higher level mathematics research and produce innovative things, as long as they have a background. Upvotes: 0
2019/06/14	1,045	4,633	<issue_start>username_0: I'm about to start a 2-year postdoc in math with a possibility to stay a 3rd year. This means I will probably be on the job market in one year. I am planning to apply for tenure-track research positions. As I understand it, to get a tenure-track offer I should try to get at least one paper in a top journal. When I look at my research statement, I don't think I have projects that will lead to papers in, say, the Annals or JAMS or Duke. I listed a few projects that I think can get done quickly but are basically extensions of other people's papers, the idea being that these are "low-hanging fruit." I also listed some long-term ideas but they are speculative and aren't concrete problems. If I follow the research statement I probably won't have a paper in a top journal. Am I doing something wrong? Edit: I should also add that my letter writers all looked at my research statement (they requested it) and didn't say that anything was off.<issue_comment>username_1: You do the best you can do with the ideas you have. Most very good mathematicians can’t come up with a JAMS worthy result every year, and it’s harder when you’re just out of graduate school. You do need to spend some time on some more ambitious ideas as a postdoc, but “more ambitious” doesn’t mean JAMS-worthy and there’s luck in which ideas pay off and when there’s an unexpected connection that turns up when you’re in the middle of a project. Yes if you want a job at a top place you might need top publications, but all you can do is do your best with the ideas you have the expertise you developed. Most of us only get a couple publications at that level in our life. Aim to be productive and to increase the level of your publications, but thinking about how to get into JAMS or the Annals isn’t helpful. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This is orthogonal to the actual question, I realize. The answer of [username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/131883/75368) is direct and seems correct to me. But I'd like to make a couple of recommendations about what to do during the postdoc so that when you enter the actual job market you are in the best possible position whether or not your research has resulted in completed high level papers. First, your current backlog seems appropriate with both short and long term projects. You want to maintain and extend that. The first recommendation is that you keep a research notebook in which you record ideas, as they occur to you, that might be exploited later when you have time. Researchers in large companies like IBM keep a "patent book" in which they record "possibly patentable" ideas when they occur. You can do the same with any sort of research. Periodically review the entries in your notebook to see whether you have additional extensions of them or can now develop them more fully. This notebook can form the basis of your next "research statement" when you are in the job market. Having a good backlog of projects of various difficulty and in various states of development can be an asset. Research in most fields, including, or maybe especially, mathematics can't really be time boxed. The results come when the insights come. But one big insight is knowing what might be possible to develop - and not forgetting it in the heat of other pursuits. Keep a notebook. Update it constantly. And if you get blocked for some reason on your currently most important project, go to the notebook to see what you can do now while the main project gestates for a while. Have several irons in the fire, some hotter than others. The other recommendation is to use your time as a postdoc to develop collaborative opportunities. Talk to a lot of people about your and their ideas. Think about whether it is advantageous to work with them. And make sure you capture anything significant (even slightly significant) in your research notebook. But one important benefit of such collaborative relationships is that you might eventually take a job at a small institution that doesn't have a lot of local opportunities. If you have a lot of prior relationships then you can still carry on a rich research program even if you are somewhat isolated. Even a relatively large department can be weak in your particular research area. The notebook is useful for another reason, actually. It is useful for a new faculty member to have some ideas available for student research. If you have several partly developed ideas, perhaps they can be taken over by students. You already have given them some thought so it is easier to advise and guide them. Upvotes: 3
2019/06/14	612	2,680	<issue_start>username_0: I wanted to apply for a particular postdoc in the UK that has a start date in September. It is a great opportunity but I would need to delay the start date as I am currently in the US and it would not be possible for me to move before then. How common is it to delay the start of postdocs? Is it worth applying even with the knowledge that I wouldn't be able to start by the advertised date?<issue_comment>username_1: Not especially common, no. But you have to take it up with them to see if it is possible. No one else can answer. It depends on field, generally, and on the particular needs of the institution. In some fields it wouldn't be especially disruptive to have you come in late, provided no teaching is involved. But in some lab sciences (for example) there might be a firm need for a person in place by a certain date. The agency funding the postdoc might also have firm dates in mind, after which funding ends. But it would be a mistake to apply without exploring it first with them. If you get pretty far along before you find out you are actually not eligible, then you've wasted everyone's time. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I would definitely ask them if that could work. Sometimes the timelines on funding are restricted, but often it's not set in stone and there is some flexibility. Be honest from the outset about what your existing commitments are though - I would definitely suggest getting in touch before doing the formal application. My current postdoc position (also in the UK) wanted someone to start straight away, but I was in another post and was really keen to see that project through, so they were willing to delay for 7 months for me. I think they actually respected that I was loyal to my existing role, even though it was ending soon. For postdoc positions, I think getting the right candidate is often more important than getting a candidate ASAP (if that's possible within the scope of the funding). Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It is very common to negotiate the start date. All of the postdoctoral researchers I hired or was involved in recruiting came at different times than advertised. Most funding bodies allow you to defer funding for a few months. For instance, EPSRC allows up to 3 months delay for start of projects. Also, most funders allow a so-called no-cost extension, meaning you can extend the end of the project without losing the money. Just apply and in your cover letter say that you would be available in October, for instance. Source: I am faculty (engineering) at a UK university and have been involved in recruiting 5 postdoctoral researchers. Upvotes: 3
2019/06/14	368	1,640	<issue_start>username_0: I am doing a publication using a specific optical instrument protected by different patents. To see how it works I opened it and I have redrawn the arrangement of the optical components. Am I allow to publish my drawing for explaining the physical principle behind the measurements I have performed during my research? It's not a reverse engineered designed, there are no specific distances between the components or other relevant details for the construction. I am showing an abstraction but more or less the parts and the arrangement is the same as the real one. The drwaings, are of course mine. I would like to publish on my PhD thesis in Italy, but in general I am interested on any pubblication.<issue_comment>username_1: If the device is protected by patents, the filed patents contains all relevant information about its design, its function and its protected claims. Therefore, I think publishing a high-level summary of how it works should not be a problem at all. In fact, you might want to read the relevant patents to verify your understanding of the device! Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Following up on the answer of [username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/131899/75368), you are also safe from copyright issues (a separate thing) if you are using your own drawings, especially if they are an abstraction of the ideas in the patent. There is no restriction on public discussion of patents (most places). In fact the patent process requires disclosure. But you can't republish copyright material. And your description suggests you aren't doing that. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/14	1,472	6,149	<issue_start>username_0: I teach math classes and I was speaking with the assistant chair of my department about a student who claimed that I was rude and put my students down when lecturing. (I'm a Ph.D. student.) This particular student was seeking a letter recommending tuition for my class be refunded (she dropped out) but I told the assistant chair that I do sometimes get comments like these in my evaluations. I know that I never intend to put anyone down when students ask questions in class, and I also know there are also students who feel that I'm a good instructor and like dealing with me. I get both of these types of comments in my evaluations (I'd say my evals on the whole are fine to good). I don't want anyone to feel like I talk down to them or put them down and I mentioned this to the assistant chair. (She has only seen me lecture once and said I did a good job that one time.) She asked me to think about the gender/ethnicity of the students that say I'm "rude" or "put them down", and whether there is a pattern where female/minority students who are considered "underprivileged" in mathematics may respond differently to my style of instruction than white male or Asian-heritage students. (There is research to back this up.) I don't have any hard data to check this for me personally but this hypothesis seems plausible. With most students I say that I'm generally direct; I try not to put the student down but I will tell them that they are incorrect and explain why. How should I adapt to make sure that "underprivileged" students don't feel put down or belittled in my class?<issue_comment>username_1: First I want to say that my answer does not depend on your gender and race, which I consider irrelevant. I will answer the question in two parts, one relevant to any field, one to mathematics. I suggest changing your title to something like: "How can I show respect to students from different backgrounds?" General Answer Understand that your students have had different experiences, which will affect how they perceive your and others' behavior. For example, the phrase "Can I help you?" may be perceived positively by someone who is used to others' wanting to help them, but it may be perceived negatively by someone who has had that phrase used toward them in a hostile manner (e.g., by a retail worker who follows them around to make sure they don't shoplift). I would encourage you not to think that the former student is rational and the latter student is irrational. Everyone generalizes based on past experiences. I encourage you to attend any diversity training offered at your institution or read about [microaggressions](https://otl.du.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/MicroAggressionsInClassroom-DUCME.pdf), phrases that might be innocently meant but negatively experienced. Be aware that everyone, including you, has unconscious biases, picked up from the cultures you've lived on. You should be aware that most elementary school teachers, regardless of gender, [call on male students more often than female students](https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-educationalpsychology/chapter/gender-differences-in-the-classroom/). You may find it interesting to take an [Implicit Association Test](https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/research/), although [you should be careful making inferences from it](https://www.chronicle.com/article/Can-We-Really-Measure-Implicit/238807). Encourage students to give you feedback about how to improve your teaching, especially this aspect. We have the option of adding our own questions to course evaluations. I added to mine: > > What could the instructor do differently or keep doing to make the > course feel inclusive to students with a variety of backgrounds, > learning styles, and mental or physical abilities? This would be a > good place to mention any micro-aggressions. > > > Mathematics This goes beyond what you asked, but I encourage you to learn about stereotype threat, a well-documented effect in which evocation of stereotypes affects students' performance on tests and other high-stake assignments. [For example](https://www.apa.org/research/action/stereotype): > > <NAME>, and <NAME>, PhD, also found that merely telling > women that a math test does not show gender differences improved their > test performance. The researchers gave a math test to men and women > after telling half the women that the test had shown gender > differences, and telling the rest that it found none. When test > administrators told women that that tests showed no gender > differences, the women performed equal to men. Those who were told the > test showed gender differences did significantly worse than men, just > like women who were told nothing about the test. This experiment was > conducted with women who were top performers in math, just as the > experiments on race were conducted with strong, motivated students. > > > Read articles about [inclusive pedagogy](https://www.chronicle.com/article/The-Case-for-Inclusive/242636), especially as applied to college-level mathematics. I have been told that [active learning techniques](https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1016&context=stem_proceedings) benefit all students but disproportionately those from underrepresented backgrounds. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Many universities have some campus-wide office, whose responsibilities include advising graduate students on their teaching. If yours does, I would suggest making an appointment and raising your concerns there. This would allow them to get into the specifics, ask you questions, and allow them to address your particular situation. They have probably seen similar situations before, and could likely offer helpful advice. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: If you haven't already done this, see if you can get one of your classes filmed so that you can watch yourself. Maybe you can see some patterns about how your behavior varies with different people, or spot something you're doing that some people might consider derogatory. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/14	932	4,281	<issue_start>username_0: My paper has been rejected but encouraged re-submission. The reviewers were overall positive said it was well written and that all the analyses were correct. The problems pointed out were changes to the introduction and conclusion to change the scope of how the experiments are framed, not to any of the experiments themselves. There were no mentions of lack of novelty or other common reasons for rejection. There was also no mention that anything I wrote was overstated or incorrect. I am unsure of whether to re-submit when it has been rejected for this reason because I don't understand how a manuscript could be rejected if the experiments were correct and found to be novel? If the problem is that I need to modify my introduction and conclusion than why not accept the manuscript, since re-writing the introduction/conclusion would not be very difficult. I would consider doing so would be a minor revision. I am wondering whether anyone has had this type of rejection before and if they decided to re-submit or submit elsewhere?<issue_comment>username_1: It does seem unusual, but I would still suggest resubmitting to this journal: * Since the reviews were positive, you may have a good chance of acceptance on the second round. * If the reviewers had deeper concerns which didn't come through in their reviews, you may get a better explanation on the second round, thus giving you a chance to really improve the paper. * In any case, since you're working with reviewers who have already read the paper once, you'll probably get a decision much faster than if you were to submit to a new journal. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: If the reviewers didn't express much dissatisfaction, or rather, expressed general satisfaction, it may have been an editorial decision. I suspect that the journal's editors know their readers well and are just trying to match your paper to reader expectations. Some journals place a very high value on the presentation, which you indicate is fine, but the editors may just want the introduction to make the significance of the results clearer for their subscribers. I think it is to your advantage to work with them on this. It may be the difference between a good and a great paper. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: Write back to the journal asking if the decision is correct, for the reasons you gave in the OP. It feels like they were intending to make a major revision decision, but made a reject & resubmit decision instead. In many editorial management systems, the buttons to reject and to revise are right next to each other, and human error can easily cause the confusion. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: Many journals are now encouraged to publish the data on the "efficiency" of the review process, e.g. the average time before initial submission and publication. Expected time to publication may be an important consideration for authors, along with the journals impact factor. So, imagine that you run a journal, where a paper on average goes through 2.5 rounds of review and each round takes 3-6 months. If you sum it together, 12+ months from submission to publication would not look too attractive. But you only need to sum up if you invite revisions. If you "reject and resubmit", then technically you look at a completely new submission, and it counts as a new paper in your statistics. So, your processing rate gets shorter (which authors like), and your acceptance rate gets lower (which makes your journal sort of a prestigious one, tough to get into). This is the main reason (in my personal opinion), why so many journals now rebrand "major revision" decision (and often "minor revision" as well) as "reject and resubmit". Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Based on what you have said, the editor has, based on the reviews, decided that your introduction and conclusions were not suitable for the journal. Therefore the editor rejected your paper. You seem to suggest that the journal should accept every paper that has novel, correct experiments. That is not the way most journals work. Usually the criteria are more complex. Often, the results must be meaningful as well as novel, and the style of presentation must meet some subjective threshold. Upvotes: 0
2019/06/15	486	2,160	<issue_start>username_0: Is a first class-degree from a highly-ranked university (ex: Lancaster University) equal to a first-class degree from a lowly-ranked University (ex: Central Lancashire) when applying for a Masters degree at a privileged University (ex: Imperial College)? I'm basing my logic on the fact that according to Imperial College's website, all that's needed is a first regardless of the university's ranking! Students tend to work harder for a first at top universities than students at lowly-ranked universities.<issue_comment>username_1: You are confusing the formal minimal requirements for admission with what is actually required to get admitted. Imperial, similar to most universities, puts a fairly low cap on the formal requirements of admission (having a relevant master's degree from a recognized university), but of course that does not mean that they admit everybody who fulfils these minimal requirements. Instead, the admission committee (or whatever it is called at Imperial) will make a selection from all applicants who fulfil the minimal requirements (typically many more than there are seats in the PhD program), and the criteria of selection will likely also factor in which school the candidate has their master's degree from. They do this because it leaves the door open to admit a graduate from a low-ranked school who has other qualifications that make them a promising PhD candidate. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: My understanding of Master's degrees in the UK is that they are almost always unpaid so the universities have an incentive to admit as many qualified students as possible, especially international students. They might receive more applications than they can accept, and also some of them might not be acceptable, either because they don't meet the minimum criteria or they don't have a good statement/proposal or references. I don't believe where you did your degree is terribly important. I know people who studied at an ex-polytechnic university and then went to do master's at a Russell group uni, although going to Oxbridge or Imperial from an ex-polytechnic might be rarer. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/15	1,195	5,094	<issue_start>username_0: I've currently finished two years of undergraduate study in physics. I'm at the end of a close to two month summer research program in math, at one of the best universities in my country. While I'd applied for a mathematical physics type project, the problem I was assigned has to do more with math and my job is to make a program in order to understand (the outcome of) this problem. My background in mathematics is not good, since the way it works where I study is that there is an extremely small math component in a physics degree and some extremely important concepts in math were excluded from this math component. While I have been studying independently, my course is generally lacking in rigour and depth in coursework so there always ends up being a lot of independent study that I need to do. I wish to apply for a Master's program in Physics once I complete my undergrad (I'm doing a three year degree) and I'm considering applying to places in the UK and/or Europe. My background in math and my never having had formal education in CS certainly put me at a disadvantage during this internship. However, I am unable to decide if I should be asking this professor for a letter of recommendation in case my applications require one from a summer research guide or someone in such a position. 1. This is the only such research internship that I will be doing before applications begin (which happen in 2 months) so I do not have the option of asking anyone else for this specific position. 2. I'm also not sure how having only one summer research experience, and that too not in physics, plays out while I apply for a Master's in physics. 3. I'm also quite disillusioned at this point regarding just going forward with physics itself because it seems like I already have heaps and heaps of catching up to do and I'm feeling extremely overwhelmed and unsure of whether this is something that I'm good enough to do. I've always wanted to do physics and I enjoy learning and I understand that this is simply one summer, but I am quite anxious at this point. I'm unsure of what to do, specifically regarding the recommendation. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: I'm a bit confused by your confusion. On the one hand you say you have some deficiencies in maths, but on the other that the internship is, somehow, filling in for those deficiencies. It seems like a good thing. Next, you say you don't have formal CS training, but are doing programming in the internship. That too, sounds like a good thing. I'll also point out that a lot of programmers don't have formal CS training - especially those programmers doing it as an adjunct to some other field. As to feeling behind, you also seem to have the attitude that will drive you forward toward success. Yet another good thing. Finally, as to the title question. Normally you get to choose who will write letters for you. You want to choose those people who will say the best things about you - works hard, overcomes obstacles, lots of curiosity, etc. If your summer guide is one of those people, then get a letter. But as user <NAME> suggests in a comment, you can explore first how you are viewed - and additionally ask for suggestions on a path going forward. As an outsider, looking in, I think you will be fine. Work hard and also relax a bit. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: > > I am unable to decide if I should be asking this professor for a letter of recommendation > > > Of course you should be asking! Specifically, you should be asking whether this professor is willing to write you a strong letter of recommendation. The word “strong” (or a similar synonym) is crucial here. You want to make it clear that a weak letter may do more harm than good, and you’d much rather receive honest negative feedback now, face to face, while you still have some time to improve, than to risk spoiling your application. Stop trying to read the professor’s mind. Stop trying to imagine all the impostor-syndrome-inspired weaknesses that the professor could write about. Every applicant has weaknesses. Just ask. > > unsure of whether this is something that I'm good enough to do > > > Do not listen to the Impostor Syndrome. There is no such thing as being good enough; what matters is what you do. And what you are doing is pursuing an internship that addresses the gaps you perceive in your own background. You see a gap in formal CS preparation (even though that preparation is rare among programmers, and even rarer among physics students), but you are addressing it by learning to program anyway. You see gaps in your mathematical background, but you are pursuing a mathematics internship that requires you to do a lot of independent study. You are deliberately working outside your comfort zone to strengthen your background—of course you feel overwhelmed! In short, you’re acting exactly like a researcher. I agree with username_1. From out here, it looks like you’ll be fine. Keep up the good work! Upvotes: 3
2019/06/15	1,440	5,988	<issue_start>username_0: I'm a third-year undergraduate student yet to experience the graduate world. Currently, with the course choices I made, I can choose between two degree titles, namely “BSc Mathematics” or “BSc Applied Mathematics”. I will be taking the same courses regardless, but I'm wondering if it matters to have a different degree title. E.g., might one of the titles benefit me or does it not matter at all (in terms of job prospects, continuing to my master’s, …)? *Moderator’s notice:* Do not take this as a [shopping question](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3657/7734) as to which of these specific titles is better (you can use them as examples though). Instead, focus on the relevance of such differences in the title in general.<issue_comment>username_1: In the long term it won't matter at all. There might be a small effect in moving to your next position depending on whether you go to grad school or to industry, but after a few years no one will notice anymore. You will be responsible for your own reputation and people will look to that, not to the specific degree you earned - especially its title. I also studied math, but in the US. Here we have a very broad undergraduate education, studying many things beyond the major subject. At graduation I had qualified for either a BS or a BA and was given the choice. I chose BA as it seemed to me to be more "interesting". I had taken extra courses both in math and in other subjects. But it never mattered. Literally no one cared. For entry to grad school the transcript shows what I had done. But, you might use the opportunity to think about what you want to do for the next ten or so years. Grad school and academia, or industry. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: As far as I can tell, (almost) nobody cares. (I am saying "almost" because I am working in a very "pure" mathematics group and the professors in my group often speak with disdain (sometimes jokingly, sometimes not) about "applied" mathematicians. Their impression of you would probably be slighly better if you were a mathematician. On the other hand, some people in industry might be slight unconsiously biased in favor of applied mathematicians. (Keep in mind that many people in industry in charge of hiring do not understand what the courses on your transcript are about.) But this is only a slight thing. It is not so important. Just follow your feelings about what you feel more for. Another recommendation: If it is common that people in your school choose their title, ask around what the advantages are. Maybe those people can give you better information why it should matter than this site. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It's mostly irrelevant, but it might come up in a few weird situations. If you want to take the US Patent Bar, for example, you need to establish that you've had some kind of scientific or technical training. Often, this is done by showing that you have an Batchelor's Degree in a recognized technical subject [from this list (see page 4).](https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/OED_GRB.pdf). Any degree in Computer Engineering will sail right through, but Computer Science degrees need to be ABET-accredited (and fairly few programs--especially the 'good ones' are). Likewise, pharmacology is on the approved list, but "pharmacy" is not. This seems like ridiculous hairsplitting, but there you have it. Similar situations occasionally crop up in federal hiring and immigration, especially when point systems are used. Quebec gives potential immigrants "points" based on their Bachelor's concentration. I suspect you might be able to finagle Math vs. Applied Math, since those seem pretty similar to a layperson, but something like Psychology vs. Neuroscience vs. Biology might be harder (even if the coursework is identical). I wouldn't necessarily plan your whole life around the major you choose, but if you have something specific in mind for the near future, do check! Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: You might be heading towards graduate school right now, but you may also end up looking for work in industry. In that case, many (most?) people involved hiring processes will not take the time to check what courses you've actually taken, and may categorize your application based in part on your degree title. I'm not saying what's better than what, but the connotations for "math" and "applied math" are different. So it matters at least in that respect. Also, on a personal level - I would want my title to reflect what I feel I've focused on in my studies. What would you rather say you studied? Abstract/general mathematics, or applied mathematics? Maybe make your choice that way. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: As a former recruiter and employer of graduates, I would say that the words you use to describe your degree are of negligible importance. What is vitally important is that you should be able to explain, in plain English as to a non-expert, why what you have studied for your degree is highly relevant to the job that you wish to obtain - or not. People are recruited to do jobs that bear no relation to the detail of their undergraduate degree. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I would lean towards applied math because it sets you up for more, well, applied jobs, and even grad schools. If you want to head into pure math grad school or even pure math professor jobs (post Ph.D.), they will just look at your actual accomplishments. All that said, many schools don't have a math versus applied math difference (just one general degree). And math undergrad remains a somewhat flexible degree, so it's not like people will completely pigeon hold you as a purist, just from listing math. Maybe a better way to think about the question is where are you headed (work or school, if work what field, if school what field). There may be a (still weak) match of some opportunities versus particular major slant. Upvotes: 0
