date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2019/06/22
| 943
| 4,020
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student since 9 years. I am working on medical technology where I need intra-operative surgical data. When I joined, I was told that they will have collaboration with hospitals and other universities around the world so, I can have my experiments there.
After 4 years I got a chance to have my first experiment to acquire my first data with an artificial plastic bone and I presented my results on that data in a conference. After that my supervisor gave me some wrong data (someone else acquired that data for some other research) from a human patient to work on. Within a few months I told my supervisor that this data doesn't fit to my research topic. He forced me to work on it and modify the data so that it fits to my topic. It didn't work. He promised to have an animal experiment or cadaver experiment. But even after 3 years ( total 8 years from start) he didn't arrange any experiment for my research.
Then I forced and fought with him and finally I got chance for an animal experiment. That was also for limited data acquisition, for only one day. As this data was acquired by myself for my research topic, I got good results from it. I have written an article but now my supervisor is forcing me to include the old wrong data. I think he wants to get rid of the obvious accusation against him for wasting my time with the wrong data. He forces me to include the best result I got from that wrong data which I think is unethical and biased.
Even after 9 years he has not allowed my thesis proposal. Now he pressurises me to include that old part in my article and says if not, he won't allow to publish it and without publishing it he won't allow my thesis proposal which actually should have been passed in the first year of my PhD. So I have been waiting for 9 years to submit my thesis proposal too.
Besides, he never allowed me to visit other labs for internships. I had an international full fellowship from the European Union, which allowed me up to 12 months of internships in any EU country. But my supervisor never allowed me to visit any other country or other lab.
After 9 years I am still stuck in the same place, frustrated and psychologically stressed. I lost lots of money living abroad. For the last 3 years I have been living without any scholarship, only with my own money. I can't live with my family and can't bring my family to me as I don't have any money and I am in debt. Moreover, I have no thesis proposal submitted. It's a total ignorance to a PhD student, the poorest supervision. The university ruined my career and life by accepting me as PhD student but not providing the necessary resources for the research.
What can I do in this situation? Any suggestion?<issue_comment>username_1: Since you are feeling stressed, you should visit your university's counseling center, if it has one.
What you should do depends on your goals and the university's rules. We do not know either of those things. Your university's omsbudsperson can help you understand the university's rules.
You should not work on a PhD if you do not have financial support.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Imho you are past the point of risking a bad relationship with this supervisor. Your case looks like terrible academic behaviour on their part bordering on psychological abuse. You need external advice on this situation, so you should contact the ombudsman or somebody with this role in your institution. Please note that this first step doesn't involve burning bridges with your supervisor and they don't need to know about it. Once you get their (hopefully useful) advice, you can analyze your options. Some of the possibilities could be:
* the ombudsman/institution asking the supervisor what is their plan (sometimes a little official pressure is all that's needed to make things move forward)
* a mediation with the current supervisor leading to a clear plan for you to achieve your PhD as soon as possible.
* a change of supervisor.
Upvotes: 4
|
2019/06/22
| 622
| 2,560
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am thinking of doing a PhD. Problem is, I am not a student and the only professors I do know are the ones from the university I took my bachelor and Master's degree. However I was thinking of changing institution or even moving to a relevant scientific field and thus I do not want to contact one of those professors.
I have located some institutions and faculties I might be interested in following a doctoral programme. Question is how can I contact one of the faculty professors, since I do not know them either personally or academically? Is there any other way except of spam emailing them?<issue_comment>username_1: You should email them and arrange to have a call. Many times, they’ll agree but a big thing is to make sure your research interests align with their work. Why them specifically? Heres a couple pointers: (1) you clearly convey drive and conviction, (2) clearly can explain his/her field and the lab’s general expertise, (3) what are you interested in advancing thats important? (But say you’re open to exploring new ideas too!)
Remember that they must also support a PhD student’s stipend, so it really depends on their funding and pending grants, so ask whether could support you or not - *after* the main talk.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Recruiting PhD students is part of their job, so you are not spamming them by expressing interest in receiving supervision. But make sure that you keep it concise and that you know their area of expertise.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: The difference between "spamming", which you should *not* do, and a completely acceptable contact is how targeted your emails are. Make sure you know what you want and what the professor you are contacting does their research in, and that these two things align. Explain in your first email why you want to work with that specific person, what your background is, maybe also include your university transcripts. You do not need to know the professor personally before contacting them.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: A short discussion of how to choose a PhD advisor is given in the book "A PhD is not enough" by <NAME> (chapter 3). See [this link](https://biomath.usu.edu/files/Peter_J._Feibelman_A_PhD_Is_Not_Enough.pdf) for an online PDF. Before sending any messages out I would recommend you make a list of advisors that you really want to work with (and knowing yourself the reasons why), rather than spamming a whole bunch of professors in the hopes that one will finally accept you.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/06/22
| 564
| 2,451
|
<issue_start>username_0: I sent an informal query to a professor in UK and she replied me with her strong interest in my research works and considering me as a potential postdoc. She mentioned that she wants to apply for research grant this year and will inform me when she gets that. But she did not provide some details on the approximate time which she probably get the grant. In the meanwhile, I am a postdoc in another country and my contract will be finished within 4 months. As I need to make some plan about renewing my contract, is it appropriate to ask her to let me know about the approximate time of approving her application for grant?
As a note, one of her postdocs has resigned but the remaining time of the current project is rather short. Can I make a request to join her team for recent project as well and wait to confirm her new grant in the meanwhile?<issue_comment>username_1: Don't be intimidated that she is a professor. It is certainly appropriate to continue your "conversation". Let her know of your interest in joining her team (possibly subject to funding) and give any constraints you might have. You don't need to say a lot, but thank her for her interest and express yours.
Ask her for any advice about what you can do at the current time if it seems like there is a possibility to work together.
In other words, write as if you are a colleague, not a subordinate.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Talking about money and timetables isn't a problem depending on how you frame it. You want to communicate the reason you want to know is because it's important to doing the job. Because it is.
If grants are taken care of already, you won't have to write them. If they're not. You will. If it's somewhere in the middle, is there a plan for what you should be doing to make the best use of the time regardless? These are things that are very reasonable for you to need to know.
I would approach it as: "In order to focus on the work I need to do for you and appropriately prioritize things, I need to understand your expectations and how they may change based on the funding situation."
And then ask more specific questions per your field and your expected responsibilities.
I'd make sure not to be demanding, pushy, only curious in passing, or apologetic as if you see yourself as "not important enough to know."
If you have a good reason to know, you have a good reason to ask.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/06/22
| 520
| 2,254
|
<issue_start>username_0: My advisor invited me to host a panel at a conference next week because she is on vacation and of course I said yes right away without thinking.
But now I realize I should asked more questions, because I don’t really know what to do.
What are some good tips on how to be a great host for a panel? For ex, maybe I should get everyone’s presentation in advance on the same pin drive so we don’t need to switch between presentations all the time. That’s obvious. But what else?<issue_comment>username_1: If you had a bit more time, I'd suggest that you contact each of the participants and ask them a few questions. It may be too late for that, but they will probably want to know the order of presentation.
They will certainly want to know how much time they each have and how you should (or should not) signal them as the end of their slot approaches.
You need to know how questions from the audience are handled at the conference - after each presentation - all together at the end - not at all. Make sure that there is time for questions, if allowed.
If someone ends early, it is usually appropriate to delay the start of the next speaker so that those people who want to hear only part of the panel have time to arrive and/or leave without disruption. But that may vary with local custom.
If possible, try to meet the presenters before the panel session.
Coordinate with any volunteers that are available for such things as water or special needs.
Get there early to make sure the setup is correct.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Some basics from my experience as a panel chair: At the bare minimum, email all of the presenters in advance about their AV/tech needs. As a panel chair, you will need to make sure that each presenter doesn't go over the necessary time limit. You can tell them at the panel that you will signal at them when they have, say, 5 minutes left, or 1 minute left. You can do this with your hands or with a sheet of paper with the time left on it. Make sure to meet the presenters beforehand so that you can know how to pronounce their names correctly, too. You might want to read a short bio in addition to the introduction of each speaker; it depends on the conference.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/06/23
| 567
| 2,349
|
<issue_start>username_0: I worked with my professor on a project for two months at the beginning of this year. After a while, I finished writing up the paper and sent it to him to check. He didn't reply. I've sent 5 follow-up emails within the span of 3 months after that with no reply. I am afraid to send another follow up email (the last one was a month ago) because I don't know whether he wants to continue with this project anymore.
Should I just give up? or start sending more follow-ups but at a higher frequency?<issue_comment>username_1: Email is obviously not succeeding, so contact him another way. Phone, postal mail, visit his office, etc. You may also contact his department chair and ask if they know of any reason why he wouldn't be answering emails.
>
> I don't know whether he wants to continue with this project anymore.
>
>
>
Even if that's the case, you have every right to be told that directly. Ignoring your emails would not be an appropriate professional way for him to communicate that to you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, you can send too many follow-up emails. How many is "too many" depends on the importance of the issue. Publishing a paper is very important, so I would say that you cannot send too many. However, you could send them too frequently. Try once a month. Don't give up.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I see two possibilities that haven't yet been mentioned, and can think of several others. But it can all be cleared up with a personal visit.
The first is that your mail is being flagged as junk and relegated to a junk folder. Mailers can be weird about that and one of my regular correspondents always winds up in my junk folder.
But the other possible reason is the nature of your email. You don't say whether you explicitly ask for feedback or just assumed you would get it. If you don't ask, it is possible that the professor is treating your mail as "for your information".
Other possibilities include illness or overwork, etc. But the way to get real feedback is to meet in person. You can ask for "next steps" or "what is still needed".
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Check *very nicely* with the department secretary. The office staff often know what's going on with various professors and might have suggestions about how to get a response.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/06/23
| 647
| 2,611
|
<issue_start>username_0: I would like to submit a paper which is exactly 15 pages. The [journal overview](https://www.ams.org/publications/journals/journalsframework/abouttran) of *Transactions of the AMS* says:
>
> Papers of less than 15 printed pages that meet the above criteria should be submitted to the Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society.
>
>
>
It seems that my paper can be submitted to Transactions, since it is exactly 15 pages. However, [Initial Submission for Peer Review](http://www.ams.org/publications/journals/journalsframework/transubmit) of *Transactions of the AMS* says:
>
> Papers submitted to Transactions of the AMS (to be published in either Transactions of the AMS or Transactions of the AMS, Series B) should exceed 15 printed pages in length."
>
>
>
So it seems that my paper cannot be submitted to Transactions (since it is exactly 15 pages), and should be submitted to *Proceedings.* So I am confused. Does anyone have information/similar experience which could possibly let me know to which journal I should submit?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't know if the editors of the two journals have an actual policy for this, but I'll guess two things.