2019/06/15	2,677	11,370	<issue_start>username_0: EDIT: I should clarify this is not the first draft of my PhD, it's the first draft of my upgrade document to go from MPhil to PhD. I have been working on my PhD for about two years now, it is a six year part-time program. I have a very good relationship with all my supervisors and they are very supportive. I am fortunate to be part of a good university which is open-minded and free-thinking. I also have attracted the interest of a well-known external academic who is an authority within the field and who wants to be involved. I am very lucky. The problem is that I am just not that interested or convinced by my research [chiefly its significance]. I have to submit my upgrade document [MPhil > PhD] in about five week's time, and the viva is a week after that. I have written a draft document which is 12,000 words and my main supervisor has written a lot of comments which are suggestions for improvements. The issue is that I do not feel that interested or compelled to work through them. I am under the impression that my supervisor is not that convinced by my research, even though she keeps saying she has no concerns. I feel my research is too vague, too broad but also too overbearing. It incorporates three disciplines [at the advice of one of my supervisors], disciplines A B and C. Discipline A I am not that interested in - I was for my master's but now I find it quite tedious but it is quite an important part of the whole. It is a well-worn discipline and feels rather old and stale to me now. Discipline B is quite new and interesting, I have published within this discipline. Disipline C is very new and up-and-coming. I find it quite exciting and my supervisor has written the least amount of comments about it in my draft paper, which I take to mean she has the least amount of complaints about it [she has a lot of comments to make about dispclines A/B]. She has also said that discpline C is a 'key' part of the PhD. I do not know what to do. I am really not that interested and the whole thing seems so daunting. My PhD focuses on A and B mostly with C being only a feature, but I am wondering whether I should switch things round entirely and make it more about C. I feel I will not really be able to convince my panel about the significance of my research in the viva if I am not excited about it or convinced myself. In my master's I was always keen to research and write, now I am not, but I know I would be if the topic were carried out a bit differently. What shall I do, how shall I regain interest? My PhD seems rather fluffy and not sharp enough. Additionally, I am daunted by the scope of the whole thing: it seems too large to work through and 'bigger' than me. I am kind of at a loss for what to do.<issue_comment>username_1: First, I think that your first paragraph is a bit at odds with the rest. If I read it correctly, you are in a good place even if your current "mood" is down rather than up. But that is a common reaction for a grad student, especially one who is aware of things. One reason for thinking your research isn't very valuable is that you are now, unlike a year ago, understanding it much better. Before it seemed hard. Now it seems routine. But that is an effect of your mastery of it. I suggest that you think both short term and long term. In the short term you want to complete your degree and move on. Changing your path radically now might negatively affect that. You have made some progress. But thinking long term, you may also want to move to a somewhat different subfield. There is no reason you can't do that, but it would be easier to do so after you finish your degree and have a regular position. But you don't have to completely abandon thinking about, and taking notes on, the new field while you pursue the main thread toward completion. I've recommended in a number of other posts here that researchers keep a research notebook in which they record ideas for research that might be explored and developed in the future. When any idea of potential research directions occurs to you, make a page in the notebook for it. Periodically review the notebook and update it whenever related ideas occur. With judicious use you can keep fairly current in a somewhat different subfield without abandoning the path you are on. The advice you are getting seems to be good. Don't let it confuse you, however. Deal with the short term to enable the long term. Your first work (dissertation) isn't likely to be your best work over a long career. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: One of my PhD professors told us something like this: "Make sure that you pick a topic that you absolutely love, because by the time you're done, you're going to hate it." I've found this to be an excellent piece of advise. The PhD journey is so intense and soul-consuming that you should not go that road on something that you're not emotionally invested in. By the end of the road, students are often sick and tired of their deep dive into the same topic over a few years, so it's best to start with something that you really like to begin with. You don't have to literally absolutely love it (in fact, there are problems with taking that too literally), but emotionally, you do need to like your topic a lot and you certainly need to believe in its importance. Put aside your need to convince your committee: you need to first focus on convincing yourself. So, rather than trying to motivate yourself in your topic, I strongly suggest that you switch topic for something that genuinely motivates you. That said, resource support is very important, and this comes primarily from the professors whom you are working with. So, I generally recommend to PhD students to look for a topic or sub-topic that a cooperative professor is already interested in, and then go with that for the PhD. If you can find a topic that you like that your potential supervisor also likes, then they are emotionally invested in supporting you and you will find that your PhD journey goes much more smoothly. So, in brief, I recommend that you carefully examine the topics and sub-topics of interest of the supportive professors that you have access to, then pick the one you like best as your PhD topic. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It's a bit difficult to give actionable advice without knowing the specifics, many aspects of a PhD depend on the field, the institution, etc. So I don't know to what extent my advice below applies to your case. That being said, I see three points worth mentioning: * The supervisors. There seems to be many people involved in your work. You mention that they are supportive, this is obviously good and it's not always the case so good for you! But too many people involved can also make things messy, each might (consciously or not) put pressure on you to go in the direction that they favor, they might not always agree together and you might end up spending more time managing their expectations than focusing on your own ideas. It's important that everyone's role in your PhD is clear to them and to you: there should be only one supervisor who acts as the lead, this implies that the others have an advisory role only (don't try to satisfy their requests unless they really fit in your schedule). This is also important in order to know who has the final word in case of disagreement: it's likely to happen sooner or later when many people are involved, and this can have quite bad consequences if there's no clear strategy in place. * The scope You are right to be concerned about your topic being too vague and too broad. To me this shows that you have a good understanding of what you are doing, you are able to spot the weaknesses in this PhD plan. Identifying the issue is important, the next step is to find a solution to this. It's quite common to start with a broad topic and refine it along the way into something much more specific. I've seen many PhDs in which the final work covers only a small portion of the original topic, but this is fine as long as there is a strong rationale (why it makes sense to focus on this particular point). But here again it's important to make sure everyone is aware of that from the start: with a broad topic, it's unavoidable that there's going to be some parts left unaddressed. If possible, try to establish a preliminary plan or a list of priorities of what you are going to focus on, and make sure your supervisors are ok with it. * Your own interest. Your personal motivation is critical. It's normal to feel a bit scared. Every PhD student faces the question "am I really able to do that?", and the only way to get an answer is to try. The answer is almost always positive if you are persistent enough to go through it, small step after small step. In my experience, it's the personal motivation which makes the difference: if you start with an half-empty tank, you are more likely to run out of motivation in the middle of the work (or apparently even at the start in your case). So you want to make sure that (1) you know what you'd like to do yourself (even only intuitively, intuition is usually a very good indicator) and (2) you make sure that most of the PhD work is going to be about that. Of course, the largest the overlap between your interest and your supervisor's interest the better: some things you like might not be realistic in this context, adjustments are ok but at the end of the day it is your PhD, you should feel a sense of ownership with it. Bottom line: if you really don't feel comfortable with the direction this is taking, re-discuss the details with your supervisors before committing to it. It might not be an easy discussion but the longer you wait the harder it's going to be. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: > > my supervisor (...) keeps saying she has no concerns > > > *Believe her.* Having lots of comments and suggestions for improvement does not mean she doesn't like what you have done. It may be the exact opposite: because she likes what you have done, she wants to make sure your research is presented in the best possible way, clearly demonstrating its potential and value. I would suggest taking some time off to recharge your batteries and then working through the list. You've made it this far, now do what it takes to complete your PhD. Judging the value of the research is most likely better done in a less stressful situation (i.e. once your done). Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: What you are going through is common among graduate students. I had it back when I was doing my M.Sc. and then my Ph.D. Now my students have it from time to time. The other answers offer good advice but they might apply to different phases of a Ph.D. journey. So here is my advice. Don't burn the bridge behind you. You've come all the way, so you might as well get your Ph.D. Ph.D. is not just a dissertation, but a journey. All the people you meet, all the new books and papers you read, all the new tools and skills you learn, they all contribute to making you a better person/researcher. From your question, I understand that you could be satisfied with those things. Even though you are not satisfied with your dissertation, you have all the time after your Ph.D. to pursue other interesting fields. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2019/06/15	615	2,672	<issue_start>username_0: What if this happens: Say I contacted a researcher R in my field about particular question I had. They answered the question in a private email to me. Their sketch of the argument was about 5 sentences long, and it can be turned into a rigorous proof. I really like the result. However, R has been unresponsive for 2 months and has not replied to any of my subsequent emails where I make various offers and seek their advice. Would it be unethical to include their argument as a small part of a publication I'm preparing, assuming I give credit to R? What constitutes proper credit in this case? A sentence in the introduction when I first mention the result? A sentence preceding the proof? In Acknowledgements?<issue_comment>username_1: In most places a citation (ack) would be enough. For a citation, list it as a "private communication". That is normally enough. You avoid plagiarism because you properly credit the idea. There may be a few places, though I can't name them, where it requires specific permission to do this. It isn't needed in the US, but seek local guidance elsewhere. Most likely you will be paraphrasing the communication rather than quoting it. Quoting a communication in full may have different rules, even if it is only a few sentences. To do more, you need permission. One way to get permission, or at least acceptance, is to send the person a copy of your finished paper, saying that it is about to be submitted and asking for any advice on it. If they have issues with how you have presented their ideas they have a chance to correct them. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: 1. Write the paper, attributing the person in the way you feel most suitable. I would write that the person in question provided an outline/idea of the proof of proposition this and that, and include something to this effect in the acknowledgements, close to the result, and maybe in the introduction if the result is a major one for the paper. 2. Send an email the person with the attached draft, writing that you finished a preprint/paper using their idea, is the attribution fine or (if earned) do they want coauthorship? Maybe also write that you'll be submitting the paper to a preprint server/journal/conference in two weeks (or whatever), so you would prefer an answer by then. If not, you'll submit the paper as is. 3. Give the email a descriptive but short title. If you are fairly unknown to the person, try to not write a title which looks like spam or crankery. 4. If they do not react and you are still uncertain about the attribution, you may try calling or visiting or some other means of communication. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/15	1,034	4,369	<issue_start>username_0: I am currently enrolled at the engineering school of a large university (as a freshman). I am set on majoring in Computer Science, and have been taking courses towards the requirements of that major. In fact, I am so interested in CS so far that I suspect I will want to pursue graduate education in the field. However, I have lots of other interests (mathematics, physics, mechanical engineering, robotics, and statistics), and have enough AP credit that I can either pursue a second major or multiple minors. Besides mechanical engineering, pursuing a second major in any of my other listed interests would require that I satisfy the degree requirements for the school of arts and sciences (which I have determined to contain many courses that are probably interesting to some people, but are totally useless and uninteresting to me). If the details of what were put on my degree did not matter, I would much prefer to simply take the courses in these various fields that would be most useful/interesting to me, and disregard any degree requirements other than those for my CS degree. However, I have heard that minors generally don't add much to one's resume, and that a dual major/degree is much more valuable. So how do I decide what to pursue?<issue_comment>username_1: Given that doing well in a single major is enough, in the US, to get you into graduate school, anything else is just gravy. Do it because you love it. Over the long run it will make little difference. But if you want to do separate majors in different "schools" within the same US university, you should talk to an academic advisor to be sure that you have a correct list of requirements. It may be that fewer courses outside the two majors might be required than you think. This will vary from university to university, of course. But if you really want to make a career out of CS (a) think about what would support that best - maybe math and (b) keep an open mind as you will perhaps become interested in other things as you take additional courses. Don't worry too much about credentialism at such an early stage. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I get this question a lot in undergraduate CS advising here at Michigan. The context is usually that the student feels they can do more than just the minimum to earn their degree and they're wondering if it's worthwhile to put the extra effort into a minor or a dual degree. If they're expecting or hoping it will make them more attractive to employers, the answer is no. In fact, it can make them less attractive. A resume that lists, e.g., dual majors in CS and ME, or CS and math (to pick real examples I'm familiar with) instantly raises a question in a hiring manager's mind: What job are you looking for? Do you want to be a computer scientist or a mechanical engineer? A software engineer or a mathematician? They only have particular job to fill and they're looking for someone who really wants that job, not someone who's not sure what they want. To get a job, students with dual degrees or minors usually have to carefully craft their resumes to make very clear what they want, downplaying, almost to the point of burying the minor or dual degree. (Again, I'm giving you real examples of what really happened.) For those hoping to make themselves more attractive to employers, the far better choice is to put the extra effort into graduate school. In CS, a master's is definitely the degree to get for those headed for industry. In my experience (in 40+ years in industry) most hiring managers on high-performing teams have a master's (often earned part-time while working) and they like candidates with master's degrees. It'll typically get you bumped to the top of the pile of resumes and, if they make an offer, it'll typically come with a small bump in salary, title and assignment. If you work for 45 years and change jobs every 3 to 5 years, that's 9 to 15 times you'll get that bump. The one great (but sole!) reason to go for a minor or a dual degree is that you simply love the subject and you recognize (correctly) that you have one chance to be an undergraduate and one chance to follow your dreams. Certainly, if you go take a job as a software engineer, they'll pay for a master's but they're not going to pay for you to take philosophy courses. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2019/06/15	676	2,801	<issue_start>username_0: This question is specific to the United States. Can one acquire something like "tenure" if either (1) their primary / only responsibility is teaching undergraduate courses and / or (2) they work as a Research Scientist for a university lab but are not professors. I am wondering about job security, basically.<issue_comment>username_1: Your first case is possible at some but not all US universities. There are many whose primary mission is teaching with only minor research responsibilities. The usual way it is put is that you "need to keep up with the field". But at many other universities, research is a major part of any tenure decision. Your second scenario is probably much less likely. The titles you give often don't come with tenure, though in some top level places, Research Scientist would be more likely to be tenurable. But even then, some guidance of graduate students (i.e. "teaching") might be part of the job and evaluated in any tenure decision. I'll note that at some very fine institutions (CMU, Duke, Stanford, ...) there is a special track for teaching faculty (Professor of the Practice is a common title) and these positions, while not tenurable, come with, say, renewable ten year contracts. But they also have high standards both for teaching and for "keeping up". In this case, keeping up usually means that you also publish, though publishing pedagogical work rather than strictly scientific work is probably mostly the norm. People that I know in these positions either have doctorates or some other outstanding qualifications as educators. The positions are very secure, even if not tenure, strictly speaking. (Information here supplied by a Duke PoP). Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: No, generally speaking, tenure is not offered to teaching faculty, usually called lecturers, or research scientists at American universities. The AAUP has long argued that teaching faculty should also be eligible for tenure and [they report](https://www.aaup.org/report/tenure-and-teaching-intensive-appointments) that a small number of universities have created tenure tracks for teaching faculty. But it's rare. That said, if you can get hired full-time as a lecturer, your job security is pretty good, mainly because (speaking from experience serving on the lecturer search committee here at Michigan) it's so hard to find qualified individuals who want the job, given that it's so dramatically less attractive to academics than a tenure track appointment. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Professor of the practice at Duke is a permanent position without tenure. It has levels: assistant, associate, and full. Contracts start at 3-4 years and get longer as you move up with 10 year contracts for full. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2019/06/15	574	2,323	<issue_start>username_0: Some universities require that each graduate student have a minor. I wonder whether it is helpful in the long run? For example, if one has PhD in mathematics with a minor in philosophy, would it be helpful to obtain a position in logic in a department of philosophy? [Probably related to [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/131957/is-it-necessary-to-have-a-background-in-philosophy-in-order-to-get-a-position-in).]<issue_comment>username_1: As you kind of alluded to in your example, the answer to this question depends a lot on what kind of "long run" you are planning to pursue. First, in a career where your minor subject is irrelevant, then no, your minor likely will not matter. Sounds obvious, but this is likely the case for many people. Further, in a career where your minor subject becomes your main focus, such as a mathematician transitioning to a position in philosophy, then you will likely need to demonstrate your qualifications with more than just your PhD minor. Your minor may be noticed when looking for your first academic appointment, but in the long run, it will be much less helpful than publications in philosophy, recommendations from fellow academics in philosophy, coursework in philosophy subjects etc. There are a few situations where the minor could be helpful, such as if you are applying for an entry-level job in some interdisciplinary field. However, there are many more situations where the minor is either irrelevant or insufficient to prove your qualifications. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Based on my own experience (i.e., n = 1), a graduate minor during my PhD helped me a lot. In my case, I earned a PhD in an environmental field and earned a minor in applied math. The minor helped me demonstrate quantitative skills. I have also seen other people who earn either a minor or master's degree during the course of their PhD in statistics and this help them a great deal. More broadly, a graduate minor can be helpful if it compliments your primary field of study. For example, a PhD with a major in wildlife ecology with a minor in biology would likely not be beneficial, but a PhD with a major in wildlife ecology with a minor in sociology might be helpful if one wants to do human dimensions research. Upvotes: 0
2019/06/16	1,669	6,460	<issue_start>username_0: It's not hard to find sources that say that the UK punches (punched?) above its weight in the research, and there're lots of people who want to go to the UK for work or study. We can see this in StackExchange questions as well - people often explicitly ask about doing PhDs in the UK. Why is the UK so attractive to researchers & students? Presumably the availability of funding is a big deal, but as long as the UK is part of the EU, funding levels shouldn't be too different from the rest of Europe. It's possible the UK has high quality of life, but it's not like other EU countries [do much worse](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index) in this area, in fact several outperform the UK. It's also possible that the UK simply has many more prestigious universities than the rest of the EU, and prestige attracts people; however I find it hard to believe that this is a major factor, especially at postgraduate level and beyond. The only other thing I can think of is that the country uses English as its primary language, but that should be less of a factor in academia since most academics can speak English (it is the language of academic communication after all).<issue_comment>username_1: From what I have heard from students and academics in the UK there are a few key factors: I think you may be undervaluing the [effect of language](https://www.britishcouncil.org/research-policy-insight/policy-reports/the-english-effect). English is by far the most [widely studied language](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/04/23/the-worlds-languages-in-7-maps-and-charts/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.b9990c480f7e) and is the primary language of communication in academia. Students want to improve their English while they study. While universities in non-English speaking countries may teach in English and it is most likely possible to do research in English, day-to-day life can be isolating without knowing the local language, for example see [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/34837/is-it-possible-to-study-in-china-without-knowing-chinese). It's also much less daunting to live in a country if you are already competent in the local language. Similarly for faculty, its much easier to work in a country where you're already fluent in the language rather than starting from scratch in a new language. The UK is widely seen as welcoming and accepting of different nationalities and cultures. You could debate the extent that this is actually true, and it may be changing. It is certainly true at least of university cities such as Oxford and Cambridge as well as major cities such as London. The UK is home to some of the [best universities](https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2019/world-ranking#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats) in the world in Oxford, Cambridge, Imperial College are all in the top 10 (the rest being in the US - which also suggests a language effect). These universities are also widely known worldwide. Oxbridge in particular offers a certain prestige which attracts many people, mainly due to its history. I don't think the UK is necessarily attractive to top academics, especially in STEM subjects. The cost of living is high, especially in cities such as London, Oxford, Cambridge and academics (especially junior academics) [struggle to live in these cities](https://www.timeshighereducation.com/features/priced-out-housing-cost-headaches-for-universities-and-staff). There has been a large push by Oxford and Cambridge to provide [subsidised housing](https://www.accommodation.cam.ac.uk/FindAHome/UniversityAccommodation/UniversityOwnedProperties/NorthWestCambridge) for staff in order to attract/retain staff. I know many top academics who have left the UK for the US. I also don't think the UK is particularly extraordinary in terms of [research funding](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_research_and_development_spending). In conclusion, I believe language, culture, and brand recognition are the main factors for making the UK attractive to students and academics. Although this is threatened by the cost of living and rising xenophobia. The outlook for research funding is also uncertain due to Brexit. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In Commonwealth countries, many people believe that Cambridge and Oxford are the only elite universities. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Based on anecdotal experiences, and things I’ve heard from students I know who study in the UK, these are the reasons people choose to study/research in the UK: 1) Most UK universities don’t ask applicants to take unnecessary and expensive exams in order to apply. I mean, I’ve seen some English programs in the United States asking for GMAT and TOEFL scores. This I think is absolutely ridiculous. 2) Building on the my previous point, not a lot of UK universities ask for application fees. I’ve only heard of Oxbridge doing this. Depending on where you are in the world, these application fees can be up to a month’s salary, and most people aren’t willing to risk so much money on a gamble. I know universities do this as a barrier to entry for unserious applicants, but in the end they end up deterring high calibre applicants who simply can’t afford to apply. 3) This point is reletive, but in general, top UK universities are on the whole cheaper than top fee paying universities in other parts of the world. It’s still a lot of money but I think you would agree that the difference between $20,000 and $40,000 is significant. 4) Because of the fact that the UK colonised a huge portion of the world, there is a huge representation of common wealth citizens, making it culturally diverse. So foreigners tend to be able to slip right into society without drawing too much attention. Of course, this is not the case for every town and county in the UK, but it’s a reality. 5) Another thing that I will add is it’s reputation; the UK has done a good job or marketing it’s educational system. It’s purely good branding on the government’s part, as education is one of their largest exports However, I think this is changing. Fewer and fewer international students are applying to UK universities because of the immigration laws that have been put in place. Students are basically kicked out of the country two weeks after graduation. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/16	3,857	15,827	<issue_start>username_0: I have been offered an award to be presented to me at my graduation this summer at an English university. The award is not for academic achievement per se. It's for gaining my science degree despite having suffered significant illness at a crucial point in my degree. The award is for a student who has overcome a significant obstacle (which could be anything) and successfully completed. Specifically because the cause of my problem was illness, this nomination has made me feel acutely self-conscious (even before I've received it). I've spoken to student friends and family about it. They all give predictable advice - "we understand, but accept the award, it's good for your CV!". Any possible benefit to my "CV" doesn't begin to enter the calculus for me. This was a significant illness, and I struggled hard to be "normal" again. This award would make it hard to feel that way. I would find an allusion to this episode, particularly on a day such as graduation, rather difficult to handle. I doubt very much that the specific motivation for the award would be stated at the ceremony, but even so... I realise my academic department are trying to be generous towards me and recognise my efforts with this award. It is a good university and they care about their students. I am going on to postgraduate study at the same university. The award is sponsored by an alumnus who themselves had a significant problem during their studies. Can I decline politely or is this a no-no? Could it be seen as self-indulgent to decline? Update: I wanted to thank all of the posters here for empathic, thoughtful and surprisingly non-judgemental answers. This is clearly a well-regulated and insightful community. Many of these answers conflict, and some posters have admonished others, but I wanted you to know that I have read everything carefully, that I am open to seeing this from all perspectives, and that I have found almost all answers and replies helpful.<issue_comment>username_1: > > I would find any allusion to this episode, particularly on a day such as graduation, rather difficult to handle. > > > It's up to you what decision to make about the award, but it sounds like you might really benefit from talking to a counselor about your feelings about your illness and recovery. Your school may have free or discounted counselors available, or your insurance might cover it. It's completely understandable that going through such a difficult experience has left you with very strong feelings about that experience, but you might want to work to get to a place where remembering that this happened and that you survived it with great resilience is something that you can handle hearing sometimes and even be proud of. The award itself, either accepting or declining, isn't the important thing here. The important thing is your feelings about your experience and your mental health going forward. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I suggest a third way: Write a concise e-mail to whoever is handing out the award that you would prefer to receive it silently for the reasons you cited (not wanting to be reminded of your disease), i.e., without being mentioned at the ceremony, but via mail or similar. This has several advantages: * You spend at most as much energy on this as declining the award, probably less since you do not have to worry about how to politely decline it, etc. * You avoid what you want to avoid. * You will never face regret for not taking the award and in the future you are completely free to use it or not (for your CV and similar). Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_3: Usually the advice is indeed to accept awards offered to you, but in this case I can understand you wishing to decline it - and you are perfectly in the right to do so. My advice would be to talk to your academic advisor, ombudsman, student counsellor, or whatever this role would be called in your institution, and tell them the same thing you posted here - that you are honored that they want to present the award to you and that you are grateful for that, but that you cannot accept the award. Just do it in time so that they can still nominate somebody else, and I cannot imagine that your department will have hard feelings about this. As for the "CV value" of an award - yes, in principle every award helps your CV, but I suspect the value is often overstated (and, mind you, it will only really help for your next career step - for instance, applying to grad school - later in life basically nobody will care about awards you won during your undergrad). I personally don't think it's worth it if it makes you feel less good about yourself. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: You have to look as yourself as a brand and to your reputation. I was once offered a performance award in an academia setting, and I equally did not had the slightest wish to attend the ceremony, for several reasons not pertinent to these answer. I decided to go just for my reputation, for the sake of good relations, and not annoying anybody. Nonetheless, the ceremony itself went ok, people had a good impression for me being there, my family was proud of me, and I got to put it on my CV. Do not forget in the academia world forging alliances and reputation counts a lot. IMO, your family is offering good advice, go for it! Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: You have every right to object to any mention of or allusion to medical problems, whether current or historic. In the UK, medical data are subject to very robust confidentiality provisions (this applies even in respect of internal NHS systems -- I have opted out of NHS Digital, the computer system that facilitates sharing medical data between GP practices and hospitals... and Google... and the UK Border Agency), and nobody should be disseminating them without your explicit consent (this applies even if you are writing a confidential reference for someone's job application and even when answering questions such as "How is X?" in a social context), unless it were on an urgent basis to protect your "vital interests" (e.g.: if someone had a reasonable and good-faith belief that you are in imminent danger, it would be legal to share concerns for the sole purpose of preventing such danger). You also have every right to object to being singled-out as having overcome adversity (even if no medical data are disclosed) in a public ceremony. If accepting the award in the ceremony is a condition of receiving the award, that would entail declining the award or graduating in absentia. As others have said, it may be possible to receive the award without any disclosure of medical data and without being singled-out in the ceremony. If you opt for this course of action, you should be aware that a record of the award will probably still exist somewhere, so it may still be possible for somebody to discover that you "have overcome a significant obstacle" or whatever. You should check the wording of the award and how it is described in reports (presumably, when the donor made financial provision for award, there would have been some sort of document articulating the conditions). I would suggest structuring your reply to the university as follows: * start by saying that you have not yet decided whether to accept the award, and require clarification of a few matters to help you decide; * ask for full disclosure of all documentation relating the award, including the official rules for how it is awarded; * say that you object to the award being presented in a public ceremony, because it would be "triggering" and make you feel uncomfortable; * say that you object to any medical data being kept on file in any archive or documentation relating to the award; * insist on the right to review (and veto) the exact wording of any official report on the reasons why you were selected for the award (as a minimum, the university will probably be required to write such a report for the donor); and * explain that if your aforementioned conditions are incompatible with receiving the award, you will have to decline. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: They, the university, should have first consulted with you, not everyone feels comfortable about receiving awards, especially one connected to a personal serious illness. But... you should feel proud nonetheless, and someone in the audience that day might be going through a similar situation, seeing you accept the award could give that extra incentive they need to persevere through the difficulties. I would, in your shoes, seriously consider accepting the award, not for the CV but for that one person in the audience who might be battling their own demons and be on the point of despair. You are the living proof that it is possible to overcome an illness and still succeed with in one's studies. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: If you don't want this award, just let them know. I'm sure they will understand. I can't see it affecting your future career either way, to be honest, so if it makes you uncomfortable, just politely decline the award. I don't see this as being at all self-indulgent; you didn't ask for it, you don't want it, and you have absolutely no obligation to accept it. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: In situations like this I often find the best solution is to ask yourself which alternative you would regret the most, and which alternative you would regret the least. Imagine yourself 5-10 years down the line. Do you think you would regret accepting the award more than you would regret not accepting it? Do you think you would feel 'dirty' somehow for having accepted it? When it comes down to it what matters the most is how you feel about each alternative, not how strangers on the internet feel about each alternative. Forget everyone else (the award committee, the alumnus, your family, the potential attendees and everybody here on this website) and ask yourself how you see this award. Is it a badge of honour earned for having made it through a particularly perilous trial, or is it an albatross that will forever remind you of a dark part of your life? We cannot make that decision for you, only you know how you feel about it and how you think you may feel in the future. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: > > I realise my academic department are trying to be generous > > > Do not fall for that (common) mistake! Try and accept that the university people are probably right in seeing your great accomplishment, which to you may not (yet) feel like one. The award will be good for your CV, but remember that you really did earn it. They don't give it to you despite your struggle, which may or may not continue, but because your graduation was objectively a great accomplishment attributed not only to your learning skills but in addition much to your personal strength and endurance. They wouldn't even consider you for the award if they did not know that you succeeded with your graduation despite having a much greater burden to handle than is expected from the 'average' student. > > I doubt very much that the specific motivation for the award would be > stated at the ceremony > > > Like above, trust in them that they know what they're doing! They are very well aware about the sensitive nature of the issue, as they are about their decision to award you. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_10: I see that many before me have come with very good comments, but I feel that I have one thing to add (if I didn't miss it). If you don't feel good about accepting it but consider accepting it to further your career, think about how you will feel every time you apply for a job and the interviewer asks "oh, I see you got this award, tell me about it". That means that you'll re-live the pain you're feeling now every time you apply for a job. And the reasoning "but I don't have to include it on my CV" kinda ruins your argument about it furthering your career. This is just a thought from me. But basically I agree with stuff mentioned above * you didn't ask for it, you can decline. * you're not rude to decline such a sensitive award. * we cannot decide for you, it has be your own decision and you'll have to own that decision. I feel your pain and I really hope that you have found comfort in these comments and that you feel better. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_11: I'll add my two cents. Universities are constantly having awards and honors turned down. I have more inside information than most academics would, so I have to be careful about what I say here. But if I could be open, I could site several examples at every level, where a university thought they were pleasing someone and they weren't. Billionaire donors who didn't really want a statue of themselves in front of the building which they funded. Special recognition for being the first black/woman/gay professor who got a Nobel/best-seller/whatever. Corporations and funds who didn't think that that sort of publicity was exactly in line with the public image they wanted. And a number of students turning down awards and even money because they didn't want to accept anything from a entity that was for/against the Palestinian state/gay rights/abortion/puppies. What I'm saying is that universities are used to being turned down. They are adept at back-pedaling and adjusting for such things. The admins exist solely for the purpose of keeping good relations with alumni and donors, so whatever you do is what they want to help you with. You can turn down the award with thanks and have no worries about repercussions. My opinion is that the extra line on your CV isn't worth much. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_12: I can see two points of view to address. When you accept the reward for overcoming the dificulty you are publicly marked as "the one who had the dificulty". One point is, that very few people want to be recognised as they-who-suffered-that. People tend not to display anything they are not comfortable with. From that point of view, declining the award is acceptable. The other point is why does the university want to award you? 1. They acknowledge your higher-than-usual effort to get the degree. Maybe there is a cash to compensate part of your extra expenses. 2. They want to show, that your dificulty can be overcome; that the difficulty is a challenge to beat, not a terminal. 3. They want to show themselves as a supportive institution. Your comment on the sponsor shows to me that second point is significant there. They want to motivate other people to embrace and fight their difficulties and not give up. The more people overcoming something the more willingful you are to trying it as well. The choice is yours; noone can force you to pick one way or anither. Think of you as an example for youngsters, if you like that. If you don't want to attract further attention to the difficulty, you can not-mention it in your CV, LI profile, etc. You can let your photo be only in the Hall-of-Fame at the university surrounded with other awardees. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_13: > > This award does not help me to feel normal > > > Declining the award will not make you feel any more normal either, if that is your underlying problem. Take the award and make whatever you want of it in the future: there will be plenty of occasions where you will indeed deserve something and will not get it, so do not overthink it too much, see this chance as to balance it out. I have myself suffered a significant illness during my Academic time and was on and off praised for having overcome it. Just take the good things whenever people do not mean bad - then time will heal up your emotional suffering. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/16	727	2,649	<issue_start>username_0: I live in Australia and hold a M.A. degree from the University of Hamburg. That degree doesn't exist in Australia, so I can't get it acknowledged through the accrediting bodies. What is the etiquette to present such a degree on a business card? [Update] I refer to a particular degree in the area of child education and not to the term 'Master of Arts', which of course does exist in Australia.<issue_comment>username_1: I suggest that you present it as it was awarded, and perhaps list the university as well. Most people will accept it at face value, though you may get the occasional question about what it means. Australia isn't so isolated that it can't accept international terminology. This would be different if you are in a field that requires certain certification, but that is a question to be directed at those providing the cert. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You shouldn't list a masters degree on a business card in Australia. Educated Australians will know what a masters degree is. Edit: Australians will understand "Master of Arts in Child Education" just fine even if they've never met one before. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: List the full name of the degree and the name of the university. It is is not uncommon for degrees from universities in other countries to have degrees which differ from degrees given by local universities. Your business card is your introduction so it can contain whatever you wish it to have on it. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: > > I live in Australia and hold a M.A. degree...That degree doesn't exist in Australia > > > I started to wonder what Australia called an M.A., so I googled "MA Australia master of arts" and discovered Victoria University offering such degrees, e.g., <https://www.vu.edu.au/courses/master-of-arts-hrat>. So, it seems it does exist. (The above previously appeared as a [comment](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/131975/how-to-present-a-degree-that-was-earned-abroad-on-a-business-card#comment351048_131975) and the question has now been edited to add the following.) > > I refer to a particular degree in the area of child education and not to the term 'Master of Arts', which of course does exist in Australia. > > > The particular name used by the awarding institute, the University of Hamburg, doesn't matter so much, the level of the qualification does. > > What is the etiquette to present such a degree on a business card? > > > Use [post-nominal letters](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-nominal_letters), e.g., ``` <NAME>, M.A. ``` Upvotes: 0
2019/06/16	692	2,519	<issue_start>username_0: I will publish a conference paper and as I'm a PhD student the committee asked "If the corresponding author is a PhD/MSc student, he/she also should send a Publication Approval Letter from his/her supervisor". What does it mean? What is a Publication Approval Letter?<issue_comment>username_1: I suggest that you present it as it was awarded, and perhaps list the university as well. Most people will accept it at face value, though you may get the occasional question about what it means. Australia isn't so isolated that it can't accept international terminology. This would be different if you are in a field that requires certain certification, but that is a question to be directed at those providing the cert. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You shouldn't list a masters degree on a business card in Australia. Educated Australians will know what a masters degree is. Edit: Australians will understand "Master of Arts in Child Education" just fine even if they've never met one before. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: List the full name of the degree and the name of the university. It is is not uncommon for degrees from universities in other countries to have degrees which differ from degrees given by local universities. Your business card is your introduction so it can contain whatever you wish it to have on it. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: > > I live in Australia and hold a M.A. degree...That degree doesn't exist in Australia > > > I started to wonder what Australia called an M.A., so I googled "MA Australia master of arts" and discovered Victoria University offering such degrees, e.g., <https://www.vu.edu.au/courses/master-of-arts-hrat>. So, it seems it does exist. (The above previously appeared as a [comment](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/131975/how-to-present-a-degree-that-was-earned-abroad-on-a-business-card#comment351048_131975) and the question has now been edited to add the following.) > > I refer to a particular degree in the area of child education and not to the term 'Master of Arts', which of course does exist in Australia. > > > The particular name used by the awarding institute, the University of Hamburg, doesn't matter so much, the level of the qualification does. > > What is the etiquette to present such a degree on a business card? > > > Use [post-nominal letters](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-nominal_letters), e.g., ``` <NAME>, M.A. ``` Upvotes: 0
2019/06/17	800	3,418	<issue_start>username_0: So I have to write my master's thesis, and I need to contact a potential supervisor. The field is statistics. I am slightly confused by how these things work: on one hand, you often hear that you should have your own ideas and proposals for what you want to write about. On the other hand, your supervisor also needs to be able to supervise you, hence your ideas need to fall to his liking and be within his area of expertise and interest. With that in mind, how do I approach a potential supervisor? I intend to first write an e-mail. In this e-mail, do I 1. merely introduce myself and my interests/coursework and then ask for the possibility of writing a master's thesis under their guidance, without getting into any specifics of what the topic should be, and then wait for their response? 2. or do I specifically go into details with the ideas that I have in mind? 3. or do I mention my ideas vaguely but stress that I am open to any suggestions that he might have for a related topic? I am learning towards option 3) as option 2) seems a bit too much for an initial contact and option 1) seems a bit lackluster.<issue_comment>username_1: This is hard to answer, and from the comments, the best advice would be to talk to your advisor. This is something that each institution would have different policies on. That being said, you should always try and write about something that you are interested in. If you are doing statistics and get put with a statistics Professor, I am sure they will have a broad array of knowledge to be able to advise you. You also have to take ownership of your work. When writing an email I would mention that you are interested in this specific subject area, i.e. "currency forecasting". But I probably wouldn't give specific details. You could even mention you are interested in these papers which fit well to your topic. This way if nothing at least that potential advisor might pass you on to one of their colleagues which have an interest in your area of the literature. This is also where your advisor will come in, a good department at the University will mean the professors have a good idea about what the other professors in their department resarch. Finally, enjoy it. It was the best 3 months of education for myself writing the masters dissertation! Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: 1. Is this supervisor someone you know/in your department? This makes a difference in your approach. 2. If this supervisor is from another school, and you REALLY want to work with them, go see who he has supervised in the past and reach out to them to get a feel for how that professor might respond. 2a. An alternative to this is to call the departments graduate studies unit, convey your interest, and ask them how you might go about talking with a particular professor. Every university tends to have a prospective students section where you'll find an email for your questions to go to. 3. If you are sending an email, prior to you getting into a bunch of details, it would probably save you some time to ask them if they are considering accepting graduate students for the 20xx-20yy year, and if they say yes, express your interest. 4. Really make sure that you contact previous students to see how that professor is as a supervisor. This isn't done enough but it is so important to know what you're getting into. Upvotes: 1
2019/06/17	553	2,663	<issue_start>username_0: Is it normal in computer science courses that one can't use open source code to solve exercises on courses even if the licenses of the code allows to use the code? I was confused as I used some code, gave source where I found the original code but still the lecturer said we have to learn to do the code on my own.<issue_comment>username_1: This is a quite generic question, so there is no real answer to it. You need to look at it from the course perspective as well as from the Open Source license perspective. There are different Open Source licences available, but most of these should allow you to use them for creating derivative work. This might mean Open Sourcing your solution also though (in case of a copyleft license such as GPL). I however suspect that your course wanted to teach you more basic concepts, therefore expecting you to come up with a solution by yourself. There is no clear answer to your question, however, more complex exercises would nearly always rely on the usage of Open Source software, such as SDKs, programming languages, libraries and frameworks. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I would assume that the lecturer wants you to write the code yourself; copying and pasting from an existing piece of code (no matter the licence and how you reference it) does not demonstrate that you have learnt the skills the lecturer is trying to teach you. That being said, using existing code to point you in the right direction would probably not be a problem. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: As indicated by other answers, generally the purpose of a computer science programming assignment is to demonstrate learning of various core concepts. If one just uses libraries of code, then there is the possibility that coders might never learn to code those components on heir own. However, for many programming situations, using appropriate open source libraries, and even snippets from Stack Overflow would be quite acceptable and efficient. What computer students (and even some professionals) forget to do is to acknowledge the sources used. To submit someone else's code without appropriate annotation and citation would make it appear as it was your own. Submitting someone else's work as your own would, in most university situations, be an "unfair means" offence and, if detected, trigger some form of disciplinary procedure. You should always properly acknowledge and cite the source of someone else's code. This should be in code comments and also indicated in any corresponding documentation. I have to explain this to students in the coding laboratories so often! Upvotes: 0
2019/06/17	1,873	6,420	<issue_start>username_0: I got my bachelor’s and master’s from different universities in different countries: * I enrolled for my master’s overseas when I hadn’t officially graduated undergrad yet, despite having done the allotted four years. This was since the master’s was done under the initial plan of it being a combined bachelor and master degree, with a semester abroad included. I ended up doing the entire master’s on its own abroad and graduated in 2017. * Due to some administrative issues¹, the date on my bachelors is only 2019, despite having finished all the credits for it in 2015. When I put on my résumé: “bachelor’s 2012–2019” that looks weird, especially with a master’s awarded in 2017. How do I best work with this weird situation to avoid confusion and having to explain the dates? --- ¹ My home uni exchanged my pending BE for a BSc temporarily to satisfy the programme rules abroad (i.e having a bachelor’s before being allowed to do the master’s – an issue that was only brought up partway through my studies there). Then when I finished MSc abroad, I had to mail back my BSc to have that degree exchanged for my original BE.<issue_comment>username_1: I suggest you write: > > * Master’s, 2017 > * Bachelor’s, 2019 > > > Most people only care about your highest degree. So they won't be interested in when you got your bachelor’s. All that matters is the date the degree was received. When you started is not particularly relevant. There is no reason to avoid explaining the dates. If someone asks, explain. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Different countries have different conventions around the résumé / CV, and you might want very different versions of your résumé for applying for jobs in academia or industry. That said, at a general level readers are interested in the flow (are there gaps which are unaccounted for?) and the skills trained. I would put the dates of study and a note about the date of award so that if an HR department does cross-checks, it won't flag spurious discrepancies: > > * 2015–2017 studied M.Foo, University of Bar > * 2012–2015 studied B.Foo, University of Quux (degree awarded 2019) > > > Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_3: I suggest you list the years you were studying/enrolled, not the years degrees were conferred, i.e., > > * 2015–2017 Master’s, Second Grade, Second University. > * 2012–2015 Bachelor’s, First Grade, First University. > > > I believe this is standard for CVs – indeed, employment periods are listed in this way – and does not suggest "you received your degree before you really received it," hence, is not fraudulent as hinted in a [comment above](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/132009/dates-on-degrees-dont-make-sense-will-people-care#comment351061_132009), and [below](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/132009/dates-on-degrees-don-t-make-sense-will-people-care/132027#comment351172_132027): > > Don't do this! It's lying to indicate you had a degree before it was awarded... > > > Administrative delays are irrelevant and it doesn't matter when a degree was conferred. Regardless, the date a degree was conferred will be clear from certificates. To be really careful, dates degrees were conferred could be noted in the text that follows bullet points, but I really don't see that as necessary. > > ...This could easily get you fired from a job. > > > This cannot get you fired: It is the truth. Listing the years degrees were conferred creates problems. For instance, suppose the years degrees were conferred are listed, as per [another answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/132022/22768), i.e., 2017 and 2019. Further suppose employment is listed from 2017. This leaves a CV gap prior to 2017 and it incorrectly suggests studying in parallel with employment. Further problems are also likely. Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: > > Dates on degrees don’t make sense – will people care? > > > Yes, *people will* care if your degree dates don't make sense. This question is a good fit in [workplace.SE](https://workplace.stackexchange.com/) post it there for additional perspective** (they are more industry than academic). I believe many hiring managers and most HR people, will "see the mistake" if you list your masters before your BE, and they will toss your resume "because your dates are (obviously) wrong". My suggestion is three lines: > > * 2019 BE University of FirstPlace > * 2017 Masters [subject], University of SecondPlace > * 2015 BSc [subject], University of FirstPlace > > > If you earned a degree, ALWAYS call that out clearly. People who did not graduate commonly specify the dates they studied (hoping people assume a degree) --- Comment asked what a BE is... I have no idea. OP wrote this in his footnote: > > "My home uni exchanged my pending BE for a BSc temporarily to satisfy..." > > > If I saw a masters degree granted before the undergrad, as others suggest, I would probably assume they didn't proof it. Based on that incorrect conclusion, I would put it aside. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: <NAME>'s comment is an excellent one and as I am in a somewhat similar situation, that's what I do too: On paper, I attended univ1 from 1993 to 2001, got my degree 2001 summer. I attended univ2 starting 1998 and from that point, I had my univ1 thesis written and everything wrapped up at univ1. So, a footnote is best: univ1 1993-1998 (\*) degree conferred in 2001. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: If you fulfilled the real requirements for your bachelor's in 2015, then consider this to be the ending year. The fact that your certificate is from a completely different year due to some administrative whatever does not change anything about this. If, however, you for instance postponed any final exams or such, that it is different and you should really consider to be at bachelor studies until these exams were held. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: There's been some contradictory advice in the answers here, so it may be helpful to speak with a careers advisor in order to figure out what is standard practice in your location and field. Universities you have earned degrees from may have such a service, provided to students and possibly alumni. Failing this, try speaking to your academic advisors and/or industry contacts. Upvotes: 0