First, if you send it to the "wrong" one, you will hear immediately to send it to the other instead.
Second, being a bit (i.e. very) pedantic here, your paper probably doesn't completely fill the last page to the very limit, indicating that it is, in reality, a bit less then 15 pages - suggesting that Proceedings is the better choice.
And, the more important question, from the editor's standpoint is what the length will likely be after review and revision. It can be hard to judge that, of course.
But the editor of either is the best judge.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: ### You should submit your paper to *Proceedings*.
[The overview page for *Proceedings of the AMS*](https://www.ams.org/publications/journals/journalsframework/aboutproc) clarifies this:
>
> This journal is devoted to shorter research articles (**not to exceed 15 printed pages**) in all areas of pure and applied mathematics.
>
>
>
If your article is exactly 15 pages long (or less), then its length does not exceed 15 pages, and so it is suitable for submission to *Proceedings*. By that same token, it is not suitable for submission to *Transactions*. The intention is clearly that the criteria should be mutually exclusive.
Information on a journal's own web page should be considered more authoritative than information about that journal on a different journal's web page.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2019/06/23
| 531
| 2,283
|
<issue_start>username_0: After my PhD I received the diploma with the (external and one internal) examiners final recommendation that was used to award my PhD. Because my Ph.D. wasn't graded and this recommendation is very positive, I want to share it on my LinkedIn profile. Is there anything that prevents me from doing this? I cannot really see any problems but I haven't found anyone else doing it.<issue_comment>username_1: I think the most significant issue is whether anyone would know (or bother to find out) what "very positive" means in the context of some specific university's usage. Moreover, for academic purposes, very soon after your Ph.D. something like this becomes either trivial and distracting (because subsequent references to your dissertation and/or your publications in general will supersede anything this honor is likely to provide) or pretentious (if subsequent references to your dissertation and/or your publications in general are nonexistent or few). On the other hand, for non-academic purposes, it might be fine to do this.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Strictly speaking, these comments would be the copyright of the examiners and/or of the university (depending on the nature of the examiners' contract with the university). Since what you are proposing constitutes publication, you should, strictly speaking, obtain permission to do so first. Unless the comments were envisaged as confidential, I suspect that the examiners will probably be happy to grant such permission without demanding any royalty, but that does not change the fact that failure to obtain permission first would be a breach of copyright.
In practice, it is unusual to publish examiners' reports on a thesis (and [the only exception which I have encountered quotes exactly two words, one from each examiner](https://cms.mus.cam.ac.uk/directory/mark-gotham/)). Doctoral degrees are not, in general, graded affairs: you either get the degree or you do not. If you are one of the ***very*** few people who got your thesis accepted with "no corrections" (in UK universities, the overwhelming majority of PhD candidates are required to make either "minor corrections" or "major corrections" after the first *viva*), then it is definitely worth mentioning that.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/06/23
| 1,762
| 7,228
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently doing my bachelor's degree in mathematics in Germany (Heidelberg to be precise) and I'll soon be applying for master programs / grad school. I basically consider two options:
**I)** First do a master's degree and then a PhD in Europe and try to get a postdoc position in the US afterwards
**II)** Go to grad school in the US now and then look for a postdoc position in the US
**Concerning I)** I really like how math programs at universities in Germany (and other European countries) are structured and if I decide to stay in Europe for now, I will probably do my master's degree at Bonn. However, I am afraid that I'll have a hard time finding a postdoc position in the US having done my PhD in Europe, both because my experience (for instance regarding teaching) might not be what US universities are looking for and because European universities might not have as good of a reputation as universities in the US. I suspect, at least a PhD from Oxford or Cambridge might have some prestige in the US, however, I really don't like the 9 month master system there, as I feel like the material is rushed through and as I've heard, in order to get admitted to a PhD there, it is strongly advised to also do your master's there.
**Concerning II)** Since I prefer the European master/PhD system, for me to be happy with moving to the US now, it would be helpful to get a position at a top university. I already (successfully) did the TOEFL test but I would have to do the GRE (both general and math) test. Together with application fees this would probably add up to about 1000$ which is a hell of lot of money.
So I guess my questions are:
**1)** Are my concerns regarding **I)** justified? How hard is it for someone who just completed their PhD in Europe to find a job at a university in the US?
**2)** What is the reputation of places like Heidelberg, Bonn, ETH Zürich,... in the US? Is a PhD from Oxbridge prestigious enough for it to be worth it to overcome my aversion towards their program?
**3)** Do I even stand a chance of getting admitted to a top US program? I took a lot of courses and managed to score between 1.0 and 1.3 (if I looked it up correctly, this should be between 3.7 and 4.0 GPA?) almost everywhere. However I haven't participated in any REUs and don't have anything to offer besides the courses I took. Having read what people that got admitted to Harvard, Princeton, Berkely... have done prior to grad school, I don't think I can keep up with them.
**4)** Having said that, do you think it is even worth applying and spending such a huge amount of money in the application process?
**5)** Do you have any other piece of advice or experience to share?
Thank you so much for your help!<issue_comment>username_1: I think you should choose this based on personal preferences only. I see no career advantage either way. Bonn is a top level university by any standard as is ETH Zurich. You will find no feeling here that they are inferior in any way. Bonn, has, for example, several Nobel Prize and Fields Medal winners.
Whenever you do it, you will have to deal with visa issues in moving to the US, but you should have no academic problems with a good European doctorate. Language is unlikely to be an issue for any educated German today.
Not all postdocs require teaching, of course, or not a lot of it. Ability to advise grad students is a plus.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In comparison with someone who is completing a PhD in the US, a candidate who is completing a PhD in Europe will have a few issues to contend with in trying to get a job in the US.
1. Bringing you to campus for an interview will be much more expensive. Many institutions simply won't pay the travel expenses of interview candidates who are outside the US.
2. You won't have direct experience of the US higher education system, which can be quite different from systems in other countries. Teaching experience is generally expected of new Ph.D.'s in math and any teaching experience that you might have outside of the US is likely to be discounted as "not the same."
3. Someone who has completed a PhD in the US on an F1 student visa can work for one year (any discipline) or longer (Science, Engineering, Math) in the US under "Optional Practical Training" before having to get an employer-sponsored H-1B or J1 visa.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I got my PhD in Germany (Heidelberg) and then did a postdoc in the US. I think that was the right choice: In the US, you will have to spend a couple of years taking classes, satisfying your breadth requirement, and you will likely have to teach alongside your research. There is much to be said about this system -- including that it teaches you to teach, and that you get a broader overview of what mathematics is -- but it all gets in your way of doing research. On the other hand, in the German system, you will most likely have relatively light teaching duties (if any) and have time to *specialize*. This will help you find a research area, and it will likely mean that you are better qualified than many American applicants once you apply for postdoc positions.
What *is* going to be important is that you form the personal connections on the other side of the pond to get a postdoc position there. Postdoc positions are not just awarded by accomplishments alone -- much as we would like that to be the case -- but also based on who you know, who your adviser knows, etc. This is so because when you apply for postdoc positions, your resume is still relatively thin: A couple of papers, a couple of conference presentations. In essence, every applicant on paper looks equally good, and so things like what university you come from, who your adviser was, and what the letters of recommendation say all have influence. The biggest influencer is if you know someone at the university you apply to. In other words, build these connections: go to conferences in the US if you can, contact people there to see whether they want to collaborate with you, see if your adviser knows people there and can support you for a 4-week stay. All of these things are going to matter.
Second, see that you can teach a course for a semester. Almost all US graduate students teach courses, and postdocs generally have to do the same. As a consequence, having taught (and having letters of recommendation that speak to your abilities as a teacher) is a criterion that is often considered when evaluating postdoc candidates. Try to make the selection committees job easier by providing them *something* in this area.
Finally, make yourself knowledgeable about the application deadlines in the US. These days, they are often at the end of October or November, for appointments that start in August or September of next year, at the beginning of the next academic year. (One can think that that is crazy, but that's how it is.) Most applicants will not yet have graduated at the time they apply, hoping to graduate at the end of the spring (May) or even summer semester (August). In other words, don't wait until you have your PhD to apply for a postdoc position -- you might have a gap of nearly a year if you do!
Upvotes: 4
|
2019/06/23
| 1,049
| 4,391
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've been offered a few adjunct teaching positions recently, and the colleges have said that degree certificates don't count in verifying my credentials and that only academic transcripts are acceptable.
Given that I finished my degrees 20+ years ago, **what is the reason for this?**
I eventually managed to get my transcripts, but no one has *ever* asked for them before, my degree certificates were perfectly acceptable (including tenure-track positions in Australia).<issue_comment>username_1: Most applicants for positions at US universities will have been educated in the US, so US hiring practices are based around the sorts of records that US universities provide. And US universities don't really have such a thing as "degree certificates". The paper diploma from a US university is considered purely ceremonial and not used for any official purpose; it often doesn't even have complete information about the degree (major, honors, etc). For most US universities, the only official academic record they produce is the transcript. Hence, that is what a US university expects when hiring.
Note that in some cases, [a hiring decision may be based on more specific details about your education than the simple fact that you have a degree.](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/126801/1482) There may be formal requirements, coming from university regulations or accrediting agencies, that you have a certain amount of coursework in certain areas, and the transcript is the only way to verify that.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: At the heart, the approach chosen by universities is because a piece of paper, however elaborate, can be forged. It is *much* more difficult to forge the transmission from one university's degree verification office to another university. So in some sense, the request is simply to make forgeries harder.
It's not part of your question, but worth telling stories around it. The kind of requirement you are encountering makes it much more difficult for people from other countries to satisfy the formal requirements. I have colleagues who were professors for 20 years and, when accepting a position somewhere else, where asked to provide a way for the new university to verify their PhD -- which they had obtained in the 1980s in Eastern European countries that no longer exist, at universities that no longer exist and whose archives were affected by years of civil war. I don't recall how that was eventually resolved, but it seems unlikely that the new employer ever got what they were asking for.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Accreditation to teach specific classes.
For example, the college I work at is covered by SACS. With just an AS degree and a metric ton of experience, I can teach IT courses that don't count towards a BA/BS degree at a "real" University. Linux administration, Advanced Java (but not intro to programming w/ java), MySQL, etc. They qualify for vocational certs and AS degrees though.
In order to be able to teach specific courses - IE, "CGS1000" titled as "Intro to college computing" which DOES go towards AAs and 4 year+ universities, I have to either have a masters or terminal degree in a specific named field, or have X number of hourse (18 IIRC) of post-grad course work in a specific list of courses. It is that last bit that requires a transcript, and it requires someone to evaluate the transcript, compare substitution codes by FICE codes (to see that your schools ABC123 mapped to what SACS calls ABC101), etc.
A good example of this is someone I work with who has a BS in software engineering and a masters in project management but he can't teach the CGS1000 course because he didn't have any educational technology related courses at the masters level.
Edit - explanation of terms
SACS - Southern Association of Colleges and Schools. Accreditation body for SE USA.
AS - Associates of Science degree. 2 year terminal degree (nursing, X-Ray tech, Resp. therapy, etc). Minimal gen-ed stuff, doesn't go to a University to become part of a higher degree
AA - Associate of Arts. First half of a BA or BS degree, gened type stuff.
FICE - Federal Interagency Committee on Education - defines a nationwide list of code numbers to reference schools and/or courses for cross-institution communication of academic info like transcripts, etc.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/06/24
| 252
| 902
|
<issue_start>username_0: The academic promotions procedure at my Australian university includes specifically publications in A/A\* journals. What defines A/A\* and where can I find out which journals are in this category?<issue_comment>username_1: A and A\* labels on journals are obsolete. The current custom is to refer to impact factor. Consult your head of school.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: You can look at CORE if you're in computer science, like a commenter mentioned: [conferences](http://portal.core.edu.au/conf-ranks), [journals](http://portal.core.edu.au/jnl-ranks).
There's also the ERA outlet ranking lists (unofficial website): [conferences](http://lamp.infosys.deakin.edu.au/era/?page=cmain), [journals](http://lamp.infosys.deakin.edu.au/era/?page=jmain), but it is old.
Though you're best asking your institution as to where they are getting the rankings from.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/06/24
| 2,172
| 8,977
|
<issue_start>username_0: Disclaimer! I am a first year CS/Applied math master student so I do understand very little in how academia works. I am trying to fix it before I go into PhD.
---
I have discovered a scientist who works in the field I am interested in. This scientists is very successful career-wise. The scientists finished a prestigious university and had stays in very good places. Now the scientists is an assistant prof in a high-ranking US university.
However, literally >90 % of his papers were written in co-authorship (as a rule, not the first nor the last author) with other more experienced researcher who we recognized as leaders in the fields. In fact, the only solo paper the scientist has is ones thesis! All PhD students so far have been also co-advised.
I have very little research experience but it seems to me that coming up with a good idea one can further develop is the trickiest part. Implementation (or, sometimes, even writing down actual proofs) is a technical work. I guess that the coauthorship was earned for some implementation work. It seems to me that there are much more people capable of / actually doing these technical work both in academia and in industry who do not get such recognition as the aforementioned scientist.
I may be envy but I find very little proofs of that scientist actual skills. Instead I have a feeling that the scientist makes very wise political decisions or is good as self-advertising.
Also I did very limited empirical studies and found that researchers who have highly-cited solo papers tend to have higher (4K +) citation counts then those who have almost exclusively co-authored papers.
My question is many-fold:
1. is what I have described normal? Update. Is it normal to have almost exclusively co-authored papers?
2. what should I do to mimic that behavior. It does not seem to be noble at all but apparently this is how successful academia people work.
3. Are indeed funding and promotions based on citation counts? If this is not the case, how those researchers without solo papers are assessed?
4. Is it true that those researcher who has successful solo papers are much better supervisors?
Update. I am talking here about theoretical research in CS/Applied Math. I guess in other fields there are many more opportunities for equally valuable contributions of many sides.<issue_comment>username_1: I think you are misinterpreting the data. What you seem to think of as "wise political decisions" is really just collaboration. Collaboration is a good thing in general. I'm not sure why you think that the leaders of the field would put up with someone just "hanging onto their coattails". I think they would probably resent that implication.
My suggestion is that you give up trying to "stand above everyone" and find some people who are as good as you are and start to share ideas and start some collaborations. If you wind up in a place that has a small faculty, then having already established a circle of collaborators will help your career greatly.
The person (maybe people) you open with have good positions because they were judged to have good potential. Their "citation counts" and all of that were just evidence of that potential. Their vast network of collaborators was likewise.
As you say, you are in a field in which insight is (all) important, but also rare. Sharing ideas can help. Hoarding doesn't.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I should point out one of the most famous of co-authors in math: <NAME>. Erdős never won a fields medal or even wrote a seminal paper as a solo author. What he did do was "wander" around to different universities and help people solve problems. He was an extremely prolific writer (over 1500 published manuscripts) and is considered one of the greatest mathematicians of the 20th century. The ultimate mathematical Renaissance man who could seemingly work on any problem. I think you would have quite a bit of difficulty in arguing that because Erdős never wrote a classical mathematics paper as a solo author, he was not a tremendous mathematician. (Though to be fair, in the past decade, his paper "On Random Graphs" can now be considered a classical work of mathematics. It just took 50 years for the work to become highly applicable).
I relate this story because having lots of co-authors does not necessarily mean having bad skills. Now I am not saying your professor is the second coming of <NAME> (I can't think of anyone currently in academia who can claim that mantle) but they might have other skills you are not giving them their due credit for.
Never underestimate the power of being able to organize a group of smart people and get them to work together on the same problem.
To answer your questions specifically-
1. It's neither normal or not normal. Tenure positions are rare enough that there are certain metrics that are highly predicative (e.g. individuals who are ahead of the publication curve for their field tend to get hired in tenure positions) but there is no conclusive metric. Individually, there is enough variance within each position that you cannot really say.
2. Collaborate! Having only solo author publications is probably not wise (unless you are in a field that is big on monographs). Having a variety of publications where you are first author, second author, and a middling author show your ability to collaborate and be a team player.
3. Yes, clout does increase likelihood of getting accepted. Being a big wig with 10,000 citations at an elite university means you are more likely to get a grant than someone with a handful of publications from an R2. But to be fair, the qualities that led that person to be a big wig probably translate into their writing and research caliber as well.
4. I have never seen any research or evidence that suggests that.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I'm not sure what part of theoretical CS you're considering. In the parts I'm familiar with, co-authored papers are very much the norm, and author lists are alphabetical, so there's no significance in being first or last author. Other areas use other author-ordering criteria but co-authored papers still seem to be the most common case.
Citation counts differ dramatically between areas. For example, I have just finished a 50-page (co-authored) paper that cites about 25 other papers. In contrast, a seminar announcement on our departmental mailing list linked to a 14-page paper in another area of CS that cited more than 80 papers (or, should I say a 9-page paper with a five-page bibliography?). If that paper is typical of its field, citation counts must be much higher there than in my area. Perhaps your citations-vs-single author comparison is comparing a field where a typical paper has one author and cites a lot with a field where a typical paper has several authors and cites less.
There are plenty of universities where co-advisorship of PhD theses is common. Think of it as a sort of insurance policy in case the student doesn't get along with one of their advisors, coupled with two heads being better than one. It's not a reflection on either advisor's skills as an advisor.
>
> I guess that the coauthorship was earned for some implementation work. [...]
> I may be envy but I find very little proofs of that scientist actual skills. Instead I have a feeling that the scientist makes very wise political decisions or is good as self-advertising.
>
>
>
Wow, you're spectacularly dismissive. From reading your question, I get the impression that you believe that scientific publication is primarily to prove how awesome the author is, that co-authorship must necessarily dilute that awesomeness, and that the only reason to bring on a co-author is to get them to do the boring parts. That's not how it works. Furthermore, unless you're reading papers that explicitly state what the contribution of each author was, your guesses of who did what are exactly that: guesses, and guesses based on almost no information. Don't condemn people based only on your baseless guesses.
>
> c) Are indeed funding and promotions based on citation counts? If this is not the case, how those researchers without solo papers are assessed?
>
>
>
No. Not applicable.
>
> d) Is it true that those researcher who has successful solo papers are much better supervisors?
>
>
>
Why would it be? They seem completely unrelated concepts, to me. If I had to guess, I'd guess that the researcher with many co-authors is better at working with other people, so is better at working with students. Doesn't that make more sense?
>
> I am talking here about theoretical research in CS/Applied Math. I guess in other fields there are many more opportunities for equally valuable contributions of many sides.
>
>
>
Your guesses about theoretical CS aren't something that I, a theoretical computer scientist, recognize as a description of my field.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/06/24
| 546
| 2,192
|
<issue_start>username_0: I applied to a pretty broadly-themed conference in my research areas, and submited two very different contributed talk abstracts. I suspected one would be downgraded to a poster, or simply rejected. Instead, the organisers told me I could present both talks. Looking in the abstract book, I see that no one else will be giving two talks. Is giving two talks in poor taste?
Specific background: I am an early postdoc, and the conference is in Europe. Both research projects are new and have not been presented elsewhere, and are with completely separate sets of coauthors.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Is giving two talks in poor taste?
>
>
>
It isn't ideal, but I wouldn't consider it inappropriate.
>
> Both research projects are new and have not been presented elsewhere, and are with completely separate sets of coauthors.
>
>
>
I think it is better for a co-author to present one of the works.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: It's totally fine. I commend your efficiency.
It would not be fine if you submitted two similar talks, or if you submitted a talk under someone else's name so that you could pretend to fill in for them.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: It's feasible, sure. But my advice would be to "downgrade" one to one of the poster sessions. This will seem more normal...and also allows you experiences in a couple different settings (each mode has advantage/disadvantage). Choose the one you want to do that with, but I would try to do the poster second, so you get benefit of some chitchat carryover from separate talk, if people loved that.
If it doesn't work because of fitting into themes or the like, fine, leave it as is. But usually posters have some general-ish sessions anyhows. If it's a mega-conference (e.g. ACS), than don't worry...there will be thousands of people and sessions, nobody will notice/care. But if it is a more intimate setting (like a Gordon Conference), I would cut a talk or downgrade one to poster. It will just be slightly odd otherwise.
I also like the comment below about having a colleague present one topic if possible (not sure why the violent downvote).
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/06/24
| 1,060
| 4,882
|
<issue_start>username_0: In computer science, I need to compare the accuracy of my proposed method to the previous ones. There are two possible options:
1. Implement the methods described in related papers on my own machine
2. Use the claimed results of the authors
Sometimes, when I implement the other papers, the results are different from the claimed ones, because of a lack of details, parameters and hyperparameters. What is the correct decision? Should I compare my work with the implemented one?
In addition, sometimes the reports of the previous works are on a different dataset and I have to implement the code. Is it the correct way?<issue_comment>username_1: This would depend on how you are measuring things. If the results are simple timings then machine speed/architecture can matter (a lot). But if you are, for example, counting comparisons, then the result is independent of machine speed.