2019/06/17	388	1,828	<issue_start>username_0: I have a paper that was a published in a conference proceedings. This paper was extended and turned into a journal paper. However, some things like figures from the motivation section or the experimental setup (used same metrics) are the same. The journal paper was reviewed, and one reviewer raised some concerns about a possible overlap with the conference paper. At the moment I'm preparing a response to his comments, and would like to present a percentage of the overlap. Is there a method to calculate the overlap with a previous publication? Are there any common guidelines that are used when presenting an overlap with a previous publication?<issue_comment>username_1: You should be able to list the major points in both papers. If the lists are mostly identical then the second paper is too similar to the first, if the points are substantially different then the second does not overlap but takes the topic forward. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Your problem is that you need to show your paper is sufficiently original to merit publication. Calculating a measure of overlap will not help you achieve that goal. Instead, you need to: * Clarify the original aspects of the paper. For example, you might write in the paper "Previously we showed [minor progress]" and then "but we did not solve [major problem in the field]" and finally "in this work we achieve [important step towards goal]" * Justify to the editor why some overlap is necessary. For example, "This paper is about x, which is well known to experts but may be unfamiliar to some readers of this journal. Therefore, we repeat our introduction to x from our conference paper." * Remove unnecessary overlap. The editor will be looking for meaning, not quantity. Don't invent metrics where they are not needed. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/17	530	2,425	<issue_start>username_0: While being a Ph.D. candidate (software engineering), I've observed a strange tendency in academia: many mediocre researchers are writing lots of white papers with no evaluation at all. I was also initially encouraged by my supervisor and other professors to do the same, but working with other research groups, getting feedback from conference reviewers and from friends, I've learned that without evaluation of my work, without having an experimental section in my papers, I am only building sand castles. It was hard lesson and I needed to refuse my supervisor to submit papers too early, but it was worth it. I've learned that evaluation offers two benefits: * I can confront my ideas with reality and compare with other solutions * It provides feedback on my actual skills as a researcher, programmer, statistician, etc. I can understand doing experimental evaluation is harder than just sketching ideas in white papers, but I don't understand one thing. How is it possible that so many white papers are accepted for conferences and publications and their authors can still work in academia? Or maybe I am missing something and my judgement is unfair, because there should be a place in academia for researchers who only write white papers?<issue_comment>username_1: You should be able to list the major points in both papers. If the lists are mostly identical then the second paper is too similar to the first, if the points are substantially different then the second does not overlap but takes the topic forward. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Your problem is that you need to show your paper is sufficiently original to merit publication. Calculating a measure of overlap will not help you achieve that goal. Instead, you need to: * Clarify the original aspects of the paper. For example, you might write in the paper "Previously we showed [minor progress]" and then "but we did not solve [major problem in the field]" and finally "in this work we achieve [important step towards goal]" * Justify to the editor why some overlap is necessary. For example, "This paper is about x, which is well known to experts but may be unfamiliar to some readers of this journal. Therefore, we repeat our introduction to x from our conference paper." * Remove unnecessary overlap. The editor will be looking for meaning, not quantity. Don't invent metrics where they are not needed. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/17	373	1,675	<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student works in computer algebra(Theoretical computer science). I have published one research paper recently, I am currently making slides for the paper. It is my first time and believe me I am struggling a lot. I have spent 4 days but till now not able to convey the idea that I want to deliver to the audience. I have given 30 mins for the presentation. My algorithm is based on 4-5 other algorithm with few lemma and some modification to previous algorithms. I am confused how to make slides such that I can convey my work efficiently. Should I focus more on modified previous results or on new lemma. Should I first explain them notations and definition or directly go to the results. Questiom : How to convey your full length paper in conference through slides? Edit : Audience is Professor and Ph.D students of computer science and mathematics.<issue_comment>username_1: Set out as plan for your slides and then discuss with your advisor / supervisor. They can then suggest changes as necessary and you can then do the next level of detail which can then be checked. This will be an iterative process, much like your calculations. At the end you should have a good presentation - but it will never be perfect: there will always be one question that needs something else... Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: In a short face to face presentation, remember that insight is much more important and valuable than detail. People aren't going to remember the detail, and can get it from the paper if they need it, but they will remember if you can show them why your main result is true from a chain of insights. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/17	1,825	7,910	<issue_start>username_0: I've recently sent some of my research to a local conference entitled "XIX Simpósio Brasileiro de Sensoriamento Remoto". After the conference, I started getting contacted by some publishers asking me to publish the work I sent to the conference in the form of a book chapters and another one even invited me to publish as a paper itself in a journal. None of them required me to edit the work in any way. I'm aware that academics get scammed this way (I managed to identify some myself), but this particular invitation seemed okay. The editor was very honest about the publisher status ("We're not big", "We aim to achieve this and that in X months", etc...) and I have colleagues that have published with them and nothing went wrong (meaning publication really happened, the e-book is available for download and all). Then, I received an e-mail by the conference staff alerting all participants to the risks of plagiarism if one is to accept these publishers' offers. They argumented that the conference proceedings are open access, they have a ISBN and used this as to validate their statements. Additionally, they said they would be taking legal measures. Honestly it seemed more like a power play than anything. Normally, I would agree with the e-mail, face this as self plagiarism and don't even consider this as an option, but a fellow colleague pointed out that conference proceedings doesn't count as a publication because it has no DOI nor ISSN (both entries are used on my country to score for PhDs and funding, but not ISBN). In his mind, as far as academy goes, my work is still "new" and there would be nothing wrong in publishing it, especially considering nobody cites conference proceedings. I understand that it is normal to use the conference proceedings as a type of feedback while you're developing your research, but I published a substancial amount of my results on this paper and I don't really know if I could only cite it on this book chapter invitation I received, otherwise it would be nothing left to talk about. So, what I want to understand is: what are the rules to consider something properly published, and therefore, accountable for self plagiarism? Is there a way to publish this book chapter in a unethical way? For example, including that this chapter is a reissue of conference yadda yadda would do?<issue_comment>username_1: You have a few misconceptions. Having an ISBN is no guarantee of legitimacy, honesty, or quality as anyone can purchase such. In bulk they are very cheap. I currently have several unassigned ISBNs myself, intended for future work. Second, if your paper has been submitted to a conference and appears in the proceedings then it is "published" and so subsequent uses are not original. However, self plagiarism only occurs if you reuse some work without citing it. If you still hold copyright, as is likely, you can reuse the thoughts and many of the actual words as long as you are careful. Cite the original conference work as appropriate and formally quote from it as necessary. Perhaps you gave up copyright already, but I think that is unlikely in this case and you would know anyway if you had signed a transfer. And it isn't the ISBN on the original that makes it self plagiarism. It is copying without citing. Cite your own work the way you would that of another author. The main purpose of avoiding self plagiarism is to permit a future reader to trace the full context of the ideas in the new work by examining the old with its full context, including all references you cited there. Future researchers want a full record. Ordinary plagiarism includes this as well as other concerns, of course. But some of what the publishers seem to be saying seems a bit of a scam. I can't say without more information, but it has that feel. Legitimate publishers also have "page charges". Try to assess the legitimacy of the publisher using other information before you agree. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I have seen books with things in them along the lines of "A big part of this chapter was already published in XX Journal in XX year. The publisher was kind enough to allow me to duplicate some if it here in order to complete the narrative of my book...". It is important to note that in such cases, the entire book was by the same Author, so the book had a considerable amount of new content by that author in it. One book with such statements in is is Causality by <NAME>. I feel like I have seen it elsewhere too, but none others come to mind at the moment. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: The DOI and ISSN systems were introduced in 2000 and 1976, respectively. Does your colleague think it was impossible to plagiarize articles published before then? Or impossible to plagiarize old articles that have not yet been assigned DOIs? And the ISBN system provides identifiers for books. Does your colleague think it's impossible to plagiarize books? I would hope the answer is 'no' to all questions. In any case, this could be self-plagiarism if not cited properly. As ff524 states in a comment, the conference cannot really take legal actions based on the plagiarism itself - but they could certainly point it out to any journal you might try to publish in, or blacklist you for future years. Any respectable journal will have a policy against prior publication. Such policies often has exceptions for e.g. publication in the form of a thesis/dissertation, but I have never seen a policy making an exception for a published article that happens to lack a certain identifier. Of course, less respectable publishers might not care to have or enforce such a policy. If you did transfer copyright to have the article published in the proceedings, then the conference can pursue legal actions (such as takedowns) to protect their copyright. If you did and you want to convert the article to a book chapter, you or the publisher of the book would have to clear the copyright issue with the conference. (That is, obtain permission before publishing.) If the article gets re-published anyway, the conference could conceivably sue the publisher for damages. The publisher could, in turn, conceivably try to sue the author for damages if the author certified that the work had not been previously published. What if you didn't transfer any copyright, and the license granted to the conference was non-exclusive? Well, if you manage to find a publisher willing to re-publish the article under another non-exclusive license, and you cite the original one properly, you shouldn't be on the hook legally or in terms of self-plagiarism. However, in most cases, for most publishers, I think you're unlikely to gain much from it. Certainly from your story, these publishers sound mostly like opportunists, and possibly scammers, approaching you right soon after the conference. Now, if it is a legitimate, well-known publisher putting together a volume on a certain topic that would see wide distribution? Yes, that could certainly be worth considering. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: Then, I received an e-mail by the conference staff alerting all participants to the risks of plagiarism if one is to accept these publishers' offers. They argumented [they argued!] that the conference proceedings are open access, they have a ISBN and used this as to validate their statements. Legalities aside, if the conference organisers belong to the core of established and respected workers in your field, you do not want to aggravate these people! Re visibility of your work: they have a good point in that it is already as prominent as it is ever likely to be. Also, in a years' time your thinking on the topic will have moved on and you will not even want to re-publish an unedited version of the work, but something better. Right? Upvotes: 1
2019/06/17	3,741	15,692	<issue_start>username_0: I graduated with a biology PhD last year. My supervisor named X was pretty hands-off (which was great) and most of my project, from conceptualization to data analysis, was done by me generally without much input from X partly because it wasn't X's area of expertise. I now have a full-time job doing math. X insists I meet with X to discuss how to turn a manuscript (rejected last year as I was writing my thesis because it required significant revisions and additional experiments) into publishable form for resubmission for grant money purposes, and then work on that on my own time. So I was just wondering whether I have any obligation, professional/moral/official/other, to comply with X's request (other than my personal responsibility to publish stuff I've done and not waste time/resources I've used), because X is not going to be paying me to spend my free time working on this manuscript and this manuscript isn't going to help me with my career. Approximate time to get this into publishable form is: 2-3 months working weekends by me to do additional analysis from existing data, and 6-12 months for additional experiments done by a person in X's lab who will require training from me. To clarify, 1. My new job is not in academia, but I do regularly write academic math/stats papers as a part of my job. 2. I am thoroughly disillusioned with academia and never intend to return. 3. The intent is to publish a paper that X can cite in grant proposals to show productivity etc.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, I think you do have some obligations, not so much to your supervisor but to science itself, although 2-3 months working all weekend sounds like a bit much. When you do academic research, you don't just publish the work for "grant money purposes" - you publish work because you are advancing science in some way, even if it is a small/incremental step. Basically, even though you got a PhD in part through this work, it doesn't count yet from the perspective of science. You haven't advanced anything. It's basically worthless in the current form. Part of getting a PhD is producing something novel for academic knowledge, and although you've put this work into a thesis you can't expect anyone outside your committee to read the thesis. If you have advanced the work to the point that it was submitted, I do think you should put some effort towards getting it to the next step. If the time asked is more than you can give up, I would at a minimum discuss with X what you can do to get it to where it can be handed off. That might include helping point someone to resources (including your own code, data, etc, as well as literature you've collected on the topic), or being available to answer occasional questions from a new person in the lab (especially procedural things that you may not have documented as well as you should have the first time around). It isn't clear to me that X even expects you to do all the work you are saying would be expected, it seems like you haven't discussed it yet. It's reasonable to set limits, but I do not think academic work is the same as industry work in that once you've left the company everything is their problem. Surely if you were abused in some way or had a bad working experience in the lab, you would be justified in walking away completely, but it sounds like you had a reasonably good experience and it let to you getting a job you want. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You owe your advisor respect at this point but not specific work products. But rather than think of it as an obligation, I'm curious that you don't think of it as an opportunity. Especially if the advisor is well established and can do some things to help advance your career. In most fields collaborative work is highly regarded and you would do well, I suspect, to be drawn into his or her circle of collaboration. You say the paper won't help advance your career, which I have a bit of trouble understanding. But that would be the only reason, IMO, to decline. Most of us don't require specific compensation to do a bit of science, though being employed is definitely a good thing. But if it truly is outside your career goals/path, it is fine to decline, though with respect. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: No, there is no such obligation. You met your requirements for the PhD, got the PhD, and moved on with your life. It is unreasonable and unethical for your advisor to "insist" that you continue to do unpaid work. You should tell him to pound sand. As the other answerers say, it would be nice if you were willing to continue your research and get the additional publication. But that does not (correctly) answer the question of whether you have an obligation to do so. Even when you have a good experience in grad school, it is sometimes necessary to focus on new challenges rather than revisiting old ones. Note, I am basing this partly on your statement that you would need to do major revisions and new experiments -- a substantial amount of work. If your advisor had asked for a more reasonable contribution, like helping to spin up your replacement, I would think it would be reasonable for you to comply (though whether you have an "obligation" to is another matter). Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I think it's reasonable for X to ask, but you have no obligation to say "yes". In particular, 2-3 months of weekends is a lot of time to work for free. I think that if you choose, it would be reasonable for you to politely say that this is too much, and that he needs to get somebody else to do that analysis. If this is work that you have already done a lot of, you should still be an author on the resulting paper. If your new job is with a university, then it is worth asking your new supervisor if you can spend some time on it. They may be happy that they can get a paper with their affiliation for only a couple of weeks of work. If your new job is a commercial one, this is much less likely to help. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_5: While you have no direct obligation to X keep in mind that networking is very important in academia. X is moving more to the position of a collègue in your life. Publishing may not help you directly now but it is taken into account whenever someone is assessing your potential. You are at the beginning of your career. It would seem to be worthwhile to talk to X and reach an arrangement satisfactory to both of you. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: Your formal obligations end the moment you receive your degree. Even if they did not end, they would be unenforceable. Of course you likely also have a personal relationship with your advisor. So there are potentially informal obligations. The following stand out to me: * If you promised before graduating that you would do it, going back on your word now would not be very nice. * If you did not promise anything, but there was an implicit understanding that they will be relying on you, it would also not be very nice to let them down. It is up to you to judge these things for yourself. We cannot do it for you because we know neither you, nor the advisor, nor the work. But ask yourself: How difficult would it be to move forward with this without your help? If the answer is "impossible", and if not being able to write the paper would seriously harm the lab, then perhaps you might feel an obligation. IMO the correct way to handle these situations is: > > Sure! I'd love to help with this paper for $X/hr and I estimate Y billable hours. > > > But academics balk at such things, so a more tactful option is to simply say that unfortunately your current job leaves you no time at all to work on it, sorry. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I am of the opinion that you have absolutely zero obligation to continue to work on any further work with X unless you want to. Who cares about "science." My PhD advisor wanted to enter into a collaboration such as this. He was entirely absent for much of my dissertation (including failing to show up to my final defense). Once I was in a full time position, all of the sudden my advisor realized that he hadn't published in two years. Trying to be nice (and for the sake of "science") I agreed to continue collaborating with him. Three years later, after doing several thousands of $US work for him (new experiments, new manuscripts, meetings, etc.), I still have exactly....zero publications with my advisor. It was just one excuse after another as to why he isn't able to publish the manuscript. I have now essentially ended any talks of publishing with him. Some faculty members have become accustomed to getting free work out of graduate students (and former students) because they have leverage over degree requirements, funding, letters of recommendation, etc. I would say that unless you are really dedicated to this Professor X, you should suggest that your contributions be rather minimal. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: No, not for the amount of effort they're asking. I've been asked occasionally by my old boss to do some things, but generally an hour's worth of getting some old software updated after a package update broke it, or review a paper or two. In both those scenarios, it's in my benefit to do so as I built the software and I get credited for reviewing. If I'm getting asked to contribute to a grant proposal that won't benefit me or my employer the answer is no, especially the amount of effort being asked here - unless of course you pay me out of hours (and as a phd student I did get £200 for adding a specific section to a grant I wasn't named on or would benefit from if it succeeded.) Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: While you have no obligation to do that, I still suggest that you consider helping your supervisor here a little bit but not to the full extent he/she is asking for due to fairness. Your supervisor financed your PhD studies (right?) and there is the implicit cultural academic norm to "pay this back", i.e., to help the future generation of PhD students to get funding. Normally, this happens due to grant writing during the PhD studies, while in your case, the request happened afterwards. At the same time, you advisor cannot give your former paper to someone else to finish it and publish the work without you, because you had a substantial intellectual contribution. By the usual authorship conventions, every author needs to approve the final version of the paper and at the same time have some intellectual share in the overall work. So you advisor can't publish this without you at all. So you not helping him at all would mean that the paper cannot be published, which may hurt the next generation of PhD students. At the same time, since you left academia, it is unreasonable for X to assume that you will quit your personal life for a few months to write the paper. I personally think that you should give reasonable effort to satisfy the academic cultural norm and think about whether you can make ends meet anyway. One option would be (1) to not meet in person with X but rather have a quicker Skype chat, (2) to only offer occasional advising to the person in X's lab to finish the work, and (3) to offer one pass over the paper when the paper is written and to implicitly "sign it off". This sounds like it reduces your workload by 90% while still not blocking the publication of the paper. It does load off a lot of work to the person in X's lab, who will get a paper out of it, though. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: I wouldn't make a drama about it, but just say "I'm too busy". You don't have to explain, justify, etc. Just literally (and not how millenials use that word) write that. If he wants to cavitate, let him. But leave the monkey on his back, not yours. An alternate approach is to try to modify the claims in the paper (lower them) and publish what you have. This is often possible even in decent (perhaps lower ranked) journals. But only do it if it works for you. Had somewhat analogous, but not completely, experience with a paper, post grad. (More an issue of differences on authorship, claims, etc.) And after a year of "nothing", advisor was very amenable to doing what I chose. We just published the paper how I wanted it, exactly. He ended up happy for getting part of a loaf versus nothing. (And it is not uncommon for profs to get nothing when people leave. It's just an aspect of their business model of not doing the work themselves or having true paid employees. So I don't cry for them.) I was out of academia and the prof was just some guy. Not someone to affect me with this silly geneology (he ain't my dad) or letters of rec or any of that kerflurry. Plus, he had already gotten huge return on any financial investment in me from previous publications, so I sure didn't feel any psychic debt...more the opposite. But I actually wanted mildy to get what I had done, printed. So at least it helped the field and was one more little byline, from which I get a childish pleasure. In any case, I would NOT doing anything requiring new analysis, coding, experiments, etc. The furthest extent of work would be writing. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: I agree absolutely with the comments that you do not have any obligation to assist X in the way he asks, especially if he does not propose to pay you. In fact, I would describe the request as unreasonable. (If you find yourself in discussion with him, you might point out the X is getting paid for performing this work, as part of X's university salary. Why, you might ask, should you work for free?) The only argument I can see in the other direction: if you ever need a letter of reference from X, it helps if X is happy with you. If you are confident that your current job is secure, and don't anticipate that you will need X's support to get a new job, then you could risk annoying X. I would politely decline, citing the inflexible time demands of your new job and your current employer's expectations. "It would do neither of us any good, if I agreed to a commitment that I found myself unable to honor." X sounds like a greedy, grasping, self-absorbed jerk. Academia is full of them. You are not obliged to continue to humor X's expectations for a one-sided, exploitative, abusive relationship, just because X wants it. Stay away from people like that. Life is way too short. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_12: Academic work that you are not specifically paid for, but which will help you get recognition in the field, is normal if you are in academia, because recognition in the field is a major currency for an academic. Your advisor may just not be realizing that what they are asking literally makes no sense for you. Tell your advisor to find a bright undergrad or maybe a master's degree candidate, bring them up to speed, and you will help them in an advisory capacity only. If the advisor wants unpaid work, they should find someone that will want to do it in order to get their name on a publication. The benefit to you here is that it keeps you from burning this bridge. (Personal note, I also left academia after a graduate degree, very disillusioned, but many years later I've realized that, basically, all institutions have deep issues counter to their core missions, and I would consider returning. This could happen to you, even though you can't imagine it right now. Also, you never know when a former contact can come in handy in a future job search, etc. If you can avoid burning this bridge with a reasonable amount of effort, consider it.) Upvotes: 2
2019/06/17	2,253	9,377	<issue_start>username_0: Once in a while, I will hear stories (usually of the "friend of a friend" type) about some bold instructor who took some specific action in order to entrap or trick their students into poor academic (not behavioral/conduct) performance. Typically, this involves the instructor breaking traditional implied rules of trust in the classroom (i.e. that the instructor will guide the students in good faith, rather than try to trick and "catch" them). This may be analogous to Sting Operations in law enforcement. Examples may include: * Planting fake resources in the library as a critical thinking exercise. Students found to be citing said materials would receive a lowered grade for not inquiring into their provenance ("Ha! There is no Advanced Journal of Trans-Neptunian Objects! The measurements you cited were made up by my 5 year old. You lose 20 points for basing your paper on unreliable findings."). * Assigning material known to have flaws to students as course reading material. Students simply accepting the truth of the "knowledge" provided in these readings and regurgitating these on exams without confirming their correctness would be penalized (e.g. "Yes, the assigned textbook said that Woofer's Theorem proved that x < 5 when y > 3, but if you actually read a sampling of textbooks used by other instructors or had bothered to read Woofer's original paper, you would have known that it only proved that x < 5 when y is between 3 and 6. You lose 10 points for incorrect answers."). * Sabotaging laboratory chemicals or equipment (on the theory that the students should always test everything they get). Students using these materials "off-the-shelf" would receive lowered grades on the theory that in the real world, you can't just trust what you see printed on the label (e.g. "Yes, that bottle was labeled One Molar Hydrochloric Acid, but how could you just trust that that was true? You are a grad student! Do you believe everything you see posted on the Internet?"). * Pretending that they have more authority than they have. For example, an instructor may falsely claim to a student that they can exempt them from or alter certain requirements that are actually set at the department level or higher ("Ha! Why did you trust me when I told you I was giving you permission to be late to the final exam? Chapter 4, Paragraph 6, Subparagraph R, Clause E of the Standardized Universal Academic Policies states clearly 'Students arriving late for a final exam will receive an automatic failing grade. Only the dean has authority to dispense a student from this regulation.'. I'm not the dean. Here's your failing grade, see you next semester. Try to wisen up! Ha ha ha!") To what extent is this kind of underhanded behavior ethical? On the one hand, I can see the pedagogical wisdom behind some of these ideas - to make the university more like the "real world" and to instill some (healthy?) mistrust and skepticism of authority, but on the other hand, undergraduate and lower-level graduate courses have as one of their purposes to guide and educate someone who is still immature academically and not yet ready to do real academic research on their own.<issue_comment>username_1: The "sabotaging" and "false authority" examples you have given are highly questionable and probably unethical from the viewpoints of most academics (to the extent I can guess their opinion). They certainly are from mine. Ultimately, they boil down to lying. The justification you provide: > > to make the university more like the "real world" and to instill some (healthy?) mistrust and skepticism of authority > > > (arguably not your opinion but a best guess of how these behaviors would be justified) is too weak: There are less damaging ways to get the same results. Skepticism of authority can be taught by confronting students with existing failures and misbehaviors, which are so easily found if one knows where to look that it is almost ridiculous to create one's own lab-grown ones. Finding fatal statistical errors in published medicine papers, for example, has become [so commonplace](https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu) it could be assigned to students as homework. There is your skepticism and mistrust! After all, you don't randomly kill people just so that medicine students have fresh bones to dissect. The "fake resources in the library" example is more in the grey zone: Here, at least, no "implicit rules of trust in the classroom" are being broken, since the library is not the classroom and any graphomaniac can leave whatever stuff they want there (that is, until some librarian finds it). You are no longer claiming something in your name, but merely claiming that someone else claimed something. To me, the freedom to do such hoaxes is part of academic freedom. Still, from a teaching perspective, the damage probably outweighs the use -- what exactly are you achieving? Fake journals aren't exactly rare; why concoct an artificial one when there are real ones all over the internet? (That said, the idea of leaving easter eggs for your students to find in the library is seriously worth it. Just don't make them so subtle that they will be taken at face value.) Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I can find no circumstance in which any of it is ethical. Not even putting out fake "answer keys". Your job is to teach. Those examples have nothing to do with teaching. Sadly, some "teachers" think their main task is to "sort" people into grade classes, rather than to actually educate them. This basically assumes the students don't need to be taught, just graded, and they will learn on their own or with minimal effort on the instructor's part. Such people worry more about catching "cheaters" than they do about actual education. Imagine instead, that your job is to teach every student, even if you have to spend more effort with some students than with others. If you tried to present any of those to an IRB as a part of research they would shame you out of the room. If a tenured professor tried some of them and a student brought it to the attention of the university authorities, the prof might be in danger of losing tenure for moral transgression. Some faculty would certainly vote that way. The chemical case in particular. There are ethical ways to teach critical thinking and resource evaluation. Use those. The only variation I can envision in which any of it is valid is if the professor specifically points to a set of resources and advertises that some of them are "broken" and the task is to sort them into the ones with value and those without. But here there is no deception at all. Another variation is a "find the error here" sort of exercise. Again, no deception. Note that there is a vaguely related [question at CSEducators](https://cseducators.stackexchange.com/q/4717/1293) for which I also provide an answer. It is about lying to novices as part of teaching. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: In my view, the ethical line is crossed when you impose irreversible grade penalties on students who fall for these tricks. I think you could ethically use most of these tricks if when a student falls for one, you explain the issue and allow them to correct their work without penalty or excessive additional labor. I also think it will be more effective at helping students actually learn about the issue - their takeaway message will be more along the lines of "this is an important issue to watch for" instead of "the instructor is a jerk". Even with such a modification, I'm still not sure it's actually a good idea - it may very well tend to annoy students more than to teach them. These tricks might also be nearly as effective in a "full disclosure" version. "Your assignment is to synthesize this compound. However, some of the reagents have been replaced with inert substances, to simulate the possibility of mislabeling." Obviously, the laboratory chemical version should certainly not be done if there is any possibility of a risk to health or safety from using the wrong substance. And your #4 (pretend to have more authority) is completely unacceptable. Temporarily misleading someone regarding academic content, as a way to help them learn it, is one thing; misleading them as to the administrative regulations of the university is entirely different, and is educationally unjustifiable. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: To consider any of these would be a waste of time. They seem closer to the urban myth category and rarely have a basis in fact. They are all unethical if they did indeed occur at all. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: If one is teaching undercover scientific misconduct investigation, this may be the right strategy. Generally, however, research is a cooperative endeavour, and one assumes a priori that there is no intention to mislead, misdirect, confuse or fool fellow scientists. As an occasional exercise, with some advance hints, such entrapment may be a useful addition to the standard educational repertoire - however as a standard strategy of education, all one will get will be students that will be paranoid, suspicious, prone to conspiracy theories and, at best, will have acquired skills in hunting down academic offenders; effective scientists, however, they are not likely to become. Upvotes: 0