Be sure that you are comparing apples to apples and not apples to peanuts.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: [Computational complexity](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computational_complexity) is a useful tool for measuring performance and comparing results. For instance, sorting algorithms are [compared this way](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorting_algorithm#Comparison_of_algorithms). But, what is appropriate for you really depends on what it is you're solving.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I'd say, as a rule you just rely on the results provided by the authors of the papers you cite. You aren't really supposed to reimplement their algorithm just to confirm their results.
Let's dive a bit deeper, especially from a reviewer's point of view. When a reviewer sees that your method in a certain way superior to a previously published work, this is exactly what is expected, so everyone is happy. If you can't prove that your method is better because you use a different dataset, it's quite a problem (for both you and the reviewer), and in general case it would be very advisable to get the same data. Perhaps, this is the first step to take.
If you can't get the same dataset and try to reimplement the algorithm, of course it opens the whole can of worms, since the reviewer might rightfully presume that your implementation is somehow different (due to different parameters or possible bugs) and thus incomparable. I'd say that a common valid scenario for such a venture is when you doubt the original paper's conclusions and want to confirm or disprove them.
As a side note, I think one should decide on the evaluation strategy **before** designing and implementing own methods. If you want to advance the state of the art, it's reasonable to check the existing papers first and make sure that you can get the same dataset as their authors to show that your method is more accurate on the same data.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: 1) Comparing with results that other authors report is in all likelihood acceptable.
2) However, published results shouldn't by uncritically believed, so it is better (in the sense of being a better service to science) to replicate other authors' results. Also, who knows, in case reported good results do not replicate you have another argument against a competitor and in favour of your method.
If information to do that is not sufficient in the paper you're citing (which reviewers of that paper should have criticised in my opinion), the most reliable way of doing that is to ask the authors for their code (if it isn't available anywhere anyway, that is).
3) If the authors don't share their code it is a good thing in my view to try to replicate their results using your own code (although in case you can use published results it is not mandatory for your publication, see point 1). If you find differences, it's best to contact the original authors about this, but you are also well within your rights to say in your paper that these results deviate from the original ones despite making your best attempt to replicate them. In any case you should acknowledge that this is your implementation, and list any decisions made by you for the implementation that are not obvious from the original paper. Once more, this is more work than just using their reported results and in all likelihood not required for publication, however the reward is a certain chance to find something that you can use against a competitor (I of course mean this in a purely peaceful way, but implicitly assuming that you want to write a paper and readers and reviewers may want to know what makes your method worthwhile compared with XXX).
I add (belatedly) that apart from the value for the specific publication you may have in mind, I learned a few valuable things trying to replicate other people's work.
4) The other respondents are right about only comparing what's comparable, see their answers.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/06/24
| 5,444
| 21,313
|
<issue_start>username_0: I find it hard to write a literature review, even though I have Google, the Internet, and all free, very easy to search for information tools.
I have to search for days to find a piece of information that is related to my research.
I really would not be able to do that without the help of the internet and the technology.
This really makes me wonder how people in the past did that:
* Did they have to read the entire book to find a piece of information?
I know they might have used the index, but still this wouldn’t have given them the details of what they were looking for.
* Does that mean people in the past (before the Internet) worked harder to achieve their degrees?
* Does that mean that research before relied less on references?<issue_comment>username_1: We depended on libraries and librarians. Grad students would spend hours in, say, the math section of a good academic library, going from book to book and taking copious notes (on paper, of course).
But, often enough, the next paper we needed to look at wasn't in that library at all, so you would go to the librarian and ask for a loan of the resource from another library.
But it was also an important technique to use the librarian as a 'knowledge expert' who could, and would, suggest things for you to look at and places to look. I don't know if librarians still get the training to do that.
And, of course, you could ask your colleagues for hints about which rocks to uncover to find the gems.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: (Comment extended to post:)
My impression is that part of the answer is "they didn't", or more precisely "they were only as good at it as their own knowledge and that of their communities". In particular, at least anecdotally, many things in mathematics were discovered in parallel for lack of easy communication and inter-visibility. [This is complementary to @username_1's answer, which explains why people found anything at all.]
I have tried to put this on solid footing by comparing numbers of references in a 1970 issue of a mathematical journal vs. in a 2019 issue of the same journal. This turned out to be surprisingly nontrivial. Firstly, it's not clear if I am comparing apples to apples, since most journals have changed their publication criteria and sometimes even their (implicit) subject within these 49 years. Secondly, papers in almost every part of mathematics have gotten much longer (by a factor of 2.8 in my sample). Thirdly, empirically, Project Euclid bans your IP if you load more than about 20 PDFs in rapid succession, and Sci-Hub is slow and has captchas. There might be a way to do such research using MathSciNet, but I am nowhere near proficient enough at its use.
So I ended up comparing Proceedings of the AMS (due to their long back-catalog of freely accessible issues), and came up with this ("reference" means "bibliography item", not "place where a bibliography item is being cited"):
I picked 13 of the papers from [Proc. AMS **141** (2019) #12](https://www.ams.org/journals/proc/2013-141-12/home.html) (more or less picking the first 13, except I skipped a few from the Abhyankar cluster since he writes and cites in rather idiosyncratic ways). The average paper has 1.5 references per page:
I picked 13 of the papers from [Proc. AMS **24** (1970) #1](https://www.ams.org/journals/proc/1970-024-01/home.html). The average paper has 1.2 references per page:
Should we really compare references per page? There are good reasons to assume that the number of references per page should decrease as papers get longer, since the references cited in Section 1 won't normally be disjoint from the references cited in Section 2. As a consequence, the discrepancy between the above numbers looks even starker.
I can only explain this discrepancy in two ways:
1. the literature has grown much larger, and not just by the addition of new disciplines but also by more people writing about the same discipline;
2. (as the OP observed) finding relevant references in the literature has gotten easier thanks to the Internet, Google Scholar, etc.
I don't know how to properly disentangle these two causes.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: It was a LOT harder before the internet. Time spent traveling to and from the information source is eliminated by instant transmission of data.
If people were lucky enough to be able to spend long stretches of time in a library, the amount of information they could find was, for those days, a "lot." There were these things called "card catalogs." They were furniture, basically, in which long, little drawers were kept, and the drawers were organized by subject, and inside each drawer were hundreds of little cards, and you'd find information about one individual book on each of these cards and determine if you wanted to go walk sometimes long distances and up elevators or stairs to "the stacks" (where the books were) to find this particular book or not. (Google Dewey Decimal System.)
You'd write down the ID info about all these books onto what would often become long lists. Then you'd go to another part of the library, where the books were ("the stacks") and pull books, many of them hardbound, off of shelves. Lots and lots of books sometimes. Yes, they'd actually read "the whole book"!!! (Couldn't help but laugh hard at that question.) And sometimes not. And they'd underline sections in pencil (and ink, unfortunately), and place books face down with pages open to pages they needed to look at as their hands went to and from the typewriter, and they'd put bookmarks in between pages in an effort to be able to go back to references and material they wanted to put into the project they were working on, as they attempted to create an effective structure without Select, Copy, Cut, Paste.
If they couldn't type, they'd write it out by hand on pads of paper, and cut paragraphs and sentences with scissors (I'm not making this up) out of one section so they could rearrange the sequence of their text by taping it and gluing it to other cut-up pieces. (Google the word "mucilage.") Before this stuff called Whiteout was invented (by a mom, apparently, with stuff in her kitchen), typists had no way to correct an error on a page; they'd have to start the entire page over again.
The invention of the IBM Selectric typewriter was revolutionary and a gift from heaven because you could correct backwardly about 12 spaces. You could check books out with a library card, and you had to return them usually within two weeks or pay a small fine. And if you didn't return the book, you had to pay for the book. (One of the many good things that broke down in the social decay of the last few decades was that people started stealing books from libraries, something nobody ever did before.)
Some libraries had little tiny rooms (e.g. New York City) that they'd let serious researchers use privately for months. And they could get "a lot" (by the standards of the day) done. But it was a small fraction of what you can get done now. Someday, when you're in your 60s or so, a young person is going to ask a question that will make you laugh because you can't believe things have changed so much that young people don't know what something used to be like. It was a lot, lot, lot harder to get a degree, build a business, make almost anything... than it is now. I mean a lot, lot harder.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Although I haven't really known this time myself, I think it's important to mention the much more crucial role that conferences and journals used to play in the dissemination of specialized knowledge. A researcher would usually try to attend the conferences of their field and get their local library to subscribe to the relevant journals in order to keep up to date with what people are doing in their research community.
At the time researchers would preciously keep these massive conference proceedings whenever they attend a conference. I know a few senior researchers who still have their offices shelves full of old proceedings and journal issues. In order to keep up one had to follow the series of conferences/journals relevant to their field, but it was feasible because there were not as many publications (and publication venues) as nowadays. They didn't have to read the entire volume but at least they would read the most important publications and make a note of potentially relevant ones. To some extent they relied less on references indeed, and they relied more on the reputation of a journal or conference to cover the recent progress of the field.
The question of whether they worked harder is subjective. The nature of bibliographical work was different and certainly more time-consuming, but researchers were not expected to process more than what is humanly possible: overall the research system was proportionate to the technical constraints. Like for many things, I think that people used to make more out of fewer resources: exploiting the resources they had access to in a deeper and more extensive way, whereas nowadays we often can only afford to skim through the massive amount of literature... I could keep rambling about disposable research but that would be very subjective and out of topic ;)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: To add to the other answers: Many publishers and professional societies produced bound paper indices of journal articles such as Math Reviews by the AMS.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: One point that the other answers have passed over is that there were various services the libraries subscribed to which surveyed the literature and provided abstracts and cross indexing of the primary journals. [Science Citation Index](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_Citation_Index) was mentioned in a comment, but there was also [Science Abstracts](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inspec#Science_Abstracts), which had been published since 1898. These were hefty print volumes, and consumed a significant fraction of the library's shelf space and budget.
You'd typically start with a paper your mentor pointed you to, use the Science Citation Index to see who had cited that paper, then look up those papers in Science Abstracts, march off to the shelves to find the appropriate bound copies of the journals, and then plug nickels into the copy machine. If your institution didn't have that journal, well, that was what the interlibrary loan was for.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_7: >
> Does that mean that research before relied less on references?
>
>
>
Plural-of-anecdotally, I've referred to several mathematics papers from the 1940s and 1950s and it's quite common for a 20-page paper in that era to have between zero and two references in the bibliography. Even today, papers in pure mathematics don't tend to cite a whole lot but I'd say that something like ten to twenty citations would be the common range for a 20-page paper.
As for your title question, it was very common for researchers to *not* find articles before the Internet and the computer era. For example,
>
> The Bellman–Ford algorithm [...] was first proposed by <NAME> (1955), but is instead named after <NAME> and <NAME>, Jr., who published it in 1958 and 1956, respectively. <NAME> also published the same algorithm in 1957, and for this reason it is also sometimes called the Bellman–Ford–Moore algorithm.
> ([Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellman%E2%80%93Ford_algorithm))
>
>
>
>
> ---
>
>
> The Floyd–Warshall algorithm [...] was published in its currently recognized form by <NAME> in 1962. However, it is essentially the same as algorithms previously published by <NAME> in 1959 and also by <NAME> in 1962 [...] and is closely related to Kleene's algorithm (published in 1956)... ([Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floyd%E2%80%93Warshall_algorithm))
>
>
>
>
> ---
>
>
> [Dijkstra] re-discovered the algorithm known as Prim's minimal spanning tree algorithm (known earlier to Jarník, and also rediscovered by Prim). Dijkstra published the algorithm in 1959, two years after Prim and 29 years after Jarník. ([Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dijkstra%27s_algorithm))
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: Another resource was *memory*, the one inside your head. We would remember a bit of fact we read n years ago, remember what we were reading n years ago, and start there.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: Chem Abstracts worked well. Look at the volumes (physical, take down from shelf). Then go to the bound journals (in volumes). See if article is good...if so xox it and stick it in a file folder.
Trace footnotes back (look at articles, copy relevant ones, sometimes going couple layers back...you find quickly the seminal reviews). This is even same process done now.
If uni doesn't hold something, send in an ILL request. (Librarian hunts it down in other libraries.) Articles would often be faxed. Books mailed.
Books tend to be dated and less useful than review articles. But still, they are much quicker to skim (just physically to do so...and you have the TOC and index). Often looking at what is physically next on shelf is useful.
P.s. Now that Google is here, I'm actually amazed how BAD many kids are at looking anything up on Google. Very little "fu". I mean there are wizards also. But very frequently, people who can't even do the basics. See it all the time in classes, work, forums, etc. Q&A sites an issue too. (Nothing wrong with asking for help after making an effort. But those to lazy to Google are a plague that drive discussion quality down and take community for granted.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: As a math grad student in the 60's I thumbed through the orange *Mathematical Reviews* when it came to the library every month. I could read a paper there, or write the author a postcard asking for a reprint. I still have lots (including reprints of my own papers) but rarely use them because it's easier to find a pdf on the net than my hard copy.
Nowadays I often don't even have to know where to go for the literature. A query on stackexchange returns proofs and references.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: I'm surprised that no one has yet mentioned [preprints](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preprint) of research articles. At least in mathematics, it used to be when you published an article in a reputable journal that you were given a number of paper copies of your article that you could give to colleagues. These in turn were often photocopied. Almost every time I went to my advisor's office in grad school I would emerge with another paper (either one of his own preprints or a copy of a preprint that someone else had given to him). By the time I had finished my dissertation, I had amassed a collection of a couple of dozen papers which were directly related to my topic.
When you went to conferences, many people would bring with them preprints of their own papers. You might emerge from such a conference with a half dozen new preprints.
Nowadays I don't accumulate many paper copies of articles very often (though I might still print up one I download if it strikes me as particularly important). But over the years (roughly) 1988-2003, I must have accumulated over two hundred preprints (and copies of preprints) that were given to me by colleagues. Even now I have a file cabinet full of them.
TL/DR: Before the internet, networks of researchers would keep much of the relevant articles in circulation.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_12: Most of the methods used have already been pointed to. I'll add that Index Medicus was *de rigueur* for life sciences, as it doesn't look like anyone has pointed that out.
Oddly, I find that having to use the Scientific Citation Index taught me an understanding of how important tracking citation of seminal work can be in a way that graduate students don't really seem to understand.
The biggest difference I find between now and then is that the immediate ability to know how many times a paper has been cited without having to page through volumes and volumes of the SCI means that you *immediately* know what the seminal papers in a field are. It makes it much, much, much easier to bring oneself up to a workable level of knowledge in an area that isn't your own.
Of course, the other difference is the hours in front of the copy machine in dark library stacks.
On a separate point, another factor that might influence the number of citations in a paper over time is how EASY it is these days to pop a reference into a paper, with the advent of powerful reference managers that interface seamlessly with text and word processors. Think about adding that last minute reference when it meant retyping a whole document, changing all your superscripted numbers!!!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_13: "In the old days", I think there was much more emphasis on, and valuing of, *scholarship*, in the sense that there were (usually older...) people who had good memories, and had paid attention, and knew of many things. Published and preprint-only. I myself was struck by this possibility most powerfully as a grad student at Princeton long before computer look-up was possible: many of the math faculty were aware of an amazing terrain of current and older work.
In some regards, this was very important there, because very many of the most important books and journal volumes were checked out, all the time... and grad students had very low "recall" priority. So to be able to find out what was in those unavailable sources, informally, very quickly, by talking to *scholars*, was excellent.
Unsurprisingly, the high-level "pre-processing" done by very-capable scholars, as opposed to search engines, allowed many huge speed-ups in searches... and I think still does so.
And, with live scholars, as opposed to current fairly-generic search engines, one of the fundamental difficulties... not knowing the keywords... was easily overcome.
Indeed, from what I can see, quite a lot of the "research" posted on arXiv has failed to connect with much prior research, visibly due to failing to connect to the proper key-word (or author) world. Understandable, but "computers" do not magically solve that problem.
One of the biggest changes is simply the possibility of typing things up oneself, in presentable form, and easy error-correction. This was a significant bottle-neck as late as the late 1980s. The even bigger change, unimaginable in 1985, was the possibility of "publishing" by simply putting things on-line. "Organizing" this, if we pretend that's what we're doing, to any degree, seems to require new ideas or concepts, that are not yet "here". E.g., for math, arXiv is very useful, *but*: lots of pointless stuff, and many things don't appear there. (I periodically check the web pages of a list of people to see what they're doing... in addition to looking at arXiv daily.)
But, yes, "in the old days", it was important to "be on the inside", and/or be connected to people who were, etc., to get the "preprints" which would not have been (*could* not have been) publicly available for a year or two (due to publication lag in math... which sometimes was infinite).
And, as other answers have noted, in those days, in math, conferences really were the places where *new* things were announced... that might not appear in "publications" for a year or two, if even that!
We can also mention the vagaries of "physical mail", especially transatlantic... :) Things could take a month or so, or never show up at all. And, too, long-distance phone calls in the U.S. were pretty expensive. People tried to arrange to charge their grants... :)
One summary of the state of things was that there may have been a more coherent common body of "known" things, that specialists/experts all were aware of... and novices were trained-into that scholarship.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_14: Amusing quote from Dirac on this subject:
'I worked on it [quantum theoretical interpretation of kinematic quantities] intensively from September 1925. During a long walk on a Sunday it occurred to me that the commutator might be the analogue of the Poisson bracket, but I did not know very well what a Poisson bracket was. I had just read a bit about it, and forgotten most of what I had read. I wanted to check up on this idea, but I could not do so because I did not have any book at home which gave Poisson brackets, and all the libraries were closed. So I had to wait impatiently until Monday morning when the libraries were open and check on what a Poisson bracket really was. Then I found that they would fit, but I had one impatient night of waiting'.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/06/24
| 542
| 2,323
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm an undergraduate in Mechanical Engineering interested in a career in academia, especially Physics. A middle aged person in India (from where I am) I recently met told me he couldn't find employment in academia in India or abroad after completing his doctorate in a Physics field, because he did an undergrad in Mechanical Engineering. Is this situation where there is difficulty finding employment when doctorate and previous education do not match generally true in academia, Physics or otherwise, or probably a very specific problem?<issue_comment>username_1: Don't base life decisions on anecdotes. I'm sure such cases exist, and, other cases in almost any combination. But your future as an academic, or even in industry, will depend far more on your later work and far more than that on the potential for success that you can demonstrate to anyone in a position to hire you.
But it would be a mistake to stay in Mechanical Engineering for life just for such a reason. It might be a reason to switch earlier, rather than later, but only so that your path into a physics doctoral program might be eased a bit.
But, a single case is always a poor indicator as there are always, potentially, other, unstated, reasons for the outcome.
Create your own life. But work hard at it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I have a permanent lectureship in a field that I don't even have a PhD in, let alone an earlier degree...and I lecture in the field too, despite never having even taken a class in it. It makes sense if you follow my research progression, but that's the point, everyone is different. Note this is social sciences/humanities, but nothing is clear cut in academia, and a different undergraduate degree is particularly meaningless post PhD.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: This is generally not a problem, and many departments may even consider having a more diverse background an advantage.
I have an engineering undergraduate degree and graduate degrees in physics and math, and I was asked (only once) in one of my interviews if I am comfortable teaching undergraduate physics courses given that my undergraduate degree is in another field. If you can confidently say yes to this question and can back it up, there should be no problem.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2019/06/24
| 752
| 3,173
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a fairly new Assistant Professor at a liberal arts university. I know from Facebook that a professor at my undergrad just retired and I specialize in some of the same classes this person taught. I would love to work at my undergrad.
Is it appropriate to email my former advisor and ask to be notified if/when they choose to fill that position? How should that email be phrased?
[I'm fairly certain that there hasn't been a search begun already for this position, so it may be even be a few years before one begins.]<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, asking is always allowed. The worst that can happen is that they say they have other strong candidates and that they're not looking for any further applications -- though it sounds like they're not at that stage.
From the perspective of a hiring committee, you *always* want to spread the news that a job is available as widely as possible, because then you will get better applicants. So there is really nothing wrong with sending an informal email as these kinds of emails are *useful* to the hiring department.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Is it appropriate to email my former advisor and ask to be notified if/when they choose to fill that position?
>
>
>
It’s generally appropriate to ask about job opportunities and to express potential interest. However, I wouldn’t rely on the former adviser to remember to notify you of something several years later (for me it’s hard enough to remember what someone asked me to do last week), and asking for such an open-ended future commitment to notify you might come across as a bit insensitive. It might be better to phrase the request as a question about whether they anticipate that there would be openings soon, and if so, what would be a way that you could learn about them.
As a general rule, people will show more good will towards you and willingness to help you if you show yourself willing to do things yourself (like keep track of job postings at a place you’re insterested in) instead of asking them to do those things for you.
>
> How should that email be phrased?
>
>
>
Since it sounds like it’s been some time since you’ve had contact with your undergraduate advisor, I suggest starting by saying hi, reminding them of who you are (there’s a good chance they’ll need their memories jogged, even if that may sound unlikely to you) and updating them about what you’ve been up to. They will probably be glad to hear you are now beginning a career in academia.