2019/06/18	397	1,801	<issue_start>username_0: My manuscript was favourably received, with a recommendation to publish after a minor revision. However, after submitting the revised version, the Associate Editor (or Editor-in-Chief) responded: > > Please benchmark your manuscript against recent articles in [other journal] to increase the relevance of your manuscript to the journal's readership. > > > What does this mean? Does this mean the Associate Editor (or Editor-in-Chief) doesn't like my manuscript?<issue_comment>username_1: First, are you sure this is a reputable journal? Avoid publishing with disreputable journals. The editor is requesting that you compare your results to recent results published in the same journal. It is normal to expect that you compare your results with previous work, however, it is a bit odd that the editor specifically requests that you compare with work from the same journal. Perhaps the editor is attempting to inflate the journal's citation statistics. It is also possible that the editor knows the journal has published multiple relevant papers you should have mentioned in your submission, but did not. If you can identify similar papers from the journal with which you can compare your results, do so. If you cannot find any similar papers, you may have selected an inappropriate journal for your work. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I work as a manuscript editor for a medical journal. I suggest writing back to the corresponding editor and tell them that you would appreciate more direction. It is part of what they do--help new authors figure out the publication process. It will not change your acceptance and it is better to have the request explained fully rather than risking another round of edits if you don't do exactly what they intend. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/18	836	3,524	<issue_start>username_0: I am at the end of the fifth year of research. My thesis was written last year but my supervisor refused to take in any submissions stating that he is very busy. I followed up from time to time for feedback but that irritated him and he told me to wait till he called me on his own. I have now applied for an extension at the university for another year. In a recent face to face conversation on what is expected of me and how to move things forward, my supervisor says that it will take time for him to begin the review and that Phd depends on mostly my behaviour and not the research work that I have done. I have sought the university's help informally but they say they cannot do anything to help. They say I need to sort it out myself. What should I do?<issue_comment>username_1: > > What should I do? > > > Talk to a departmental academic that you trust and ask for guidance. Hopefully, they'll help you proceed. Otherwise, contact your department head. (You may ask several academics before escalating to the department head.) Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: > > What should I do? > > > Escalate within the university. You have finished your thesis, but your supervisor is not reviewing it, and thus you are stalled in your PhD progress and unable to progress. This is not reasonable- reviewing your thesis is part of your advisor's job. So you should escalate. You might try doing this informally first - as it sounds as though you have already tried - by speaking to people you know and trust in the department. But if this fails you will have to do something formal, by contacting a person in charge of PGR student progression, or a head of department, or similar. Unless there are significant factors that you have not told us about, they are likely to support you, because no department wants students taking extensions when they could be defending and graduating. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: It seems like you're in a tought spot there. I've been through similar. I don't know how it works in your country, but here we're allowed to have a co-supervisor. Since my supervisor was also busy with something else, she's actually the one who came up with the idea of getting myself a co-supervisor. Maybe that's an approach you could try. respectfully tell your supervisor you understand he's busy with things of his own and that maybe you would both benefit from having someone else reviewing your text and giving you feedback. It would earn you time and remove some of the pressure from him. It is also a good opportunity to make some network and prospect future steps. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: I'm absolutely horrified when hearing stories like this. In Denmark a PhD is nominated to 3 years, although most do a 3 or 6 month extension. But then the thesis must be submitted within this time. Hence, there is a fixed date (already when you start your PhD) for when to hand in your thesis. At the time of handing in, you can of course apply for an extension, but it's you who decide and not the supervisor (if you have a good relationship with him/her, its a joint decision). For you particular situation, I would (as I can see other also have) recommend that you take action seek advice from other professors or senior staff. Do you have a guidance/counselor or perhaps HR staff at the PhD school? At my university I've had talks with guiding staff at the PhD school (HR people), regarding disagreements with my former supervisor. Upvotes: 1
2019/06/18	525	2,386	<issue_start>username_0: I'm working on a final year project on software development. I intend to publish it as a research paper on computer science, but the university says that it will hold intellectual-property rights (IPR) over all final year projects. Can I publish the project as an independent research paper in a journal by including me and co-authors or will the IPR of the university cause problems?<issue_comment>username_1: First, it would be good to know if that is a claim they can legally make where you are. It is possible that it is an empty claim. Second, if it is a proper claim, you should learn how it is interpreted by the university. A place making such a claim should have an office at which you can learn the consequences. I suspect that all it means is that you need permission from them to publish and, perhaps, include a reference to the university in the acknowledgements. But forbidding publication would be unlikely except in extreme circumstances and assigning it to another "author" would be unethical. My guess is that you have a way forward for nearly any sort of publication. It is actually to the university's benefit to have students publishing. Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As username_1 says, it's very likely that you can publish your work. What you should do is discuss this with your project advisor and probably have them as co-author, as I assume that they had a role in the project, right? Additionally they are certainly able to help you make the publication more likely to be accepted. Institutions usually retain (some) IP rights on the outcome of students projects because such projects are part of the curriculum and usually include work done by the professors; sometimes the main idea is actually based on the professor's research topic. But this is not meant to limit your ability to publish, it's mostly for the cases where the project could lead to a commercial application based on the university/professor IP. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: This is something you should have checked before signing any contract as student/employee at this university. Certain legislation give more intellectual rights to scholars / teachers in some places than others. Things like "Academic freedom" or "University teacher exception" clauses may exist in the IP legislation of your country. Upvotes: 3
2019/06/18	413	1,778	<issue_start>username_0: I'm from Computer Science field and usually I've seen students are required to publish a few research papers to be eligible for writing a thesis. I'm talking about masters level thesis here. As far as I know the rationale behind this is that research papers are usually well evaluated by the conference committee but what if someone's research doesn't get published? I'm assuming their research to be good enough but is rejected by conference people because they had better alternatives. Are they eligible to write the thesis? They don't usually allow it in my college. Is it the case everywhere? If the answer goes along the line that it must be acceptable in a lower rated conference then why go for external evaluations anyway since I've heard they have poor evaluations.<issue_comment>username_1: This sort of thing varies widely from place to place. In the US it would be fairly unusual at the MS level. But, what ever it is, the rules of your university are what they are and you need to follow them to be successful there. If they permit lower quality publications, then they do. It isn't a good idea to just try for the lowest acceptable quality, but if you are rejected at a high level and a lower level will work, then do that. You are still very early in your career. Your earliest work isn't likely to be your best work and things can improve as you learn more and get more experience. Ultimately, the why doesn't matter a lot. You follow the rules as you find them. But I expect that it involves finding a way for you to get early experience. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: > > Are [students required to publish to be] eligible to write the thesis? > > > No, this is institution dependent. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
2019/06/18	1,800	7,627	<issue_start>username_0: I started my internship with a biological data analysis institute yesterday (i.e. have spent two full working days there), and I am very concerned that I am expected to have programming skills that I really don't have. My own background: I have just finished a theoretical physics degree and next year will be persuing a Masters in Mathematics. I have done some programming in my course (an intro to MATLAB, C++ and python in my 3 years respectively), but everything has been very geared towards physics applications. e.g. simulate many body collisions, plot a graph of the transmitted intensity for some funky aperature etc). What's worse, I now realise that we only really looked at very basic features of these programming languages, and basic packages. We never learned the fundamentals of 'how a computer thinks', which is why I am having difficulties now. I did OK in our programming tasks, and this gave me a really skewed perspective of what it means to know a programming language. I put 'python, MATLAB, basic C++' on the 'skills' section of my CV, not really realising that my knowledge of python really is 'basic' at best. That's the paradox I guess. It feels like with computing, you only know how little you know after you reach a certain level of proficiency. I did not mean to deceive anyone with writing the skills I thought I had. In any case, I have been struggling over the last couple of days. I realised that at the institute, everyone is basically a programming pro, and the interns are generally computer science students or statisticians. While my degree is numerical, I really have done pathetically little in the way of real data analysis and computing. I didn't know about Anaconda for instance. I have only ever used simple python libraries like scipy and numpy, matplotlib. I was introduced to it today. But the thing I am struggling with most are things like: what folders does the (programming language? interface? Environment? I don't even know the right word to use here :() have access to? When I want to read/call a file, which folder does it have to be in? How can I check my path without exiting my working environment? etc. Today I wasted 2 hours simply because I called a file name by the name of a python module that I was later calling. I wish I could say t was 'by mistake'. In reality, I didn't think this would be a problem. The text file has an extension anyway? As you can see these are small things that really require PROGRAMMING EXPERIENCE to be ok with. I don't think that cramming a python book will help. I can tell that the other members of the team are getting annoyed. I don't ask too may questions (nor too little I think). But if I ask a question, it's often too basic. And if I don't I waste time. The person who gave me a (long) skype interview- the head on my group- is returning tomorrow and we are meeting for the first time. I am quite embarrased, especially as I know they were considering other candidtaes. Any advice on the best way to proceed, or how to learn what might be useful quickly, would be much appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: You are an intern, not a program lead. Relax a bit. Presumably people will understand that you are new at this. That said, however, I'd suggest that you do a big push on Python. Find some code that they use already and absorb it. If they use Anaconda, then get familiar with that asap. Your suggestion to talk to the person that interviewed you is a good one. Ask for their advice about coming quickly up to speed. But part of the internship experience is to learn, not to bring real expertise to the team. They probably already have that. Of course, they set the tasks in the programming "test" and you did ok, so they are probably not as uncomfortable as you are. You could also try to pick out one of the members who you are comfortable with and use them as a mentor, either explicitly or implicitly. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Your problem doesn't seem to be programming per se, but rather how a programming language interacts with specific interfaces, environments, and libraries. These are things you learn when you need them to. Trust me, you could be a computer science student and still not know any of this unless you had specifically worked with it before. The good news is that it doesn't take that long to learn. You don't know how to use Python to interact with folders on a Windows 10 laptop? Google it, you'll figure it out in 1 minute. You don't know how to see the working directory? Google it, figure it out in a minute. And then just keep repeating that. Think up of questions that you think might be relevant to your current tasks, and find the answers. Start now, and do it for some hours. You'll find that you'll get your head around it quickly. It really isn't that complicated, and you don't have to learn "how a computer thinks" (especially not in Python): you just have to memorize a few lines of code. It's slightly different with a language like C++ which is more low-level: here, it can be helpful to know exactly what happens, but even still, if you can't understand it immediately, it's fine as long as you at least can memorize the code needed to accomplish the task. Oh, and your co-workers being annoyed with an intern after 2 days: They're twats. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Others have given good advice. What I would add to this is that you should try to reframe your problem. You've identified the areas that you're struggling with - and that's OK, at the start of an internship. Rather than thinking "this is a problem, I shouldn't be here", instead ask yourself "what can I do to fix this?". Treat it as an opportunity to learn (which is, after all, what internships are for). If you're worried about asking too many basic questions of experienced people, then instead ask them if they can recommend a book or other resource that you could use to get up to speed. And, as others have said, don't be afraid to google stuff continually. That's how most "real programmers" work most of the time these days :-) Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: The worst thing that you can do is continue on without asking questions. Don't be scared to do so. I am currently a Development intern and I do have programming background but there is soooo much more than I do not know. Therefore when something comes up that I don't know, I ask and I get a simple explanation and if I need more I ask for more. That is the environment I work in but I know that alot of places aren't as open and friendly (my old internship) but it is still worth it to ask. I used to find something I didn't know, Google it, memorize the smart-looking definition of it, and then if I was asked if I understood something about the thing I didn't know about, I would say "yes" and then I'd panic for the next few months. DONT BE LIKE ME! The longer you wait to ask these things, the harder it will get. Honestly, it is really good that you are recognizing it this early on in your job. Take that as a positive. One more thing, again, I don't know what your work environment is like, but it could also be a good idea to talk to your manager and state that you have a concern about your programming experiences and ask if they could give recommendations on training sites you can go on, and if they would give you some time at work to do a little training here and there to help you understand everything more. Hope this helps, you aren't the only one who has ever felt this way so do not worry, you got this! Upvotes: 1
2019/06/18	850	3,780	<issue_start>username_0: I've just gotten a textbook (physics) for next year and I noticed that, like many other textbooks I've had, it contains solutions to only odd-numbered questions. From my experience, this is typical, at least for texts at the undergraduate level. If anyone is wondering, the text is "Fundamentals of Physics" by Halliday & Resnick 10th edition. My question is, why do textbooks often include the solutions to odd or even numbered problems but not both? In my case, I don't think space is the answer because the answers section only takes up 7 pages.<issue_comment>username_1: This allowance is a custom to allow instructors to give homework where the solutions to some questions were not provided directly to the student (at least not in the book - this was from a time where searching for solutions to homework was not so easy outside of personal social connections). If an instructor just wants students to work on problems where the students can easily refer to sample solutions at the back of the book, the instructor can just assign "problems 1-7, odds only". If they want to assign only no-solution problems, they can assign "evens only". If they want to give a mixture to try to encourage students to mix up their solving strategies, they can assign both. To go farther, putting them at the back of the book was another way to try to make it take a little more effort to look for the solution, to encourage the students to try to solve it themselves rather than immediately looking at the solution. Finally, it is a custom that the problems tend to go from easier to harder, with some texts making the highest numbered questions of a chapter require more knowledge or skills than is actually provided in the accompanying chapter. As you can imagine, this isn't the only system of designing a textbook that would support these uses, but it just became a very popular and simple way to do it - so you can generally expect to see it in many of the textbooks you'll encounter. Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If I were to produce such a book, my reasoning would be a bit different from that of [username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/132119/75368). In using any such book for a course, I would probably assign only questions that did not have answers in the answer key. But I would encourage the students to use a tried and true learning technique: reinforcement and feedback. The extra problems, while not assigned, give those students who want the practice (all of them do need it, actually) the opportunity to work on some additional problems and then check their work. If they got the correct answer they have additional confidence in their learning. If they did not, then they want to come and see me to find out where they went wrong - additional reinforcement and feedback. I would, of course, stress that there is a good way and a bad way to use the answers. Working toward a known answer is far less valuable than working out an unknown answer. Not every student would 'get it' but the opportunity is there for them. And, of course, they get reinforcement and feedback for the questions that I do assign and for those, I get to follow their thinking somewhat to search for misconceptions. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: The other answers cover what I think is the main reason, but I want to bring up something else: Putting solutions into a textbook is a lot of work; the editors have to find the solutions, write them up, typeset them, and someone has to proofread them. On the other hand, the additional benefit of another solution becomes pretty small once half the problems have solutions, especially in those textbooks that feature a lot of rather repetitive problems. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/19	5,023	19,326	<issue_start>username_0: I can surmise that some of them mightn't have gotten tenure and needed to find another job, but wouldn't these former professors be bored teaching the same (relatively basal) material yearly? Let me know of other examples, but I was riffling some fee-paying schools and lighted upon: * [<NAME>](https://www.commschool.org/directory), of the [Harvard Academy for International and Area Studies](https://iwpr.net/global-voices/historian-bests-milosevic) > > B.A., Swarthmore College 1982 > > B.A., University of Cambridge (UK) 1984 > > M.A., Harvard University 1991 > > Ph.D., Harvard University 1998 > > > * [<NAME>](https://www.classics.upenn.edu/people/eric-casey), former Associate Professor of Classics, Sweet Briar College. Now at [Trinity School NYC](https://www.linkedin.com/in/eric-casey-35a78230/). * [<NAME>](https://mylearningspringboard.com/david-gomprecht/) at [Dalton School](https://www.dalton.org/our-community/faculty?deptId=1968). > > Gomprecht, PhD, graduated from Wesleyan University, where he majored in mathematics and physics, and then went on to receive a Ph.D. in mathematics from the University of California at Berkeley. After working as a research mathematician for a few years, David returned to his hometown of New York City, where he has now been a [math specialist](https://mylearningspringboard.com/math-specialists/ "math specialist") and [private tutor](https://mylearningspringboard.com/private-tutoring/ "private tutor") for over twenty years. > > > * [<NAME>](https://www.linkedin.com/in/mara-naaman-84326b46/) at Dalton School. > > [![enter image description here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/p5idi.jpg)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/p5idi.jpg) > > ><issue_comment>username_1: Some reasons might be: * Didn't get tenure * Better pay * Prefer to be a big fish in a small pond * Don't enjoy research * Never got a tenure track position (e.g. research mathematician) * Wanted to be in a certain city * College potentially shutting down (e.g. Sweet Briar) In some disciplines, such as physics or classics, the number of tenure track positions is very low and many people never go into either tenure track or "teaching professor" roles. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Because not everybody wants to do research their whole life, and because being a high school teacher is a fairly fulfilling job for many people. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: I suspect the answer is they don't, at least not with the frequency your examples would suggest. Let's look at your examples. > > ....Ph.D., Harvard University 1998.... > > > This does not mean that this person was a professor. This means they earned a PhD. A PhD qualifies one to do research; it does not give them a permanent position. If they cannot find a permanent position, or are not interested in continuing in research, they will have to make other plans. > > ... After working as a research mathematician for a few years ... > > > This person was probably not a tenured professor either. A "research mathematician" is a bit vague, but I suspect it is a post-doc position, or perhaps a non-tenured faculty-level position. Either way, when the temporary position expires, they will need to find a job. > > Former Associate Professor of Classics, Sweet Briar College > > > So this one definitely has "professor" in the title, and this person probably has tenure too. However, "professor" is an overloaded term -- I suspect your question refers to professors at major research institutions who do research and publish and teach college classes and advise graduate students. In contrast, this person was a professor at Sweet Briar College, which has about 300 undergraduates, no grad students, and no mention of mathematical research on their website (that I could find) at all. So being a professor here is not all that dissimilar from being a high school teacher, and is quite different from being a professor at a major research institution. As others have noted, Sweet Briar College has had severe financial and other problems recently; this could explain this particular decision. > > ...Asst. Professor of Arabic, Williams College (7 yrs 1 mon) > > > Assistant professors are generally not tenured, and 7 years is usually the longest one can postpone a tenure decision. I'm not sure what happened here, but I'm guessing that tenure was denied. So, I would challenge your premise: you have not provided any examples of tenured professors at major research institutions who left their position to teach high school. I suspect this happens very rarely, and when it does happen, it's for highly personalized reasons. You also ask: > > wouldn't these [PhD mathematicians] be bored teaching the same (relatively basal) material yearly > > > Well, maybe, but if you don't become a professor you have to do something. Personally, I find "the assumption that you would not want to be a high-school teacher if you could be a professor [to be] a bit belittling" (to quote @Jeffrey). Some people probably enjoy teaching and working with younger students; others just need a job and prefer the familiarity of the classroom to the unknown of industry. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: Implicit in your question is the idea that it is "better" to be a professor than to teach at high school. If this weren't the case, then it's not surprising that some people would choose to teach at high school instead of be a professor. This assumption isn't necessarily true. It might be for you, and it might be "obviously" true for some people, but it's not true in general. There've been a variety of essays by people who've left academia on the reasons they did it. Here are some examples: [1](http://www.megankatenelson.com/why-i-left-academia-or-to-publish-and-therefore-perish/), [2](http://matt-welsh.blogspot.com/2010/11/why-im-leaving-harvard.html), [3](https://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/blog/2014/may/01/academic-anonymous-leaving-academia), [4](https://www.vox.com/2015/9/8/9261531/professor-quitting-job), [5](https://www.nature.com/news/young-talented-and-fed-up-scientists-tell-their-stories-1.20872). You can Google for a lot more (search for "why I left academia" or "why I quit my professorship"). Common reasons cited for doing so include: * Dismal academic job market * Constant competition for (too little and decreasing) funding * Low pay * Lack of permanent contracts * Constant demand to be "available" For example here's a paragraph from (5) above: > > In fact, scientific life was proving tough. [Young researcher] found himself working 60–80 hours per week doing teaching and research. His start-up funding had run out, he had yet to secure a major grant and, according to a practice common in US academia, he would not be paid by his university for three summer months. His wife had not been able to move with him, so he was making tiring weekend commutes. It seemed that the pressures had reached unsustainable levels. Something had to give. > > > Many of these problems are not present when you teach at high school. You might earn less, but you also work less, so it's not fatal. You have job security. You have well-defined office hours. You won't be receiving emails from students begging for help in the middle of the night. You don't have to worry about what happens if your next grant fails to come through. At this point you might as well flip the question around: why aren't more professors with PhDs leaving their professorships to teach high school? I'm not making a statement here that it's better to teach high school compared to being a professor; I'm just saying that it's conceivable that reasonable people will choose the latter over the former. Society might consider the former as more prestigious, but that doesn't mean it's "better". Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: I don't think they leave professorships unless it is for a job of 'higher academic standing'. As an example, my son goes to a private secondary school in the UK, St Paul's School (SPS), which is known to be very academic and very well-endowed (they have a Scanning Electron Microscope, so it's much nicer than any 'high school' I've gone to). Several of his lecturers have PhDs, and some have lectured (i.e., assistant prof-ship, perhaps temporary, or postdoc-ed) at good Universities, such as Harvard and Cambridge. AFAIK, none of his lecturers have been tenured at universities. Note that at SPS, they should have relatively high pay compared to their secondary-school-teaching peers, and effective tenure. They can and do publish some academic research. The High Master (equivalent of head-master) is a full professor of History at University of East Anglia. In becoming the high master, he had an effective promotion, housing provided, and I'm almost certain higher pay. He did take a leave from his professorship rather than to give it up altogether. He did continue to do research and for instance, has written a recent book together with some of the other History lecturers at SPS. This year, however, he is leaving his position at SPS having served something like 6 or 8 years. And, he will return to being a full-time professor, focusing on his research and teaching. In other words, money and stability can be an incentive, but tenure at an established university is likely to trump all others. Temporary positions, career difficulties, all can drive people from pure academia to high schools. Perhaps the most notable example of career difficulties (forced to resign from U of Minn because of post-war harassment by the House Un-American Activities Committee) is <NAME>, former Professor, later High School Teacher, and founder of the Exploratorium (see [<NAME> (1912-1985)](https://www.exploratorium.edu/people/frank-oppenheimer). In that instance, Wyoming High School students were probably amongst the luckiest in the US. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: I have done this so perhaps can answer your question. I was a tenured full professor of physics at a state university but currently teach high school. There are several reasons I chose to do this. * Most importantly, I love teaching and am great at it, while I dislike the constant drudgery of research and will not be winning any Nobel Prizes. I never have to hit my head against the wall of grant competitions or peer review. * There came a time when I needed to solve the [Two-Body Problem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-body_problem_(career)) and the high school option made me far more mobile. * I get more time for myself. Classes generally require only about 5 minutes of prep time each, if that. The time between periods is sufficient. Grading takes less than 10% of the time it took at college because of the level of study and can often all be done in class while students are taking a quiz or test. When school is out, I go home and forget about work. There is no constant e-mailing from students wanting help and extensions. * My interactions with high school students are closer and more positive than those with most of my college students. I never learned most of my college students' names. In high school, I have a relationship with every student. The down sides are minor. The pay kind of stinks compared to what I used to make, but the free time makes up for that. I sometimes have to loop in the Headmistress when making grade decisions that involve teacher's discretion, which grates on my sense of academic freedom. But I think I can deal. Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_7: I really don't understand why you find this all that mysterious. Some people with PhDs end out focusing on teaching, for whatever reason, and sometimes for them the best teaching option is at the high school level. Some people from your list teach at the Dalton School. According to Wikipedia, "The Dalton School, originally the Children's University School, is a private, coeducational college preparatory school on New York City's Upper East Side and a member of both the Ivy Preparatory School League and the New York Interschool." Suppose you had to choose between teaching there and teaching lower level college math to classes of 100+ engineering students primarily concerned with their grades, and who mainly have little to no interest in the course material. (Yes, a lot of college math teaching is like that unfortunately.) Why is it so shocking that someone who is dedicated to teaching might prefer to teach at the Dalton School? You ask "wouldn't these former professors be bored teaching the same (relatively basal) material yearly?" Guess what, most college teaching is the same way. The exception would be graduate-level teaching, but jobs with a lot of such teaching are hard to get, and usually go to people who have a substantial research focus. The ones who don't do a lot of research are mainly going to be teaching the lower level courses regardless. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: The three schools in the four examples you've given are widely considered to be in the top ten private schools in the United States. The academic standards at many top private high schools are much higher than you find at small colleges around here. My wife taught at a small directional state university and then followed that with one of the top private schools in NYC and has been much happier with the quality of the students she has here. She teaches college material (biology & chemistry) to students four or five years younger and not only do they grasp it better, but they try harder. Plus, well, top private schools pay more than small universities. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: I agree with all the answers, including the skepticism that it is as common as OP thinks. But one more reason I didn’t see mentioned is the offensive actions of some administrations done for the sake of publicity and/or athletics. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: I went to high school in Canada. It was a regular high school, not particularly prestigious but not known to be a terrible school either. Couldn't get any more "average" than that in my neighborhood. I mention this because some answers have said that teaching in some private schools can be as prestigious as in a University. I was not at one of those schools, and one of the religion teachers had a PhD in theology. Theology might not be the "typical" PhD, maybe there's not as many avenues for careers in research, but his rationale behind teaching in high school rather than doing something else was to pass on his passion to people who may not have been exposed to the subject yet (or at least not properly or in deep detail). This rationale applies for other fields too, few PhDs get to introduce their fields to people who are truly new to it. For example, a physics undergrad student (and even more so for grad students) should already be at least somewhat knowledgeable of what physics is and be generally interested in the field as a whole. Someone who has a passion for teaching might find it more enjoyable to introduce new people to their fields than to help advance the people who are already in it, regardless of their own degree of education. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: Well, first of all some universities pay poorly. In my neck of the woods it is generally accepted that if you want to work at a UNI you are going to take a pay cut of at least 20 percent compared to what you would earn in the private sector. For some people this is worth it because the work they want to do they can only really do at the universities. For some people the pay cut is not worth it. Also it is worth noting that some AP classes are in essence first year college modules, so if you find yourself in a High School with such a program you are not doing a curriculum all that different from a 1st year college tutor. What is also a real bummer is the cutthroat way in which jobs are allocated. The politics and backstabbing nature of UNI's seems to be a real reason why some grow tired of it. And lastly, some people are just natural-born teachers. Some don't get the amount of teaching kicks at UNI and yearn for more personal teaching environments. You should really not underestimate how hard it is to teach a 4th grader long division or how rewarding it is when you get a class of 4th graders to do it correctly. It also seems to be a thing that in private high-schools because the parents have to sacrifice so much to get them in to the school they do tend to have better work ethics, not always but some of the time. Teaching in such an environment where there is a thirst for knowledge, where you can often be better paid and have regular time of to spend with family and don't have much in the of Machiavellian antics, could seem to many a step up. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_12: There is huge workload being a professor. Lots of duties and stress. You are responsible for courses, research in your department, maybe applying for grants, writing papers, teaching, supervising PhD students and people writing their MSc thesis. At some point in life it can simply become boring and too draining on health to keep working as professor. Other things simply start becoming more important in life. Maybe wants to spend more time with family. Pass on knowledge to future generations. Write memoirs. Maybe start doing other things altogether. Compose music, travel, any hobby you could think of et.c. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_13: Labor exploitation at universities in some countries. At the University the average salary per hour in the classroom for people under 40 years old can be about one half of what is paid to high school teachers (which in practice requieres highschool education instead of doc/postdoc as in the university) Although the time for class preparation (unpaid in that countries) can be significant in both places, it is easier to safe the situation explaining highschool content, at worst you can be poorly clear. At college the chance that you get stucked in the blackboard are far much greater. For example, many times you have to be hours 3-5 solving problems smoothly in front of 50 students, and the next day (or lately the same day) doing the same in other completely different subject. Many times the positions are not in the ones specific areas of research. So you have to be about 40 hours a week explaining in front of students and almost the same amount of time studying in your free time. Notice that most of the time the positions are not for an specific subjet but for sets of subjects. When the year starts you have 4 or 5 subjects and the second half you may change some (or all) of them, and continues changing by 6; months periods. So the situation does not get solved with time. The balance is that you can earn the same for real 20 hours a week in high school than for real 70 hours a week at university. The election of reducing the number of hours at University is not an option because that high load is required for a salary close to the line of poverty. I bet this is not the situation of the people that you put as example, but are reasons in other countries. Upvotes: 0
2019/06/19	520	1,996	<issue_start>username_0: I have been studying a recent paper, and wanted to extract the some data from it, in an effort to reproduce it. I wrote to the authors, and got no response, so I got the raw data by digitalizing a figure in the paper where the data is plotted. Then I made another plot, where I plot the raw data together with mine on top of each other, to compare them. If I publish this plot and properly cite their paper, do I need to ask them for permission? It looks like I don't, because this is not like copying and pasting a figure of theirs, but I am not 100% sure. Please find enclosed the [webpage](https://publishingsupport.iopscience.iop.org/handy-tips-when-is-permission-needed/) of the publishing company where I plan to publish, which contains information on their policy on the matter. The chapter relevant to my case seems to be [this one](https://i.stack.imgur.com/LbGZo.png).<issue_comment>username_1: > > I plot the raw data together with mine > > > The plot is yours, the data is theirs. > > If I publish this plot and properly cite their paper, do I need to ask them for permission? > > > No, the citation (and suitable explanation) suffices to attribute the data source. Indeed, as noted by the [referenced source](https://publishingsupport.iopscience.iop.org/handy-tips-when-is-permission-needed/) (under the heading Reuse of graphs/tables...): ``` ...reuse of raw data does not generally need permission, provided you have plotted it into a different graph/table. You should however cite the source of the data. ``` Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: In the United States, factual information such as data cannot be protected by copyright law. If the data is published, it is not a trade secret. So you may copy without permission. However, I suggest you ask for permission anyway, as a courtesy. The authors should be pleased to hear that you were interested in their data. I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice. Upvotes: 0
2019/06/19	722	3,293	<issue_start>username_0: In my field, conference submissions are usually scored by all reviewers during the review process (for example using the following scores: 2 = accept, 1 = weak accept, -1 = weak reject, -2 = reject). Many conferences includes the review scores in their notification mails, which makes a lot of sense, as the scores add a relevant piece of information to reviews. They communicate the actual assessment of the paper, even if the review's tone sounds more positive or negative than the reviewer desired (which might have all kinds of reasons, be it culture- or personality-specific). They also make the decision on a paper more comprehensible to its authors. However, some conferences do not include the review scores in the notification. What are reasons for not including them?<issue_comment>username_1: Conferences do not have a uniform system for how they select papers. Giving papers a score is a very odd concept in my field, and I am not aware of its ever having been done in any of the conferences at which I have presented or for which I have submitted proposals. Alternatively, it may be that scores were given but kept confidential. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: One possible reason for keeping scores confidential might be to avoid people who got a "weak accept" feeling that they don't belong there, and to avoid people who got a "strong accept" generating an unhelpful level of arrogance. I don't work in a field where scoring is a thing, so I don't know if this is the reason - but ultimately, the only people who can tell you the reason for a given conference are probably the organising committee of that conference. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: One possible reason is to "soften the blow" to authors of papers who only received very weak scores. Receiving very weak scores can be discouraging to authors, who might even avoid the conference in the future if they feel that their work has not been treated fairly. By giving them the reviews without scores, the authors are prompted to focus on the textual feedback and improvement suggestions instead of the severity of the rejection. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: I have been PC-chair of a recent conference run using Easychair, and I decided to not include the scores in the notifications for the authors. First of all, why the reasoning that the score could help to interpret the reports makes sense to me - but wasn't really supported by the evidence for us. Whenever we perceived a discrepancy between score and report, we tried to clarify - and it was essentially always the score which was off. There doesn't seem to be a clear consensus of what a +2 or -1 mean. [We provided guidelines to the referees, but that didn't solve the issue.] The role of the pure scores in our decision making process was extremely limited. This may be different for a conference with three or four digit numbers of submissions, but for <100 submissions, an individual discussion and comparison is quite doable. But this means that we did not adjust misleading scores for the selection progress. When it came to sending the notifications, I felt that the scores weren't needed for the authors to understand their reports, and in a few cases could rather lead to confusion. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/19	513	1,963	<issue_start>username_0: I'm writing my master's thesis (in physics) in which I included a drawing that a friend of mine made for me using Adobe Illustrator. I would like to cite him as an author. Usually, for reproducible images found on papers or books I write: Authors, Title of the Work (Date of Publication)\cite{Link to bibliography} How can I credit an image that has never been published?<issue_comment>username_1: It is fairly common in many fields to list author and title with the notation "private communication". This gives proper credit and also indicates that it isn't published. You can even make "unpublished" more explicit: "unpublished private communication". There are actually quite classical papers by quite famous authors who worked closely with others and credit each other in this way. Sorry, but I don't have examples at hand. But, for example, google '"private communication" as a citation' and you will see examples from different fields. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Figure caption ends in: artwork courtesy of "your friend name". Plus acknowledgment section, if any. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In the paper: > > <NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., & <NAME>. (2019). Elephants have a nose for quantity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 201818284. > > > Figure 1 is an illustration of the experimental approach. The caption for Figure 1 ends with the statement: > > Illustrations by <NAME> (artist). > > > There is no citation in a reference list because there is no prior publication, and I would not recommend citing as a private communication or anything like that as suggested in another answer (which gives credit but makes clear that you are paraphrasing some element of a conversation), it's a picture that the reader can see, you just want to attribute that picture to the artist. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
2019/06/19	985	3,881	<issue_start>username_0: I am doing an 5-year Integrated Master's degree (3-year Bachelor + 2-year Master) on Physics in Europe. Aiming for a thesis in Quantum Computation/Information. I am currently on the 4th year and have a "good" overall grade (84%). However, due to health issues, I failed to perform well on my 6th semester (the last of the Bachelor), almost failing half of the courses. I got 50%-60% on 4 of them. > > So I am faced with a *dilemma: > > > Should I focus on finishing my degree on time, potentially having to either manage doing a thesis and improving some grades at the same time, or settle for those low grades and just move on? > > > OR > > > * Should I focus on improving my grades and achieving the ones I know I am capable of, potentially getting to ~88%, with the > disadvantage of having to delay/prolong my thesis to a 11th semester? > > > This might be a very close call and depend on a lot of factors, but I am interested in knowing, in general, which option gives me the highest chance of success in continuing my academic career with a PhD. Not sure if a Postdoc would follow after, but I eventually want to go for a top-tier job in industry, either related or not to research (like IBM's or Google's Quantum Lab, or some other not focusing on research).<issue_comment>username_1: My advice is to stick to the schedule and get the best grades you can along the way even if not perfect. Hanging out in school extra time is unproductive. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Usually there is a scheduled time and an expected number of credits for a degree. A BSc normally takes 4 years, with a given number of classes. This is because the ability to absorb the material in the allotted time is part of the evaluation of the student. Ordinarily that is. But you mention health issues. If you had some major life altering illness then it is something you should discuss with the university. I mean something like as serious as pneumonia. I had pneumonia a couple years ago. If it had happened in university it would certainly have cost me a term, maybe a full year. Under such circumstances, and presuming you now have some kind of control of the situation, you should consider repeating either a term or a year, depending. First talk to your favorite prof or your department chair. Ask if there is the possibility of repeating the year. Or possibly repeating only some of the classes. In most cases, they will want to help you. It looks good for them for you to perform well in the university. They will nearly always want to help you finish the degree. Be open to their suggestions. They may have suggestions of alternatives. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: This is location-dependent, as education systems vary widely across different countries in Europe. For example: * in Germany, taking an extra semester to do internships, research work or stays abroad is quite common, and is generally seen as positive if the experience acquired was good. In my experience, grades are more important than the time taken to complete the degree. * in Spain, especially in Bachelor, completing an engineering or Physics degree in the allotted time is seen as a difficult achievement and students who do it are valued. Still, those few 50%-60% grades will stand out among the many ~90% ones. I would say the answer depends mostly on which courses you got low grades, and whether you are allowed to improve those grades or you need to take other courses to bump the average (also system/country-dependent). Spending an extra semester to get from an overall grade of 84% to 88% does not seem to be worth the effort. But spending it on getting rid of that 55% in Introduction to Quantum Mechanics is definitely worth it if you plan to continue your career in that field. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2019/06/20	759	3,115	<issue_start>username_0: I'm having some trouble parsing the implications of all the job titles that get thrown around in academia. Does someone whose job title is just "Professor" necessarily have tenure, or are there nontenured full professors?<issue_comment>username_1: It depends on the institution whether it is even possible, in principle, to have nontenured full professors. At some institutions, being a full professor automatically means you have tenure. At other places, it is merely overwhelmingly likely that a full professor will have tenure. Any case where somebody is a full professor but does not have tenure is likely to be a bit odd. In my department, there have been, in the last twenty years, two people who had the title of "professor" without being tenured. One of them was a senior person who the department hired, but for some reason they could not hire this person directly with tenure. Instead, they were hired as an untenured full professor, with a two year tenure clock. They turned in their tenure file after one year and got tenure with no problem. The other person is a former tenured full professor (and department head), who moved to an entirely soft money position. He was allowed to keep the title "professor," but he is no longer tenured, with his position coming up for review every three years. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: While username_1's answer is absolutely great, let me add that "tenure" does only mean you cannot be fired, but not that you are payed by the university: see [Consequences for a tenured person of not getting grants](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/131004/consequences-for-a-tenured-person-of-not-getting-grants) where GEdgar gives in his answer (and a commentator too) examples of US professors which are tenured but whose contract does not say that they have to be paid by the university. (I wanted to add this because by "tenured" I think about having the "freedom of research" which does arguably not exist in such examples.) Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: There are three things you need to consider. First is that "professor" is often used in an informal way for just about any instructor on the regular staff, as opposed to its formal meaning. In material printed/published by a university, however, it is more likely that it is used to mean "full professor". But otherwise, it could mean a lot of things. Second, there are some institutions, not many, that don't offer tenure to anyone but still have traditional titles for the faculty. People may work on fixed term renewal contracts in such places. I don't know that such places are highly ranked, however. Third, a person might be hired from another institution with the rank of full professor but still need to go through a probationary period before tenure is given. This might be two or three years. The purpose of it (possibly) is that the hiring is done by the administration, but tenure is offered "on recommendation of the faculty." Thus other faculty have a chance to evaluate the new person. I have examples of all of these in use. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/20	1,640	6,816	<issue_start>username_0: One of the things I struggle with in academia is measuring my daily/weekly productivity. Before academia, I worked in various fields and always felt productive because I could measure my productivity, i.e. cash on hand after a shift of waiting tables. Since being in academia (currently a post-doc) I struggle with measuring productivity because it comes in the form of years, not days/weeks. I set goals each week and keep a running timer on my desk when I am working -- not meetings or seminars, straight research -- and still have a hard time measuring productivity. I realize this is the nature of the profession I am in but am hoping for some advice. Question: How do you measure your short-run productivity?<issue_comment>username_1: If you are doing true research then I doubt that you can measure "short term productivity" meaningfully. You can keep track of how many papers you read in a week and how many gallons of a reactant you use up in a month, but they aren't real measures of progress, just of activity. The problem is that progress in research requires insight and insight can't be scheduled. "I'm 30% of the way to a major insight in mumble mumble mumble". Well, maybe. In some fields, other than research, you can do some things. Sometime in the previous century I was told by my writing/English professor that he knew a famous author who wrote every day, starting early, and only finished when he had made "one page" of progress toward his current project. So, he could write a short story every three weeks or a novel every year. But even there it wasn't always possible, because to make that one page of progress you might have to completely restructure your story, throwing out many many pages. In research, you can go for a long time making little 'visible' progress. You accumulate small insights, but often don't recognize them until later. Then, hopefully, you get the big insight. Possibly this comes as you are falling asleep after a long, seemingly unproductive day, or when you are finishing up a fifty mile bike ride. Research is, by definition, exploring the unknown. Scheduling activity is possible, but not insight. But, hopefully, you will know it when it happens. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I am totally new to this game (coming from high-school teaching and about to start a PhD), so this is aimed at me as much as at answering your question. I wonder if it might be useful to use a time-tracker tool (I've used [toggl.com](https://toggle.com) before) for a while to at least see What You're Doing, When You're Doing It, and How Much You're Doing It - this might at least give insights into the type of activity you're engaged in. Then you can tweak your priorities, your scheduling and look at how much work is going into your project and how much is responding to other people's requests etc. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: This is indeed a problem, and I think many people suffer from this (even if they may not be actively aware of this). In my opinion, the only real answer to this problem is two-fold: 1. Break down your work into small chunks (ideally managed in a task tracker, such as [Trello](http://trello.com/)). This is just generally useful for planning, but specifically helps you get a bit of a feeling of achievement because it makes it more obvious to you that are in fact progressing in your research project, even if you are not submitting a paper at the end of the day. 2. Accept that virtually any creative work (including research) just isn't the same as waiting tables, and you will never be able to hack your life in a way that you get the same short-term goals and achievements as when you do manual work. Adopting the right mindset is a long-term project for most, but in reality you will have to if you want to succeed (and be happy) in academia. As a sidenote, the further your career progresses the more you should also work to see your "other" job commitments (attending seminars, reading papers, etc. etc.) as "achieving something". For an early-career researcher it is often helpful to focus as much as possible on their research project, but once you are on a tenure track it will again be a source of persistent unhappiness if you only consider "productive time on my project" as achieving something. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: To measure your productitiy you need a to-do list upfront. Very simple, use onenote or some other software: * today * this week * this month * this semester * this year If you cannot complete all bullet points, you have to shift to longer period bullet point. This way you will also see, if you are multitasking on too much things on the same time. This is important as it is one of the main reasons becoming unproductive. Also, your to-do list shouldn't grow and grow and ... I also don't think it is good as a postdoc to measure your daily/weekly productivity, as a postdoc is not productive on such time scales. You have to acquire funding, manage projects, supervise PhD's, publish papers, it's rather semesters and years. If you think you have a strong problem on shorter time scales, sitting around for hours browsing randomly etc., this points rather to exhaustion, burn-out, laziness etc. as you managed to get a PhD. Then I would rather visit a physician than setting up another pressure mechanism on short time scales. Are you productive mid- and long-term? Different people have different working styles, some think during showering, driving home about their job work and have the greatest ideas (me), some work strictly from 9-17 (most professors with family I noticed have very strict time schedules and efficient time management). Their productivity I would rather judge again on a shorter time scale, as they in general don't do so much actual problem solving (where it's unclear when the problem is actually solved, called research), project management anymore as their post-docs working with PhD students in lab and thinking 60+ hours a week on their research. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: On the understanding that this measurement is for your own motivation and mental health, and not for others, then here's something that has worked for me: While working, keep notes. (you should be doing this anyway) At the end of each month, go through those notes and type up a 1-3 page summar of the main things you did that month. File the summaries. The summaries form a useful index to your notes - if you need to find something, the main result will be in the summary and if it isn't, you'll know what date to look at in the notes for full details. But also, the act of compiling the summary each month is a reminder of "hey, I did all this stuff". For me, at least, it's strongly motivational. Upvotes: 1