After that background, you can get to the point and simply say you’re writing to inquire about job opportunities that might open up in the immediate or near future. It’s okay to mention the professor retiring, but I should caution you that the way you’ve phrased your question suggests an implicit premise that departments always fill positions of professors who retire with new faculty who have similar expertise or are qualified to teach similar classes as the retiring professor. In my area (math) that is usually false. So keep that in mind when you mention how your own expertise overlaps that of the other professor.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 4
|
2019/06/24
| 240
| 1,033
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have published my paper in a new journal in our field. The reason for submitting for this journal was the editorial board which consists of some of the top professors from best global universities (including University of Cambridge, University College London, Technical University of Munich, etc.).
Now I am applying for a job which requires me to list the impact factor for all my publications. Since the journal has only two issues yet there is no impact factor. How should I deal with this issue?<issue_comment>username_1: Deal with it honestly. Say exactly what you said here. "Since only two issues of the journal have been published, there is as yet no impact factor."
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't know if Impact factor is important today as journals such as eLife, peeej or f1000 etc. Don't rely only on impact factor. However, such as is your case I personally feel two criteria are important. One is availability in SCI or SCI expanded index and the other is PubMed.
Upvotes: -1
|
2019/06/25
| 1,013
| 4,314
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm guessing that if the grad student / postdoc is directly supervising the undergrad, friending would not be very appropriate. However, would it be ok for an undergrad to friend other grad students / postdocs in the lab?
This is for a university in the U.S.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think there is a general social media rule about this. I have had many undergraduate friends on social media during my Ph.D. and postdoc. My rule is to send friend requests to whoever you like. It is just a request, they don't have to accept it. If someone sends me a friend request and I don't care to be their friend, I just ignore it.
But if you're worried that it could get awkward, you can just ask them if it is okay with them before sending a request.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: My personal take is:
* **Twitter**: I would say this barely counts as social media any more. Its more about broadcasting your opinion and 'upvoting' other people's content on particular themes. Most established academics have a twitter account and they LOVE having more followers. Younger grad students may be less enthusiastic about Twitter coz their parents are all over it ;-) (c.f. Facebook);
* **Instagram**: If the instructor has an instagram account, its probably because they take a lot of quirky pictures and want the world to see (see twitter above);
* **Linked In**: I tend to get Linked In invitations from current and former students. Frankly these tend to be from the more engaged students who are probably going to continue in their field. Personally I think Linked In is appropriate especially if you are particularly interested in the topic(s) taught by the instructor and may continue studying/working in that area. Linked In is used by a lot of academics to build their networks, so I think following on Linked In is totally appropriate;
* **Academia.edu**: I think following on Academic is more particular to research - specifically - reading their stuff. To me if you follow an academic on Academia to me it means you have an active interest in their area of research. If this is the case, go for it;
* **Facebook**: Personally I think Facebook is fine though I never use it. It does seem more personal. Paradoxically if we were actually friends you would know it was pointless 'friending' me on Facebook. Everyone has their own opinions about this platform;
* **Tinder/Grindr**: Does send a different kind of message ;-) Maybe think twice, at least while you are enrolled in their class.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: There’s no harm in sending a request, but you should be prepared to deal with the situation in which those students do not want to accept your requests. Social media can act as a platform for people to express themselves and having younger students observing their activity on social media can undoubtedly become a liability for ones career - it just creates a new opportunity for a complaint to be filed.
So go ahead and send it, but don’t be offended if the request is not accepted so to maintain professional and personal boundaries.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: There is a slight difference between a PhD student and a post-doc, since the former still falls under student rules. For a PhD student I see no problem if you know them outside class, for example from a society or a sports club. If you became familiar with them during teaching, I would suggest you asked for their permission to add them (not just sending an invitation) after the class is over and there is no insinuation of preferential treatment or conflict of interest. If they do not teach you, no problem.
For academics, both early- and late-stage, I would suggest you only followed them on Twitter and only if the account relates on research and academic issues. If you decide to do otherwise, you should definitely ask for permission - just send them a personal message on the platform or ask them in person, the same way you would ask for a business card. Even if they have no issue with it, it is still good manners and professional conduct.
Ultimately it is to the discretion of the other side to accept as @username_3 pointed out. There are good reasons not to, both practical and personal. After graduation, of course, you can do as you see fit.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/06/25
| 1,060
| 4,320
|
<issue_start>username_0: I submitted a short note to a math journal providing a counterexample to a result in literature that had first appeared in that very journal.
After eight months, I heard from the journal. It was a rejection. The associate editor based his rejection on one referee who had clearly misunderstood my counterexample.
I framed a polite email to the editor-in-chief (EIC) arguing why the referee was wrong in claiming that my counter example was not valid. I don't have high hopes of hearing back from the EIC. He never responded to my emails asking for status updates in months 4, 6 and 8.
For the sake of science (the algorithm to which I propose a counterexample is used by folks in my area of applied math), I intend to upload my paper, the referee report and the covering letter of the associate editor (all of whom are anonymous) on my website and on Research Gate. Alongside this, I plan to upload an explanation explaining why the journal was mathematically wrong to reject my work. I essentially plan to simply upload the letter that I have written to the EIC where I argue why the referee/AE are wrong.
Is there any legal reason why I should not upload the referee/AE reports?
How else can I handle this messy and depressing situation?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> For the sake of science [...], I intend to upload my paper, the referee report and the covering letter of the associate editor (all of whom are anonymous, BTW) on my website and on researchgate. Alongside this, I plan to upload an explanation explaining why the journal was mathematically wrong to reject my work.
>
>
>
Besides possibly being a copyright infringement and coming across as immature, this isn't really going to contribute anything to science. Your paper is not going to attract a significant audience if it's only on your website and researchgate. arXiv would be slightly better, but not much.
Your contribution to science is the paper itself, so the best way to handle this situation is to revise your paper to make it more clear, particularly to a reader who may have the same misconceptions as the reviewer did. Then submit it to a different journal.
To be clear, I do not think it is a good idea to post an explicit rebuttal or criticism of the referee's report, with or without the report itself, on your website or in any other public forum,. It is unprofessional, and it will cause people to focus less on the content of your work and more on your negative reactions. You can rebut their concerns indirectly within your paper itself ("it may appear that X, but in fact this is not true because Y"), but do not "call out" the referee or the journal.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'm sorry about your bad experience. However, your proposed course of action makes you look petulant and childish. You're not going to make any friends or impress anyone. Trying to tell the world that the editor and referee were wrong is just a waste of your time. Everybody has misunderstood a paper at least once in their life and, sometimes, you get unlucky and misunderstand a paper that you're refereeing.
Wait a few days, then see if the referee doesn't actually have a point. Communication failures are rarely 100% the fault of either party and, even if it's mostly the referee's fault that they misunderstood, you can probably still make your paper clearer, so other people don't misunderstand it in the same way. Do that and resubmit the paper somewhere else.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Is there any legal reason why I should not upload the referee/AE reports?
>
>
>
As mentioned by @Buffy, seek a lawyer for legal advice, not this website. But honestly, this would look really bad on your CV, as it is very unprofessional. Furthermore, what if every prospective employer/advisor/grant manager came across this piece of work and after a quick and careless reading, this person sided with the referee?
>
> How else can I handle this messy and depressing situation?
>
>
>
Insist a bit more on the same journal, you might have been unlucky enough that the referee was the author whose mistake you were pointing out. If they chose another referee or if you clarify your work, you might get accepted. Or, as others said, publish somewhere else.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/06/25
| 6,839
| 29,152
|
<issue_start>username_0: I just graduated with a software-engineering master’s degree with a good grade from a top-five university in the UK. I also have a bachelor's in computer science.
I always revised just for exams and just enough to get that first-class degree, without actually learning anything. I basically revise for the exam itself, by looking at past paper answers, and I never study the actual material. I then forget everything after finishing the exam. I've been repeating this cycle since school.
This method has given me a great first-class degree but with practically zero knowledge. As @Sule said, I never internalised the material.
I also never did a single internship because I didn’t need to.
Now, I’m facing a problem: How am I supposed to find work if I barely know how to program? Will employers just accept me because I have a fancy software-engineering master’s degree from a top-five university? I also haven’t worked professionally a single day in my life.
I'm thinking of getting a PhD at this point.<issue_comment>username_1: I’m guessing you still have the learning materials from your previous degree or have access to them. I would start by pulling them all out and going through them by yourself. If you’re smart enough to stumble your way into a first class degree then you should be able to teach yourself the material and then practice programming, and if you’re still facing some difficulty, you should then probably ask for help. You must have had friends on your program who did well and actually internalised the material. Just ask one of them... and remember, you have no room for shame; swallow your pride and ask for help... Short of doing the degree again, I don’t see any other way out of this.
To be honest, a lot of people have to pull out notes from previous studies when applying for certain jobs to refresh/reteach themselves things they may have forgotten. Since you’re in a more intense situation, maybe take six months to a year out, if you can afford it, and teach yourself.
A PhD, I think, should be out of the question at this stage. It’s way more rigorous than your past degrees have been and seems like jumping out of the frying pan and into the inferno.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Programming is not difficult, mate. Being a software engineer is.
That's why any random idiot these days can become a programmer and for as much as they'd like to go around calling themselves "software engineers" or "devs", we all know they're just code monkeys that the smarter guys use to do their bidding.
So, spend some time learning 1 programming language. Java, C#, Python. Something widely used. It doesn't take long. Build some projects.
Even if you don't have the experience, being able to point to a personal project and say "I did this" goes a long way.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: You asked,
>
> How am I supposed to find work if I barely know how to program?
>
>
>
It sounds like you're looking for a job in industry, versus academia, so I will answer from that perspective.
Employers are generally looking for people who can *get things done* and will consider the ability to program as a means to an end. While technical skills (i.e. mastery of a specific programming language) will be important, it's never the *only* factor evaluated, and it's sometimes not even the most important factor. Combine that with the pace at which technology develops, and having a specific technical skill ends up becoming even less important, as that skill may be obsolete rather quickly. Go find a dozen software engineers who have been working in industry for a decade or more since getting a degree, and ask if they're still using the actual content from any of their classes. You may be surprised at the answers. What they will probably talk about is how valuable it was to become a "learning machine" rather than a knowledge repository.
You've described the process you used to get good marks on tests. **That's a valuable skill.** Employers don't inherently care about test scores, but they *will* care about someone who can pick something up, and learn it well enough to complete a task. In many programming environments, the ability to learn something, apply it, and then move on to the next thing is incredibly valuable - even if you "forget" that thing as you're picking up future things.
Further, **Resumes and interviews are sales tools** - you're selling yourself to an employer. **Focus on the value you can add** and match that value to their needs. There's a job out there for everyone - don't just spam every software job you see and *hope one sticks despite your shortcomings* - instead, focus on understanding your own strengths and then look for jobs where your strengths are a good fit. Write your resume to emphasize the skills you **do** have and be ready to talk about them in interviews.