2019/06/20	2,396	10,033	<issue_start>username_0: I am currently a first-year Ph.D. student, before that (as I have posted about before) I was forced to leave my Ph.D. program after one year because of a bullying supervisor. Previously, I made a good relationship with other researchers in my field and other scientific volunteering activities. Now, there is a workshop at a highly ranked conference, and I asked about the possibility of sending a paper for the workshop. They don't solicit papers, however, I have a good relationship with the professor who is the main organizer of the workshop, and they voluntarily asked me to be a speaker in the workshop for 30 minutes. The other speakers are the most well-established researchers in my field, I felt excited but afraid in the same time. I don't have yet any publications concerning the current research. I don't know if I should apologize, maybe the professor does not know that I have been kicked out from the earlier program. I don't know what I should do, all the speakers are the elite and I think I am not deserving to be among them as I don't have the same experience. Should I try or would this be counterproductive to my future career? EDIT 1 Thanks for answers encouraging me to try, while there are pragmatic answers that I don't have to waste the audience time, honestly, I have self low esteem since all peers have papers published in top journals and conferences, I don't know why the organizers listed me as a speaker, I am not doing great as other students or there is no indication in the right moment that I am doing fantastic research.<issue_comment>username_1: Let's flip this question around and imagine that you, as a first year anthropology PhD student, are now visiting your high school. One of the students asked your former teachers if you would be interested in a local, anthropology-related research project they were doing (e.g., they could be investigating the attitudes of people towards those who are HIV positive, and contrasting how that varies between countries). The teacher promptly arranged for them to give a talk on their results while you were there. The student feels excited but afraid at having to give this talk. She knows she doesn't have the pedigree you have, she doesn't know if she should apologize, maybe you don't know she flunked her latest exam, and she thinks she is not deserving to be giving the talk because she doesn't have as much experience as you. Should she go ahead and give the talk or would it be counterproductive to her future career? I'm pretty confident you will say she should go ahead, and the same applies to you. These well-established researchers probably know (or can tell) you're a PhD student, and will not demand that you have done groundbreaking work on par with theirs. Instead of focusing on all the things that could go wrong, think of all the things that could go right: you get to present your work to a well-established audience. They're the people you most want to know your results. You get to network with them. You get to practice skills that you'll undoubtedly need later in your career. What's the worst that can happen anyway? Even if you give a truly atrocious talk they'll probably all have forgotten about it by next year. tl; dr: stop worrying and do it. Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If you think you can give a good talk, do it. If not, don't. I would lean towards don't based on the no papers and you not brimming with comments about your results within this question. The issue is not your rank or your social confidence. Just that you don't have significant things to say in real content. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: 1. The conference organizer thought you had enough snap to run a presentation to this august body. Given that you have a previous and good relationship with the organizer I discount that you are being set up for failure. 2. You had planned to submit a paper. Your paper was going to be among papers of the elite. This is nerves. At the worst while speaking folks will just check their email and converse in low whispers EXACTLY like they will do to some of the most well-established researchers in your field. 3. (Actual advice) Go back to the organizer and express both your desire at the opportunity and your concerns. They are the organizer and it's their job to balance these things. The feedback will be valuable and should help in whatever decision you make. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Go ahead and present (the whole point of conferences and workshops is to give and receive criticism on your and others' research) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Academia should be about ideas and research, not "status". If you have good ideas and are producing good research (NB: I say "producing", which is not necessarily the same thing as "publishing"), you should not feel embarrassed. Of course, it is often difficult to ascertain how good your own work is, which is precisely *why* we convene things called "workshops", "colloquia", "round tables", and, for that matter, conferences. Go ahead and present on your work, and go with an open mind that is receptive to what others have to say about it (although that does not mean you have to agree). You should trust the convenor's judgement in having invited you to present (and besides, if the convenor made a mistake, this is your opportunity to make a big break, just like Monet did when he was mistaken for Manet!). Part of the remit of these fora is to encourage intergenerational dialogue on work-*in-progress. And, by the way, the quantity of publications do not necessarily correlate to the researcher's ability. You should spend less time thinking about "keeping up with Jones's publication record" and more time thinking about your research. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Any practice you can get at doing presentations is good practice. No one expects a first year PhD student to know particularly much nor to make good presentations. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: Some of the most interesting and up-to-date talks at conferences are from postgrads, and for good reasons. A bit of enthusiasm always helps, but mainly it's because it's actually a talk about your research. Many of the senior people end up, despite their paper title, summarising their group's work (only slightly updated from the same conference last year and several in between) before finally getting to the interesting bit near the end. Nerves are normal. Some people (not me) even think they help when giving a talk. They generally don't show from the audience, and if they did most people would be sympathetic. Concentrate on giving a coherent presentation of your work. Giving sufficient context and background takes a fair bit of time anyway, so you often need less material than you think. And practice in front of an audience or two. Your research group should give you at least one chance to practice properly in front of them, with questions and comments. Your peers from other groups in the department can be the best audience of all, as they're not experts in your exact work but in related fields (you would, of course, return the favour). Once you've given your talk a couple of times (and dealt with any issues your audiences find), you'll feel much more ready to present. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: What is the very worst that can happen? 30 minutes feels like a long talk, but it is pretty short in the grand scheme of things. Even if it's a real yawner, at worst people will use the opportunity to take a bit of a break. More likely, some people will find that it relates to what they're working on and some people won't, but that's what you always get. Skip anything about your past or any apologies, just stick with a basic introduction and then get on to your work. The most respectful thing you can do is spend plenty of time preparing so that you give a clear, well-organized talk. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: Other answers make excellent points, but one more that hasn’t been mentioned yet as far as I can see: Talks from junior and inexperienced researchers are very common.* However eminent some of the audience members are, they’ve all seen plenty of other talks from inexperienced researchers, and they probably remember giving their own first few talks when they were getting going. They will be sympathetic to the fact that junior speakers may be nervous, inexperienced, and have less of a body of work to present. None of those things are unusual or surprising; they’re just what it’s like for almost everyone first starting to give talks. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: I recently had the same experience. DO IT! I was invited to speak at a very prestigious international conference - by layman standard these scientists were brilliant (Spectrums of Harvard, Hopkins, Columbia, Duke faculty...) As a senior undergraduate still, they were, to say the least, intimidating to me. But what helped me the most was this: 1. Believe that indeed, if you were selected, you deserve to be there. 2. I spent a FAIR amount of time adding "novelty," updating my talk with research that \just came out in 2019, hoping to establish solid ground. 3. Most of all*, I straight up said, "I'm new to the field, but I am extremely happy and honored to be here. I believe I can offer some fresh perspectives and insight!" I echo what has already been said! Hope that helps quell the nerves! Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: In the future, merely having a record of the paper you can list on your resume' / CV will be very useful. Also, the talk is likely to go very well for you. In the unlikely event it doesn't, almost no one will remember. But the citation on your resume' will still help! I had a talk that was considered a failure, but it didn't impact my career. Upvotes: 0
2019/06/20	563	2,579	<issue_start>username_0: I am in the enviable position of receiving an anonymous review from an extremely knowledgable member of my academic community and am incorporating all of their excellent suggestions into my article. Quite rightly, I want to flag the examples and suggestions they have provided me with, but at what point does this get embarrassing and look like sucking up? I don't want too many footnotes with, "with thanks to an anonymous reviewer for this..." but at the same time I don't want to pass of their extensive knowledge as my own. It's minor revisions and the editors have said they will not be sending the article back to the reviewers. So I'm not including their suggestions because I have to appease a reviewer, but because they're actually great bits of wisdom.<issue_comment>username_1: An ack is all that is needed. "Thanks to the anonymous reviewers for their suggestions, many of which were very helpful". Don't try to point out where those suggestions occur or your paper will be difficult to read. You retain full "ownership" of the paper so write it like it is the work of a single mind. The reviewer almost certainly sees it that way. About one time out of, maybe, ten thousand or so, a reviewer's comments are so helpful that the nature of the paper changes and it becomes appropriate to find a way to work with the reviewer as a co-author. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I agree with the suggestions of a single acknowledgement rather than a multitude of footnotes. But you might consider putting the acknowledgement not at the end of the paper but at the end of the introduction, where readers will encounter it before encountering the things the referee contributed. Also, I would include in the acknowledgement a list of specific places where the referee made a significant contribution. For example: "I thank the anonymous reviewers for their helpful suggestions. In particular, I thank one of the reviewers for suggesting Examples 3 and 8 and Corollary 5, as well as for simplifying the proof of Theorem 22." Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Dmt, the peer review comments and suggestions are a gift to you. They are given to you to help improve your article as a gift. Reviewers volunteer their time and expertise as a contribution to their academic field. You are allowed to do with it what you will. An email to the editor thanking the reviewer specifically is another option. As others have said, highlighting specific aspects that the reviewer improved in the acknowledgement is enough. Upvotes: 1
2019/06/20	799	2,889	<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student in environmental engineering, but I received a masters in Mechanical. Within engineering, the two fields are very different, and I feel my value-add is my multidisciplinary approach and ability to communicate between. However, I don't want to appear pretentious or boastful. I intend to go back into industry when I am finished, and I continue to have a lot of communication outside of academia. I wondered if anyone has a diverse background and/or experience dealing with others who list multiple disciplines in their signature? Many thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: Stating your qualifications isn't boastful, IMO. There is no reason that an email signature needs to be short. Mine is quite long, but for other reasons. Probably overdoing it to put your entire CV there, of course. It is only boastful if you list things for which you are only marginally qualified. And most people will ignore the signature after the first email. And, if your mailer is at all competent, you can have different signatures for different purposes. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: In my experience, email signatures present only your A) Current position, and in some cases B) Highest degree (for both academics and industry), along with additional contact information like an address or phone number. E.g., > > Ag Tech, PhD > > > Senior Engineer > > > Very Green Company > > > 1234 Long Forest Road > > > or > > Ag Tech, PhD > > > Asst Professor > > > Tree State University > > > 1234 University Ave > > > For fields where technical qualifications or certifications are particularly important, you might list out all those qualifications as additional letters after your name (for example, in medical fields, perhaps also in trades). One would not typically list either "environmental" nor "mechanical" in your email signature. It could be appropriate to list both in a CV though, something like > > Ag Tech > > > Environmental/Mechanical Engineer > > > ... > > > PhD Environmental Engineering, 2019 > > > MS Mechanical Engineering, 2016 > > > but you wouldn't present it like that in an email signature. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: * Name * Job title (optional) * Phone number * E-mail (optional, helps with some systems where address is not shown) * Website (optional) That's pretty much the norm for the working world. I wouldn't list your discipline. Personally, I wouldn't even use the "comma Ph.D.". (The people who emphasize having the union cards tend to be the weakest ones...it's eerie how common you see that correlation.) But in any case, don't tell us the field. Your signature is not your CV. FWIW, I just do name and number. If you just feel like you HAVE to advertise, then put your personal website in the signature. But don't link to the CV, link to home page. Upvotes: 0
2019/06/20	972	4,189	<issue_start>username_0: I am a senior student in a 5-year integrated Masters degree in Applied Mathematics and i have selected a specialization in Mathematics for Computer Science(Data structures,Algorithms and Complexity,Graph Theory etc.). I have a good understanding of Statistics, Probabilites etc. and decent knowledge of Python,R,Java,SQL,PHP. Last year i had a class of "Data Analysis using R" and i loved it so i was thinking of following a career in data science and machine learning and therefore doing an Msc in this field. Unfortunately i don't have good grades and therefore it is pretty hard to make it for a Master's degree in a good university,also i don't think i could make it for this year applications so that means i will have to wait another year until i can apply again. So i was wondering if i realy need a masters degree for a junior level job in this field, since i think i am half way there with my background, or if i could make it by studying on my own for some months(or a mooc) about ML,Big Data etc ?<issue_comment>username_1: What you need is really up to those who are hiring. But knowledge and competence is probably more valued than specific degrees. But, since you have some time before you can enter a masters degree program you have a chance to test the waters by applying for some positions and see how people react to you and your qualifications. That experience may give you the best guidance about how to prepare for your future. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I work as a data scientist. We hire many people with a bachelor's degree in computer science, statistics, applied math, etc. Having a master's degree is better. If you have a master's degree in applied math, most data science jobs will be happy to look at you. Be warned of course that there are various levels of 'data science' positions out there. Some of our junior employees literally just sit and query data bases for us all day. Or they are responsible to create nice looking images in Tableau. (Which has very little to do with "real" data science). I personally would find it to be mind numbing work. But it pays the bills for them, so it is what it is. To get onto the teams that do real research, we often require a graduate degree and some formalized abilities in machine learning. Compile a portfolio of your strongest projects. Being able to demonstrate some projects in ML you have worked on can go a long way. The more examples of independent projects in ML and data science that you have done, the better. Projects that demonstrate an understanding of what is going on beneath the surface are the best. (Anyone with basic R skills can run a RandomForest analysis. Being able to explain how you changed your parameters to optimize your model is another story). I will comment on your grades here. For junior positions, grades honestly do not matter for the most part. All we would care about is if you can do the work. For higher positions, someone with a mediocre GPA is not going to be looked at as strongly. Most of us excelled in school. Much of our work requires study and applied learning. Applicants with mediocre GPAs usually do not have the specific study aptitudes we want. If your GPA is lower than about a 3.7, and you want to work into senior positions, be prepared to really demonstrate your value with a strong project portfolio. One piece of advice on applying for junior level positions. Data science positions tend to fall into two categories: data analyst and data researcher. There is not a lot of fluidity between the two tracks. People who start out as analysts tend to get stuck there long term. If you want to get into machine learning and big data, avoid applying to data analyst jobs. One other thing I will say: Avoid paying for a data science "boot camp" or the like. At least at my place of employment, we tend to place very little weight onto such things. I see applicants who have a BA in Classical Greek (very interesting subject, but very little job market) who have gone to a coding boot camp and expect that we will bring them in as a ML researcher or something. It does not work like that. Upvotes: 3
2019/06/20	604	2,419	<issue_start>username_0: I was recently assigned a research mentor in my Master's program who also happens to be my professor (in a quantitative economics course). We've had a brief meeting to introduce ourselves, and I made it clear that I'm very interested in his research subject; needless to say, I want to impress this professor. I just took the exam for his course which accounts for roughly my entire grade, and I did terribly. I studied a ton, but apparently focused on the wrong topics. At this point, I am wondering if I should somehow reach out to the professor basically telling him my thoughts of the exam, or if I should simply wait to hear from him, and if I don't hear from him, simply not say anything. He'll be my research mentor for the next year on this subject, so it almost feels like there is now an elephant in the room. Would you recommend reaching out to the professor preemptively?<issue_comment>username_1: It is impossible to say what's "best" without knowing something about personalities. But I don't think it will matter a lot either way. You have suffered an embarrassment, but probably not a setback. It would, however, be a good idea for you to figure out exactly where and how you went wrong on the exam, both to firm up your insight and to have a way to respond in any meeting, no matter how it occurs. Things happen. Even head-slapping things. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: My advice is to reach out AFTER he has graded the exam (if needed). This is for a few reasons. 1. I have seen (and experienced) lower grades on an exam after a student told prof they had done poorly. Teachers are humans and prone to halo effect bias. If you did a bad job, let him decide that. Don't do something to make him think that a priori. 2. You don't want to exert (or be seen as exerting) any influence on the fair grading of your paper. For example, that prof cuts you a break since you will work together. (If you get that anyways, now, well...que serat.) In theory, he is an inviolate Roman judge of fairness. But in reality, teachers are people. 3. It may be seen, even accurately seen, as you being nervy, not strong. --- If you hose the exam, then yes...talk to the prof about still having collaboration interest. Let him know your feelings. But also be open to some real two-way discussion (even to include him saying "this would be a bad idea" or "let's see"). Upvotes: 2
2019/06/20	698	2,854	<issue_start>username_0: A bit of backstory- I'm a rising sophomore undergraduate student studying computer science who is strongly interested in urban planning as well. This spring, I put about 12 hours a week of work into conducting undergraduate research with a lab at my uni and was offered a funded research assistant internship with the same lab this summer. As this is my first time getting a real job (outside of high school), I had assumed that I would be working full-time this summer without communicating with my professor that much. Obviously, this was wrong to assume, but I have since learned from that mistake and take full responsibility. However, my professor recently wrote me an email saying that he expects me to be working 20 hours a week, even though I have worked 40 hours a week for the first week of my job. I contacted HR and they said I was down as a full-time employee, but that if my professor expects me to work 20 hours, then I should only work 20 hours. This is the first time we have ever really communicated about work hours at all. To make matters worse, I had planned to write a paper this summer, but the timeline I composed had assumed I'd be working 40 hours a week. The paper's deadline is on August 1st, and I'm concerned I won't be able to complete research working just 20 hours a week. I am really interested in working on this paper, so much that I am even willing to put in time outside of my job to work on it, if necessary. My prof is unwilling to negotiate hours with me until mid/late July, and I plan on getting another part-time job now. I'm also taking 2 summer courses (online and CLEP though, so not too bad). Should I propose to drastically narrow the scope of my paper so that I can finish it with a 20 hour work-week, or should I bite the bullet and try to keep working on the paper as it stands outside of work (time permitting)?<issue_comment>username_1: You will most likely get paid for the 20 hours and the rest of hours unpaid. Honestly you can spend even more than 40 hours in the lab no one cares. This is very common practice. It is good that you at least get a funded position as an undergraduate student since most of this kind of position is non-paid. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: As in 50% of the questions on this forum, the answer to your question is: Talk to your professor. He may have a plan and can advise you on how to proceed. Or he hasn't thought the issue through and talking to you about it will make him articulate what his expectations are and match them with the ones you will have an opportunity to elaborate on this occasion. Or he doesn't have enough money to pay you for 40 hours and that's just the best he can do. So many possibilities we all just can't know here but that a short conversation with the person in question can resolve! Upvotes: 2
2019/06/20	635	2,880	<issue_start>username_0: I decided on my supervisor because he is the only professor working in this field in my country, and he is very resourceful. He helps me out a lot on every aspect other than technical guidance because he is an experimentalist and I am focused right now on numerical simulations. How do I find resources other than research papers for guidance on my PhD<issue_comment>username_1: In some fields, such as Computer Science, conferences are a very important way for people to publish, but also to meet and form working relationships. Perhaps you can manage to attend a conference in which others in the field are likely to be present and socialize a lot. Attend talks and speak with other attendees as well as the speakers. Perhaps you can get a few ideas at such a conference, but the goal is to form a correspondence with such people. Ideally, if you could attend with your professor and exploit whatever personal relationships he has already developed. Get yourself introduced to others. But it may even be possible to obtain introductions through your professor without such travel to conferences. Many people work collaboratively across national boundaries via email and such. And don't neglect other faculty at your university who may have developed relationships with some of the people whose papers you read - or with their professors. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: 1. From your question, I understand that you should be on good terms with your advisor. Then, I think you should be straightforward and ask him to connect you to some other experts in the field. Perhaps, you could even have one of them on your committee as your co-advisor. 2. You could probably ask the other professors at your current or even the previous department for some help. Personally, I'm always happy to help students previously in my classes. 3. If your university regulations permit, you could take a short sabbatical (usually 3-6 months) in another university under the supervision of a professor expert in your desired field. If you are in the early stages of your Ph.D. studies and the regulations require you to be a 3rd- or 4th-year student before taking such a leave, you could still talk to your possible choices and seek their help. Then when you officially take the sabbatical, you could work closely with them. 4. There are lots of online groups and websites dedicated to helping people having questions similar to yours. Being an active member of them would benefit you greatly in the long run. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Paradoxically, you will probably get the best help connecting with others from your adviser. He will know people, and he can make the necessary introductions with others to ensure that you get replies to your questions if you are asking random people you have otherwise never met. Upvotes: 3
2019/06/20	870	3,932	<issue_start>username_0: I plan to conduct independent research on different forms of early childhood education. I have a B.A. in Early Childhood Education but no formal education in research methods or statistics. I was hoping to enroll in a statistics class at a community college (I specifically chose this one because the professor is by far the highest rated and helpful in showing us how to actually conduct research) but the waitlist is full and I probably won't get in if I hope for someone to drop the class. Since I'm not working towards a major (currently, though I do eventually plan on doing a Master's in psychology), would it be best to audit instead? I'm not in a rush so I can wait to regularly enroll next year, though I'd prefer to audit now if it won't make a huge difference in terms of how it'll look to have an audit instead of a grade when I eventually apply for Master's programs.<issue_comment>username_1: In general, auditing a class provides somewhat close to zero information for anyone considering your application in the future. At the very best, it shows you were interested in the subject even though you would get no credit for it. Its not much different than taking an online course with no grade, studying on your own, or just showing up to a class without being enrolled. At least in the US, auditing doesn't even require you show up to class, much less do any work, thus why it has little signal meaning. So I would suggest that if you audit the class, do it for some other reason than what people looking at your application will think of it. It is reasonable to try to audit if you want to improve your training, prepare for a more advanced class (or just taking the same class next semester), just want to do it for fun (I personally plan to audit stats classes in the future, but that's because I'm at a point that no one cares what classes I take so its just for my own utility and interest), want to get to know the professor a bit better to see if you'd like to work more with them or take other classes by them, etc. If programs you are planning to apply to strongly value or require quantitative/statistical training, though, auditing a class generally won't do it. This completely depends on what sort of program you apply to, as some won't really care about stats preparation anyway, while others will demand a lot more than 1 class in stats and research methods/design. Now would be a good time to look ahead at what sort of programs you are applying to, what they say they like to see, and plan your courses accordingly. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree with @BiranH. Auditing just shows that you were enthusiastic about a topic. If knowing that topic is important for the selection committee, then the question for them is probably how well do you know the subject. Based on my personal experience, most students auditing classes usually skip a good number of classes and do not do any homework or project. Hence, their learning is not significant compared to enrolled students. Therefore, I suggest auditing a class only if you want to get familiar with the topic or you need the knowledge to do independent research. PS #1. I have an engineering background, but AFAIK research methods and statistics are important courses in humanities and covered by almost every humanities curriculum. So, I think auditing or enrolling in those courses before your starting your MSc studies is just a plus point. Hence, not being familiar with them should not be a negative point. PS #2. Personally, I audited about ten courses during the last year of my undergraduate and graduate studies and they helped me a lot later in my research, projects, and teaching. If you are near the end of your graduate studies (probably doing your thesis), I think it's a good idea to audit courses. However, you should not rely on it as a hiring plus. It's a personal investment. Upvotes: 1
2019/06/20	274	1,107	<issue_start>username_0: I have to write a rebuttal for a machine learning conference in which I included a lot of new references (to prove broad interest). The rebuttal has a page limit of one, and my reference list is too long for that. Is it ok to cite the paper by only using the DOI in the rebuttal, if I cite the works in full in the actual submission in the final version?<issue_comment>username_1: Make it easy for your reviewers to get what you are saying. Just a DOI is really hard for a reviewer because they have to walk to the computer, look up the DOI, and all that. If you don't want to provide the full reference, just say "see Schneider et al., cited in the paper". That way, there is an easy place to go to to find the full title and reference. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, that's fine. Contrary to Wolfgang's answer, the DOI is the easiest way for a reviewer to find your reference. They can simply use the DOI resolver. The advantage of DOIs is that they always find the document in one step. Traditional citations do not necessarily do that. Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
2019/06/21	2,349	10,154	<issue_start>username_0: I am about to graduate with a PhD. I have an accomplished advisor (whose advice I value very much) who told me that I should always include the salary of my previous and current job in my CV when applying for jobs. Her argument is that the academic job market is very competitive and university administrators want to see at first glance how much money you will cost them should they choose to hire you. I did this without any question several months ago and was able to find a decent job, but I want to get a second opinion on this idea. Many of my peers thought I was crazy for listing pay on my CV, and received the opposite advice from their mentors. It worked for me this time, but is this standard practice?<issue_comment>username_1: This is not standard in any academic or industry context I am familiar with. Typically salary negotiations (if they exist and a position is not simply funded at a fixed salary) occur after a hiring decision is made, that is, a step past when someone is reading your CV. I would find it odd to see salary information in a CV. Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_2: No this is not standard practice and is probably detrimental to obtaining offers and maximizing the salary of the offers. If your past earnings are too high, a company may not make you and offer for fear of you not taking it. Why let a company decide if you will take the job. Once an offer is made, it is generally held negotiating strategy that the party that says a salary number first "loses". Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: A CV with a salary stated in it will certainly come across as "don't bother contacting me if you can't offer at least that much". It could send your CV to the bottom of the pile, so even if another candidate will eventually request exactly that much during the in-person interview, they will get the job instead of you. By being upfront and honest about your salary expectations (which is technically a good thing), you give up on a sort of lock-in effect (the more time a department spends interviewing you, the more valuable you become) which would work in your favour. Now, if you're awash in position offers and you want to be contacted only about the most lucrative ones, such a filter may sound like a sensible thing to do. But it really isn't, because such offers will automatically be capped to something like your current salary +10%, even if the employer initially had a higher salary in mind. It doesn't mean you cannot request a higher salary or that you will be automatically denied one because your current salary is too low, but it does make such negotiations an uphill battle. You lose the initial chance to "high-ball" by making an unrealistically high offer and expect that the counter-offer, although substantially lower, will still be higher than it would be otherwise, which is a common negotiations technique. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: If you are about to graduate with a PhD, your current salary has no bearing whatsoever on the salary that you should be getting after you graduate. A postdoctoral fellow *should* be making a lot more than a graduate school teaching assistant. And even if you are talking about a former real job that you had, rather than a graduate school teaching assistantship, your educational credentials were different for determining your previous salary — a PhD should generally increase one's salary by quite a bit. (On the other hand, if you were a quant in the financial industry before you decided you wanted to go back to graduate school and become a biochemist, your previous salary was much too high, and you'll be pricing yourself out of the market if you put it in your cv.) So there is absolutely no reason to put any salary on your CV ... any salary you put down will probably be too low, and thus it can only hurt you. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Depends on your location. In my country (Chile) it is normal to put your salary expectation (not your actual salary) on your CV and it will be one of the filters that will be used to get the job. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: That is not a standard practice and I would not recommend it Most of the time you interview first and then they ask you your salary expectations. By putting a number on your resume you are closing the door on a potentially higher salary. For instance you put 100k to your resume as your current salary, however, the job that you applied pays 200k. Finally, they won`t offer you 200k they may offer 120k maybe and think it is an attractive offer for someone whose current salary is 100k. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: Lacking additional information about location, this is a bit tentative. But, for many places, especially those with diverse economic situations it would be a mistake to list requirements. Let me give some of the reasons, though they may not apply to many readers. I'll assume a fairly large and diverse country, and also one that, like the US, doesn't have a national educational system. I'll also speak only about academic jobs. First, the cost of living is vastly different in large cities and in small towns in the US. A dollar in NYC is more like two in Kalamazoo, MI. Next, the quality of life is vastly different in those places, though you get to decide what is positive and what is negative in those various places. NYC is crowded but has many cultural attractions. Kalamazoo has a quieter life style, but museums are farther away. Next, it may be that, lacking a national system, some perks of the job may be more valuable than salary. An extra dollar of a travel or research fund is better than an extra dollar of salary, since it isn't taxed. Next, in a diverse system, I think stating your requirements early is an excuse to reject you more than one to accept you. And if you give a too-low figure, you might get an offer worse than one you might have gotten if the university was less certain about what you would accept. Yes, there are places in which my assumptions don't hold. My final position before retirement may be a case in point. First, I convinced the university that I would be a good match for them and for their students. I had experience and I had (have?) ideas. They were interested enough to, only then, ask me about salary. This was in a place where salaries are generally pretty high. I gave them a very large figure, which scared them a bit. I heard later that they had discussions about it. "He is good, but very expensive." However, along with the large requested salary figure, I gave reasons for it. The main reason was that I had a lot of international collaborations that required a lot of travel to conferences and such and that was expensive. The dean suggested that I accept a lower figure, but still pretty good, and she would promise to make sure that travel got covered. We came to agreement on that and it was never broken. But, had I given the same salary figure, even with reasons, at the beginning of our discussions, I doubt that I'd have even been considered. Make them want you. Badly want you. Then talk about money. --- Note that in many places in the US, there are no salary "schedules" that might put your request out of bounds. They do exist some places, I think, which would make it even more likely to get an early rejection. And, your CV should be tailored to each job offering if you can make that happen. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: Since you said "I should always include salary information in my CV when applying for jobs", I am assuming you mean expected salary for the job you are applying to. While expected salary on your CV is not standard, it is important to note that this is from the perspective of maximizing money. And as your mentor pointed out, the point of his tip isn't about the money, it's about pushing your resume to the top of the stack, and maximizing the chance you are chosen at all (since a low salary in your field is usually much better than a high salary in another field). As the other answers mention, by saying the first number, you "lose" the negotiation right off the bat. That gives a major advantage to the university over you in the hiring process, and all other variables being equal, makes you a much more attractive candidate. With how much opposition there is to giving up this advantage, it should be pretty clear already why giving it up makes you look much more attractive. People have noted that by listing an expected salary, you may deter offers (you get pushed to the bottom of the stack because you are either "too rich" for them, or they fear you are too cheap and will be a liability). It should be part of your research before sending a CV to know what the average salary is for your field in that area (and for competitive fields, you should be doing research on the company/area to make sure you have the highest quality CV in the stack). If you are doing your research right, this shouldn't be an issue at all, and how to do that is another question for another site. But a low yet reasonable expected salary will maximize your chances of success. I believe your mentor's advice is actually good, as long as you remember that you are trading a portion of the salary of the job you are applying to, for a higher rate of success getting that job. Since your mentor said you are in a highly competitive field, you should follow his advice. If you are in a non-competitive field, the trade isn't worth it (because you can more easily get the higher pay by putting out more applications at a lower success rate; not a valid option when the success rate and number of jobs is already terrible from the start). Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: In addition to the above comments about it not being standard practice: This is the sort of thing, you should be looking at articles, books, websites, multiple people. Job searching is a huge activity that many people do. There has been an immense lot of good stuff written on it. There is no reason to consider your particular advisor the oracle of this massive societal activity. Upvotes: 1
2019/06/21	1,128	4,472	<issue_start>username_0: I kind of struggle with my students. I always told them to put the reference number (identification) close to the cited object - to make really clear what is the cited object. For example: * The theorem: > > Theorem A [1] is great ... > > > * The study: > > In the study [1] it is possible to see that ... > > > * The statement: > > It was proven that usage of ... leads to problems [1]. > > > However, my students keep doing something like this: * Citation is related to the previous sentence! (probably): > > ... and it was proven. [1] The general idea ... > > > * As above, but with extra period: > > ... and it was proven. [1]. The general idea ... > > > * After the entire paragraph: > > ... and it was proven. [1] > > > They are arguing that this referencing is correct according to the ISO norm/suggestions. They keep doing that even though I told them to not do so. And they generally try to comply with my guidelines. This is a real exception. It seems this referencing idea is deeply rooted in their brains. My questions: * Is their way of referencing legal? If yes, where are informations how to read this fuzzy notation? And why it does not appear in top journals? * How to tell them that this referencing is really unclear in a way that they will understand. Note: The students I am struggling with are from all continents/countries, pursuing a university degree in electrical/software/mechanical engineering. I would say they are mostly 22±2 years old.<issue_comment>username_1: Your students have to get that idea from somewhere. For perfectly understandable reasons "fresh" students typically have no idea at all on how to cite, so they probably learned it from one of your colleagues. It is a good idea to make sure that in your department you have a uniform way of citing. That seems to be the problem in your department. I would try to find the person that initially teaches the students how to cite, and discuss it with her or him. Try to find out what style (s)he teaches, maybe that part was misunderstood by the students, maybe (s)he thinks her style is better than yours. But than you know, and depending on your local situation you can decide on how to proceed. For example, in my department there is an annual retreat focusing on what we teach, and this would be a great (and probably fairly short) topic that retreat. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: The universities with which I am familiar decide at the faculty/school/department level which referencing style will be used in courses that they teach/manage. This means that: 1. a standard referencing format is set across all courses and classes within that area 2. students do not have to struggle with different formats within the same subject 3. referencing guides with comprehensive examples are readily available for the stipulated referencing format 4. there is no need to argue/justify/negotiate with variations If this is not the case, choose a popular referencing format (Vancouver style uses numbered citations) and apply that. Give the students a link to a Vancouver style guide [such as this](https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/administration-and-support-services/library/public/vancouver.pdf), as well as handing out a printed copy at the beginning of the semester. When/if they then argue that their referencing is correct it can be compared to the established style guide. To be truly effective (in changing habits) the referencing needs to be included in the assessment rubric. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Ultimately whether a style is acceptable is up to you, or possibly your school. If your school has a defined style to use, then you should enforce it. If not, then it's your call. My personal view is that some teachers and lecturers put far too much importance on the minutiae of referencing styles, and so long as what the student does is understandable and consistent, then it's fine. If you have specified that your students should follow a particular documented style and they don't, then refer them to the style guide. If you haven't specified this, but you think that what they're doing is poor, then you need to explain why it's poor - and if you feel strongly enough, warn them that you'll deduct marks for this on future work. You might like to have a conversation with one or two of them to find out where (and whether) they have been taught this approach. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/21	1,123	4,697	<issue_start>username_0: Let's say I have an undergraduate degree from a top university in my country which is, however, not renowned around the world. Does this have a negative impact on my chances of getting into a good graduate school? Next year I will be a high school senior and I am thinking about where to go for undergraduate studies. The two options I have are: 1. Attending a top programme in my country, Romania, which doesn't make any of the university rankings, but is nevertheless really well regarded in my country. 2. Trying to get into some top 100-200 programmes in European universities which theoretically give me better chances to get into a top-tier graduate programme. This would be harder for me due to the financial costs (attending any university in my country would be a lot more cheaper). I want to know your view on whether option 1 or 2 would boost or damage my chances of getting into a top graduate programme in North America or Europe.<issue_comment>username_1: Your schools has some effect, but it is much more what you do there than it is the place itself. A top student with good grades and great recommendations from your situation 1 school will be much more likely to gain admission than a mediocre student from situation 2. But if you can be a great student in situation 2 then there are advantages. Perhaps, but not necessarily, you would have more access to educational resources (i.e. professors). You might get a broader view of your subject. But thriving in situation 2 may come with additional problems, possibly language and/or culture. If the faculty in your home country is good, as you suggest they are, then you can be a success starting there. It isn't the reputation of the school nearly as much as it is your reputation there. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: The school at which you got your undergraduate degree plays a huge role in your competitiveness on the grad school market. It is hard to give specific advice without knowing what country you are talking about, but purely numerically, for the vast majority of all countries worldwide, having top results and top references from the best university in that country will not get you into any of the top US or UK universities. The gulf between the undergrad programmes can be gigantic, and in some places you will just not develop your potential, almost regardless of how talented you are. As I say, it is hard to be more specific without more information. Certainly, league tables mean almost nothing, and there are countries whose universities don't feature in league tables but offer solid education. If you live in such a country, then you are still relying on your grad admissions committee knowing it. Edit: I have seen extremely strong students from Romania doing their undergraduate at top European universities (specifically in mathematics), and then getting into top Ph.D. programs in Europe; I do not recall having seen graduate students at top universities who did their undergraduate in Romania. That by itself does not mean much, after all it is a very small sample anyway. If I read in a reference letter for a graduate programme that somebody was in the top 10% of their cohort at Bucharest, I would take that endorsement seriously. On the other hand, if you study there, you will have to be aware that the students that you see around you will not be representative of the competition that you will be facing when applying for the top graduate programmes, while if you are at Cambridge, or Bonn, say, then the best in your year are likely to actually be the primary candidates for the best Ph.D. programmes. My view is that the main advantage of studying at the top places is not necessarily that they objectively offer the best education, but that you will be surrounded by very hard working and ambitious students, and that in turn will push you to develop your own full potential. If you manage to surround yourself with such a peer group at your university of choice in Romania, you will be fine. It's just that at the top places you will not have to look very hard to find such people. On the other hand Cambridge, say, is a much more expensive option than Bucharest. If you have the money, I would go for it; if not, then don't worry and just go to a top programme in Romania. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Super important. I got a 2.2 in my undergrad 22 years ago. With experience I was accepted at a top university after entrance exams 2 years ago. Even though I now have a Distinction at MA level to win phd funding I still need a 2.1 or first in undergrad. I'm now doing a phd at a low rank university. Upvotes: -1
2019/06/21	1,046	4,460	<issue_start>username_0: I’m starting a PhD but I’m disabled and can’t travel. This means I won’t be able to present my work at conferences. Has anyone had experience this? Will it negatively impact on my research? My tutor is aware but I’ve already had a sponsorship declined because I can’t travel to training courses. (I agree that the rejection is unlawful but as I'm only just starting out I cannot risk offence.) My intention is to publish work. I can never travel far from where I live. I'm aiming to work either in my local university or local industry. Networking and conferences just isn't possible. They would have to come to me. It's a shame because I'd love that aspect but I'm working within my limitations and trying to change my life.<issue_comment>username_1: Though presenting one's work at conferences is important, I would not say it's vital. What is more important is publishing. There's a well-known saying in academia, "publish or perish", which means that in order to be - and stay - relevant in your field, publish often. Not everyone can make it to a conference because of other personal priorities or paywalls. I know of one PhD student who won't travel abroad because he has an ethical issue with flying. Published papers are far more easy to access the world over. I have personally never attended a conference but I've been published several times during my master's and PhD, and am starting to get citations. If you cannot travel to conferences, try to put extra effort into something else, like familiarising yourself with the publishing/peer review process. Reading <NAME>'s excellent book "Writing Your Journal Article in 12 Weeks" could be a good start. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Conferences can be useful, both for presenting your work but also for networking. Some conference organisers will be willing to let you present by videoconference, if you explain the reason. Others will not want to do that - perhaps for good reasons, perhaps for really bad ones which may or may not be legal. You can also have your paper presented by a co-author, which means that you can certainly get your work included at conferences and into proceedings - but if you don't do it yourself, you don't gain much recognition. The networking side is much harder, as you can't do that by videoconference - at least, unless you or a funder invested in a telepresence robot or similar. Not being able to network effectively is certainly a disadvantage for your future career, but should not be an insurmountable obstacle, and should certainly not prevent you from doing a PhD. You don't mention where you live, but in many jurisdictions having a sponsorship declined because of disability (where the disability does not prevent you from studying at PhD level) might be illegal. It certainly sounds deeply unethical to me. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: After submitting two multi-person proposals to a conference (SIGCSE), I got pregnant, with a due date close to the conference. Both proposals were accepted. If I remember correctly, one was for a workshop and one for a panel. I requested and received permission to present by pre-recorded video. As it happens, both presentations were on the day that I gave birth. Given that my inability to travel (due to my voluntary choice to get pregnant) was accommodated, I don't see why your inability to travel would not be. As others have mentioned, this needn't be an issue for multi-person submissions, although I wouldn't necessarily advise you to cede your right to be the presenter. For single-person submissions, you could include a note that because of your disability you are unable to present in person, but you are capable of pre-recording of presentation or being available by Skype (if you can be), or you could wait until after your proposal is accepted. I think many people are happy to accommodate people with disabilities. Please don't assume they will not because you had one bad experience. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: I am a 5'th year Ph.D. student and could not attend multiple conferences due to Trump's travel ban. I do not believe it affected my Ph.D. progress/experience in any meaningful manner. Many conferences will help you to present your papers remotely and Twitter is an effective way of building a social/academic network. To summarize, it is nice to be able to attend these events, but certainly not necessary. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/21	1,241	5,405	<issue_start>username_0: I am a Master's student doing a research internship. I do not have to defend the results of my research at the end of the internship; however, I would ideally get a publication out of this. I am working with a well-respected professor in applied mathematics. When he suggested a research topic, I quickly agreed. At first I found the topic a little bit strange and uninteresting, but I thought that I didn't understand it well. It seemed like he had not thought about the topic a lot, but he seemed enthusiastic about it. After learning more, I confirmed my initial impressions. This problem has been studied extensively before, and my special case doesn't seem all that special. I reported my findings to the prof and he seemed to agree. Yet he suggested that I perform several numeric experiments to further investigate. I did so, but didn't get any definitive results. My supervisor had said that if the experiments failed, we would change the topic. But now he just keeps suggesting new ones. I do not like the topic and would like to change topics as quickly as possible. However, I do not want to be seen as one who just jumps from topic to topic when something doesn't work. During our last meeting I attempted to "corner" the professor, asking for the interpretation of the possible outcome of the experiment in advance. Also, I was seemingly displeased by the idea of more experiments because I was arguing about their meaninglessness. The supervisor said something like "you seem to be looking for the excuse to not do the job." I definitely want to do the work as I want to get results. Yet, I think our current efforts will be fruitless. What should I do?<issue_comment>username_1: Though presenting one's work at conferences is important, I would not say it's vital. What is more important is publishing. There's a well-known saying in academia, "publish or perish", which means that in order to be - and stay - relevant in your field, publish often. Not everyone can make it to a conference because of other personal priorities or paywalls. I know of one PhD student who won't travel abroad because he has an ethical issue with flying. Published papers are far more easy to access the world over. I have personally never attended a conference but I've been published several times during my master's and PhD, and am starting to get citations. If you cannot travel to conferences, try to put extra effort into something else, like familiarising yourself with the publishing/peer review process. Reading <NAME>'s excellent book "Writing Your Journal Article in 12 Weeks" could be a good start. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Conferences can be useful, both for presenting your work but also for networking. Some conference organisers will be willing to let you present by videoconference, if you explain the reason. Others will not want to do that - perhaps for good reasons, perhaps for really bad ones which may or may not be legal. You can also have your paper presented by a co-author, which means that you can certainly get your work included at conferences and into proceedings - but if you don't do it yourself, you don't gain much recognition. The networking side is much harder, as you can't do that by videoconference - at least, unless you or a funder invested in a telepresence robot or similar. Not being able to network effectively is certainly a disadvantage for your future career, but should not be an insurmountable obstacle, and should certainly not prevent you from doing a PhD. You don't mention where you live, but in many jurisdictions having a sponsorship declined because of disability (where the disability does not prevent you from studying at PhD level) might be illegal. It certainly sounds deeply unethical to me. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: After submitting two multi-person proposals to a conference (SIGCSE), I got pregnant, with a due date close to the conference. Both proposals were accepted. If I remember correctly, one was for a workshop and one for a panel. I requested and received permission to present by pre-recorded video. As it happens, both presentations were on the day that I gave birth. Given that my inability to travel (due to my voluntary choice to get pregnant) was accommodated, I don't see why your inability to travel would not be. As others have mentioned, this needn't be an issue for multi-person submissions, although I wouldn't necessarily advise you to cede your right to be the presenter. For single-person submissions, you could include a note that because of your disability you are unable to present in person, but you are capable of pre-recording of presentation or being available by Skype (if you can be), or you could wait until after your proposal is accepted. I think many people are happy to accommodate people with disabilities. Please don't assume they will not because you had one bad experience. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: I am a 5'th year Ph.D. student and could not attend multiple conferences due to Trump's travel ban. I do not believe it affected my Ph.D. progress/experience in any meaningful manner. Many conferences will help you to present your papers remotely and Twitter is an effective way of building a social/academic network. To summarize, it is nice to be able to attend these events, but certainly not necessary. Upvotes: 2
2019/06/21	1,180	4,876	<issue_start>username_0: At a recent networking workshop (not one of the "just don't be an introvert" ones, an actually helpful one with applicable ideas) I learned that it is supposedly very common to have a (career) mentor in academia. This is not meaning a supervisor or a former supervisor you are still in contact with, but a person a few years further in their career than you, not necessarily exactly working in the same field but well established and experienced in some aspects of academia and academic careers where the mentee is in need of guidance (networking, public outreach, being from a similar minority, whatever is important to the mentee). I promptly started to figure out what I would need in a mentor, who could be a good mentor and now how to approach them. But the questions come back nagging, because while this all makes sense and an online research came up with many tips and mentoring schemes I still have never met someone who said they had a mentor in this way. So the question is: Do people have mentors in academia? If so, what are your experiences as a mentor/mentee? And would it be appropriate to ask someone who you have never met before for an informal conversation because you feel they might just be right for you?<issue_comment>username_1: I won't try to guess how common it is, suspecting that it is quite common. But it is very useful in any case. But there are two (at least) scenarios. The first is that your "mentor" doesn't even know that s/he is your mentor, but you just take cues from them about how to behave in any academic and personal situations that you observe. How do they lecture? How do they respond to questions? How do they interact with colleagues. I've had many mentors of this kind. I was lucky enough to meet up with one of the most important ones later and thanked him for providing the role-model I needed as an academic. He was in the same field, but his research area was very different from mine. The second is more personal. This is someone that you specifically interact with, though not necessarily in a research sense. But someone that you are comfortable asking questions of. Even somewhat uncomfortable questions. Someone who you trust will give you good feedback and not be shocked it you ask a strange question that you might not ask a stranger. These relationships are harder to arrange and must, IMO, develop over time. The second sort of "formal" mentor can be more instrumental in promoting your career, of course, since they know you well and, having taken on the role, are likely to be supportive when asked. If you are a grad student, I strongly suggest that you seek out one or more professionals as mentors of either kind. Even better, is to seek out a circle of people who are mutually supportive - but for the right reasons. People who respect one another and help when they can. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Finding a mentor rarely happens out of thin air. A mentor may be someone whose work you admire, but who might not be one of your main advisors. Perhaps a PhD candidate a few years ahead of you in your program, a post-doc, or someone who you run into at conferences. By being familiar with a researcher over time, you'll find out whether or not they're a role model for your career path. If you haven't found anyone organically, several conferences I've attended recently have mentorship programs for graduate students: usually brief meetings to discuss your work, CV, or general questions about academia with a young or mid-career scholar. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I was not a postdoc, but I worked for almost 25 years in the media before being hired as a professor of professional practice by my university in 2011. Even thought I had been a part-time lecturer during the three years prior to my hiring, I had no clue on the inner workings of academia and the specific culture of my new workplace. In my first year, I invited at least a dozen professors for a coffee to ask questions related to a wide variety of issues. All seemed happy to help me. Some I came back to many times (I nicknamed one «le vieux lion», the old and wise lion). A few years after, when I was given administrative responsabilities, I also turned to support staff for advice. They were mentors too. Some told me it was the first time a professor consulted them beforehand for general advice. These sessions were extremely useful. Now, we just hired a new prof who's been a professional in our field for the past 30 years. I will do my best to be his mentor. It'll be my way to "give next". Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I personally think it is rare. There has a gazillion things been written about mentoring, but when I talk to friends (early, mid and late career), a small minority has/had a mentor. Most people slog ahead on their own. Upvotes: 0
2019/06/21	777	3,424	<issue_start>username_0: I have submitted a paper to a conference which defined several submission categories: papers, posters, etc. I submitted my abstract in the paper category, but was asked to present a poster instead. I would do it if it was practical in my situation. But the conference is in another country, and the travel expenses are somewhat consequent. I'm not sure my research lab would accept to cover the expenses, because we're already on a tight budget. Even so, I don't want to be stuck later on if my paper gets accepted somewhere else and I can't go there because I already spent too much of the lab's money on this poster. I'm not even certain I could present the exact same research in another setting without it being perceived as a duplicate. I hence want to decline the offer (hoping this isn't a mistake!). Do the arguments I gave above sound reasonable, from the point of view of a conference committee? Is there something I could add or remove to make this better?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think you actually need a reason to decline. Saving the work for submission elsewhere is perfectly reasonable in any case. All you need to reply is "No, thank you". Posters are good for preliminary work and for students wanting some exposure and an opportunity to meet other researchers, of course. But the work is yours and you don't need to explain why you prefer to withhold it at this time. Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: [Edit based on comments] This answer was based on the assumption that there is a paper publication associated with the poster. OP mentioned that there isn't in their case, but I leave the answer as it is since it might apply to other readers' case. For many conferences in my field, being offered to present a poster instead of an oral presentation is not a sign of low quality, it's an editorial choice: the poster setting is simply considered more relevant for the work. So before refusing, make sure that in this conference a poster is really regarded as less valuable. Even if it's the case, a poster in a good conference is often worth more than a presentation in another conference. Usually the fact that it's been accepted as poster is not visible when the paper is cited. Overall I would consider refusing a quite risky move: you know what you lose but you don't know if you're going to get anything better. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: As @username_2 mentions, the value of the paper is often not affected by the format (poster or talk). This varies with each conference, so check that yourself. This being said, I'd like to comment on the choice of poster and talk format. A talk seems more "glamorous", but has a lot of disadvantages. Unless the conference is single-track, a lot of people will miss your talk, because they'll be in a different room. Usually, everything will be slightly delayed, and you will only have time to take 2-3 questions. On the other hand, a poster will usually be up for longer, and you can adjust how much you go into detail depending on who you're talking to. They will also have more time to think about things and ask you questions. Overall, you're more likely to get better feedback and ideas at a poster. In short, a talk is often better if you want to get the word out, but I would actually prefer a poster if you want to discuss things with people and get input. Upvotes: 2