Taking a bit of a tangent, there's a concept in motorcycling called "target fixation." Riding instructors working with new riders will emphasize the skill of *looking where you want to go* when in a difficult situation. This is because new riders who are surprised by a piece of road debris, or a vehicle out of place, tend to focus on that thing to the extent that the *ride right into it* instead of avoiding it. Apply that to yourself since you're undertaking the new pursuit of searching for a job: **Don't become fixated on what you perceive as weaknesses** or you may end up in a mindset where all you have to offer in an interview is nervousness about what you see as your own shortcomings.
As a final point, to address your comment of,
>
> I also haven't worked professionally a single day in my life
>
>
>
I have a feeling that the quicker you can change that, the less significant your problem will seem. Once you have a few years of work experience, you will see life through a different lens - on the one hand, you probably don't want a menial job for the rest of your life, but on the other hand, your first job doesn't have to be *the* job - it's OK to just take *a* job and get some experience to give you some confidence and expose yourself to a professional workplace.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: Employers (mostly correctly) infer that if you can figure out how to pass tests at a high level, especially when specifically about something relevant like computer science, then you can figure out how to build a form (or handle the input, or query a database, etc.). You say you don't know anything, but I bet that you could implement binary search a whole heck of a lot faster than someone who's never programmed at all before. Of course, in your first job you probably won't have to - and you might not in any job after that, either. But you could figure it out, which is about the same thing as figuring out whatever it is you'll actually be asked to do in your job.
In fact, it's been so long now since you didn't know any programming at all that you literally cannot recall what it was like to not know any. So as far as you are able to think, you must not know anything - because you have no one who actually doesn't know any programming to compare to, because most people know truly zero programming and don't try to, so you are unlikely to have experience with anyone who actually knows nothing attempting to do it. The only comparison you can make is upwards, to people you assume must know more than you. This leads to a warped worldview, and often manifests as [imposter syndrome](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impostor_syndrome).
In short - it is a normal human response to the weird and rarefied world you live in. You'll live.
As to what will happen in the first job, anyone with experience working with people fresh out of college (regardless of degree level) expects that in the first 3-12 months you will do little that turns out to be actually useful or valuable. With companies that know how things work, you'll be put on an existing project that has some minor changes to be made, or they'll put you on a special project that really only exists to get new employees up to speed on the local system. Any company that hires you with the demand that you "hit the ground running" is more than a bit silly, but they usually appreciate you pretend to be making progress and dirty hacks are the best they can hope for, and they'll pay you for it nonetheless. If you don't think back in horror at the code you use to get paid to write, you aren't paying attention.
What companies who hire people like you know is that you are at least of above average intelligence, you are used to figuring things out on short notice, and you have lots of experiencing turning out things that sort of seem to work even when you don't understand what is going on. You have years of experiencing doing what you are told even when you don't agree with it or see the point, to please weird and often inscrutable authority figures. You should at least be able to pretend you know what variables and methods are, you've heard of object orientation, you likely get the general concept of what a database is for, etc. - your degree should provide most of the fundamentals, whether you remember them very clearly or not. You'll be expected to cram to prepare for tech interviews (and later on, project presentations), anyway, which you obviously learned how to do too!
Honestly, this describes almost the perfect employee, which is why so many software companies are keen to hire from top universities - they know what they are getting! Sure, ideally employees would actually know what their job entails in full and be good at it already, but many hiring companies don't even know exactly what the job will entail month to month themselves - so how are they going to hire for that? Besides, people with all the skills already developed cost too much to hire and retain - you are not really competing with those people directly right now.
No, this is not the story these big-name universities tell, thus your feeling that your situations is unusual - but absolutely every manager working in IT/software I've ever talked with knows those marketing lines are baloney.
At the same time, that means some companies won't be very interested in someone with an advanced degree and no job experience. That's fine too - you don't need all the jobs, just one at a time. Apply to the sorts of places that hire people like yourself, who are in the position you are in now.
Having no professional experience, even in an internship, means an extra tick of challenge, but it is hard for everyone. Expect to have to spend considerable effort developing and being able to talk usefully about your past experiences. Preparing for interviews means recalling and retelling stories about class projects and assignments in ways that showcase what you learned, which you understandably don't recall easily - you'll have to work at it, and that's a big part of what "preparing for interviews" is.
Getting the first "related experience" job entry is one of the hardest transition periods. It's always this way. Using a PhD as a way to kick the can down the road will not automatically solve the problem, and you'll just have similar challenges to overcome then too.
You may need to take advantage of flexibility to travel and being willing to do work other people would pass over as 'boring'. Insurance and education companies, for example, often have to work hard to recruit people because everyone graduates and wants to apply to the most famous name-brand tech companies and don't even think about applying to them. Some pay less, some pay more, some companies are more pleasant than others, etc.
You'll get the first job because you get it, and that's about it. You put yourself in what turns out to be the right place at the right time, it won't be perfect, and you are unlikely to be especially good at it at first. But it's a start, and "getting good" is something you will have to work at for years - no one is good just because they went to college. With time in a related job where you have a good attitude, develop your skills and experience, and build up a network of people in a similar line of work, the next job can be a lot easier to find.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: In 2008 I started a PhD, although in pure mathematics rather than computer science. I had had a school and undergraduate career much like you describe, and like you I had ended up with a 1st-class degree. I was always extremely good at passing exams, and my habit was to learn to the exam. I never retained very much information after each exam season was over, and because I was so skilled at passing exams I had never had to work particularly hard at any point in my academic career.
Part of the reason why I started a PhD was that I did not know what else I should pursue. My PhD was a disaster; I could not cope with the entirely different expectations of me since academia was no longer about passing exams (something I could always do without much effort) but about actually studying hard, something I had rarely if ever needed to do before. I responded poorly to this situation, retreating from the challenge and failing to adapt to the new situation. Several years later, I eventually left my course without having gained any additional qualification.
In summary, you should consider carefully whether you will successfully make the transition from undergraduate to postgraduate study; they are radically different and the approach you have described is not one that will get you anywhere. I know this from experience. In any case, I do not think you should start a PhD simply because you are not confident in applying yourself to some other path.
You probably have picked up more than you realise that makes you attractive to an employer looking for programmers, or graduates in the sciences more generally. An employer looking for new software developers, in particular, is not going to expect you to know much about how software development is actually practiced in the real world - even if you have the fanciest degree your undergraduate institution gives out. They expect that you will take some time to learn how to do things the way they want them done. You should avoid assuming that you do not have anything to offer an employer just because you feel you did not retain much specific knowledge.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: **Stop complaining and fix your problems**.
Doing a PhD is not a solution. You say you internalized nothing during your Masters. What makes you think you'll internalize something during your PhD? If you don't, what makes you think the PhD will help you? You'll just end up kicking the can down the road, and five years from now, you'll have "Will employers just accept me because I have a fancy software-engineering PhD degree from a top-five university? I also haven't worked professionally a single day in my life."
Things to do now:
1. Realize that you don't *have* to internalize stuff. "Intelligence is not the ability to store information, but to know where to find it." -- Einstein
2. Learn all these things that you wish you had learned but didn't. If you barely know how to program, then learn how to program. Go practice. There are plenty of tutorials out there you can find using Google or your local library for you to self-teach.
3. Find a job. Visit your university's career center, if they have one. If not then you'll have to fix your CV yourself, find the job adverts yourself, and apply. You can still do it, it'll just be harder.
Points #2 and #3 aren't easy things to do, and they're not going to get easier. You can sit around moping about how you haven't learned anything, or you can do something about it. Your choice.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_7: Since many answers are addressing industry, I want to add a counter-point here: I wouldn't be so confident in leveraging your credentials to get an industry job, at least not a particularly good one. Nowadays employers test applicants much more rigorously in software interviews versus the recent past. Probably due to the very weak or fraudulent credentials coming from some parts of the world, plus the usual problem of the bald-faced lies about skills people put on their resumes (perhaps heightened by the huge salaries offered nowadays for the right specialized skillset), and what seems like rampant cheating in schools everywhere. I'd suggest try and learn as much as you can of the key things you are supposed to know. A good way to get started is actually do a couple interviews, which will give you an idea what you need to review.
As for grad school, it is first about potential, not skills. They will want to see that you can handle the difficult concepts as you dig deeply into a topic. This is probably best demonstrated by standardized test scores, considered alongside grades. But current fashion is to not require the GRE at many places, in which case they will dig deeper into grades in particular courses. Another very important factor in technical fields is work experience, perhaps ironically. Particularly if it involves doing some R&D that is relevant to your phd program. In part it helps convince them you will not quit to go to industry, plus it suggests you already have strong skills to make for a valuable research assistant.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: >
> Now, I’m facing a problem: How am I supposed to find work if I barely know how to program? Will employers just accept me because I have a fancy software-engineering master’s degree from a top-five university? I also haven’t worked professionally a single day in my life.
>
>
>
I entered the UK workplace a few years ago with a Maths degree having never coded before and having never had a job outside of voluntary work in a charity shop. So you having a degree in a related field means that you can't have less practical knowledge than I did, and you probably have more than you think you do. Regardless, it's not the barrier you think it is. Starting on a graduate scheme or as a Junior Software Engineer should mean that the company is willing to put some resources towards you in terms of mentoring, so your programming knowledge and your best practices knowledge will quickly pick up in that period. (A slightly idealised summary, but whether by code review rather than by outright training, you'll have input from senior members of staff).
You're free to be honest that you're not coming in with incredible programming skills, but don't sell yourself short either. Many employers won't care about the university you got your degree from (I graduated from a top-5 uni in my field with a 1st, another guy in my intake had a 2:2 from a former poly), rather your willingness to get stuck in and learn and contribute is what will sway them.
On a lighter note, you know how to use StackExchange, so you know how to solve most rudimentary problems that will come up in your future employment!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: Here's the thing about work: you don't do it under exam conditions. You know you can pick things up fast - you have a first class degree from a top 5 university by virtue of doing that. That is a skill you can use, once you have got through an interview.
I've got about 10 years of working in industry, and a good reputation. I am also not great at internalising syntax, and often feel like I'm starting again after a few months away from a language.
What I have though is a set of crib sheets and reference books for languages I commonly use. My employer is fine with that - they care that I do the work right, not whether or not there is a crib sheet pinned to the divider next to my monitor.
If you can work out how to solve a problem in a given language in reasonable time, it does not matter how well you have internalised the language. In fact, being able to pick up obscure languages fast and apply them can be a valuable skill.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: But do you want to work that?
I don't really find any of your stuff you said to be a problem. Go and apply to be an intern somewhere, they do not require knowledge. Since you have the "talent" to learn fast and understand things, in no time you will get to the point where you can have the job you want. As the other people said - there are so many tutorials online that you can learn from if you want, this + being an intern somewhere will help you fix all your 'problems' since you will learn so much. You are not the only one tho, I know a lot of people who get A on all subjects in computer science, but they do not know how to code, and they work in a supermarket. The choice is yours, no degree will ever teach you to be a good programmer, practice and understanding of the code and when to find something that you need will.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_11: Only few people are prepared to "work" right after finishing school (and I don't mean that you're not a good professional, just that you have no experience yet). Always be honest in your interviews and don't worry about that too much, all of us already had this problem, we all faced the same situation. When someone like you is hired, your working colleagues should expect that you need some time to adapt and learn how to work.
The good thing is, everything is in your mind, although you don't think so. As soon as you need them, they will pop out from your memory and things will get better. Also, you should have a fresh mindset, which gives you an advantage because you will see things that people who have been working for a long time can't see immediately.
Don't get afraid, that's normal. Believe in yourself and good luck :)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_12: **Education isn't everything. You have to apply it, and decide for yourself if you need to study more, or continue working and learning on the job.**
**Can you believe that I wouldn't have known what a WEB API was if I just followed my courses, finished university, and finished grad school?** I learned most of my CS topics while **working**
I think I can help with this because I am currently in your shoes ... or was.
I am currently getting my BSc while studying Computer Science at a top university.
However, I do not plan to get my masters, or even if I do, **I do not plan t o have any hopes from "achieving" anything out of it**
Here is why:
A master is obtained after your BSc, which should've taught you how to code. When you say you don't know how to code, that sounds really strange to me because coding is the first thikg we did in University. Sure we learn some useless theory here and there, but we definitely learn coding, ddesign patterns, testing, etc.
So when you say you don't know how to code, I think you are lying to yourself.
Secondly, when I went to intern at a place, my manager himself said that Master in CS is useless. It just shows that **you are willing to learn more, and were able to do it**, but rarely will have an impact on your role. Because the skills the employers look for, **just don't matter when you take a masters**. Perhaps in other fields like Business or Medical, it makes a difference, but if your goal is to be a developer and not contributete anything research wise, then master is pointless.
People can disagree with me, but I am spitting facts here, based on industry standards.
So back to your question. You **do** know how to code, if you didn't you would'nt have got a BSc.
If you are not confident, get a introductory job, or go to youtube, create some projects, and learn.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_13: If anything, I would consider taking some online courses on programming before jumping into a Ph.D, if you want to be able to program. I also second the concern that this could be imposter syndrome. Taking some courses online (not through a university) and taking the time to learn the programming languages may help you realize you know more than you thought you did, or it will help you catch up and get you where you need to be. Either way it is beneficial.
Complete applied projects while learning to showcase during interviews and prove you have the knowledge and capabilities even though you don't have the experience. This combined with the Master degree should open many doors for you.
Also, there are roles in software development that do not require you to be the one doing all the coding. Have you taken any courses on project management or business analysis? If you do not want to be the one programming, there are plenty of other roles to be filled in technical fields. You may want to research other roles.
I understand how stressful this scenario is and I wish you luck.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_14: Education is there to teach you how to learn, develop your knowledge, and find what you're interested in doing in the future. It is not there to prepare you for the real world; that's what internships and traineeships are for, amongst entry-level jobs in general.
An employee who learns things quickly and efficiently when given the right guidance is what companies are looking for. It takes some longer than others to get to this point, and to have the confidence to consider themselves worthy of a position they were educated for.
I wouldn't panic just yet - you haven't entered a work place yet. However, when you get to the point where you feel like you hit the wall I suggest that you **don't** give up, because perseverance is a skill you will need in every job.
Apply for places and show your true self in the interview. Try to be as much prepared as possible. Don't judge yourself harshly just yet.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_15: You should believe in yourself. If you really like to study for a PhD, go to study. If you don't like it, start an internship and accept the challenge from now on, because this day will come sooner or later.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_16: It is hard for me to believe you. I just graduated as a Software Engineer and well, we programmed and programmed since first year. Our exams were different every year on different programming problems (*of course, maths exams, dbs, some theoretical parts in concurrence or whatever, do not fit in here*). But having not learned to program in a full degree + masters, it just makes me think the university is not that top as it should be.
Taking that aside, I got **the question** for you. **Do you like programming?**.
If you do, you'll have no problem in learning and soing stuff at home by your own. Free coursera practical courses, etc. I do not really see the deal here...
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_17: This isn't really an answer, but it's not really a comment either, but it's more of an answer than a comment, so here it is.
In programming, there's way more to know than can be retained.
I've been a professional dev for almost 7 years, and have used almost 20 distinct languages in around 25 years since I started learning programming. I still have to look up the way to use "substring" every time I use it, since it's different between JavaScript, PHP, C#, Java, etc. As many times as I've used "substring" in those languages, I just can't remember which one does what and parameters plus param order.
Simply, you don't need to internalize everything, only what's currently needed. This is especially relevant to newer programmers/coders/devs/engineers. As you develop your career, the things you thought were necessary in school may not be what's actually necessary in a job. As you gain more experience, you'll internalize the things you really need. Anything you forgot can generally be Googled. You'll also learn more from senior devs than professors, and you'll teach other devs in turn.
Don't worry so much about what you think you know. That will change over time and why an interview is often more enlightening than your resume.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_18: I would like to add my two cents.
I think that at this point, the most important decision to make is - what is it you actually want to do to earn money. It is very hard to proceed without making this decision.
Your options are:
* Code
* Manage
* Teach
* none of the above
You can try actual coding by participating in an open source project. This will give you a taste of what it actually is.
You can go into software project management. This is a totally different skill. May be this is what you are good at.
With PhD you will be able to teach programming, albeit without ability to do so. Working in academia requires a totally different set of skills.
The last option is very interesting.
I know lots of people with dual majors who kinda program, but they are closer to the business side of it. Say, with a major in Accounting you could build and support accounting systems. With a tax license, you could build and support tax systems. With some systems knowledge you can do systems integration.
My point here is that commercial coding is not the only option for a holder of a Software Engineering diploma.
Hope this helped.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/06/25
| 537
| 2,181
|
<issue_start>username_0: I submitted my manuscript to a journal one month ago and the status is "with editor" up to now. As the editor of my paper is one of the leading scientists in the field of my research paper (mathematics), I would like to know that can an editor do the review of paper by him/herself without sending to other reviewers?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, **an editor can review a manuscript themselves**, but you cannot infer an editor is reviewing themselves when a manuscript has been with "*a journal [for] one month...and the status is 'with editor' up to now*."
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The editor may simply not have had the time to look at your manuscript and find a suitable reviewer. Or he may have contacted one or more potential reviewers, but they may not have accepted yet, in which case the editorial system may still show the manuscript as "with editor".
Also, of course, editors do look at manuscripts themselves. They typically don't write full reviews themselves, but they may desk reject, i.e., reject it without even sending it out for review, if the manuscript is obviously not within the journal's scope or of too low quality. ("Obviously" is obviously subjective.)
If you fear [a conflict of interest](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/132431/can-an-editor-review-manuscript-without-sending-to-reviewers#comment352210_132433), it would be good to account for this *before* submission, by either asking the manuscript to be handled by a different editor (assuming the journal has more than one), or by submitting to a different journal.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I am an editor at a mathematics journal which uses a (IMHO) pretty crappy online editorial system. When a paper is assigned to me, I find it much easier to work with referees "off the grid" rather than using the infernal editorial system. (For example, the system insists that I input in an entire page of details before sending a referee request to someone who most likely will ignore the request anyway.) So I don't think you can infer anything at all from the fact that the online status says "with editor."
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/06/25
| 1,063
| 4,072
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm 36 years old and work as systems administrator and lab instructor for a computer science department at a small liberal arts college. I'm also an adjunct math instructor for a community college. I have 1 BA and 2 masters, all from Ivy League Universities. I started college late, at the age of 25.
I always wanted to have a PhD in applied math and do research, but after undergrad, I felt burnt out and instead chose to work so I could pay off my student loans, which did not go well for me, because the economy was terrible in 2012. Two masters and several jobs later, I landed my current position, which I enjoy more than any other full-time job I've had, but would still rather be a full-time mathematics researcher/professor.
So I began applying to PhD programs last December. I was offered two TAships. I'll be attending the one I chose starting this Fall. It's at an R2 university. I'm excited but I'm now experiencing cold feet, because my current student loan balance is about $150K. I'm now beginning to think getting a PhD isn't such a smart idea. In fact, if I don't pursue a PhD, I could pay off $65,000 in about 3 years.
My plan prior to last December was to work at my current job for about 3 years and then find a full-time professor position at a community college or technical college, or to find a full-time lecturer position at a four-year college. I'm thinking I should forego the PhD and stick to this plan instead. Sure I won't be a researcher mathematician as I would love, but it's the smart and safe option. And maybe I can pursue a PhD once my loans are paid off. I'll probably be in my mid-40's by then, but who cares. I don't have kids and I'm not planning on having kids. My girlfriend of 6 years, who I'll probably marry, is unable to have kids anyway.
Any thoughts/advice? Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: First, taking on a large amount of debt at this point could be a big problem. However, several candidates for president are currently discussing forgiving student debt, a good thing to do in my view. It will be seriously discussed over the next 15 months, at least. It may be that your debt problem will get erased. Whoopie.
Second, spending your life doing something you aren't happy with is a terrible existence, but you say you are relatively happy now. There is no guarantee that you will land something better, but having already gone to ivy league places that seems like less of a problem.
Third, ignore any issues about age. You will (hopefully) reach 45 with or without your degree in any case. Graduating after 50 is an accomplishment, just as is graduating at 30.
My suggestion, worth about two cents, of course, is to continue on applying and see what happens. For a degree program in applied math you probably don't need to make an unbreakable commitment and can keep flexible as you see what happens, both in the general political/educational scene and in your life personally.
Of course your future spouse has a say in how she wants to live her life, so don't forget to factor that in as well.
But none of your impediments seem to be actual blocks. Be your best.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: My advice is to maximize income and reduce debt. Not do more schooling. You only have so many productive years. Your energy will not be as high at 50 as it is at 35.
The only place they really need Ph.D.s is if you want to be a professor. And who would want that. Oh...and many are called but few are chosen. Just look at all the physics postdocs.
Go get a job with the NSA instead. I am not joking. If you are smart, you can figure out the applied math stuff without formal schooling. And they hire non Ph.D.s often and have good internal training.
[This is going to seem like a troll...but you need to consider iconoclastic viewpoints. Also realize that many people on a site called Academia Stack Exchange may be biased by their affiliation...just look at all the encouragement to kids to get Ph.D.'s when they know the graduates struggle to land jobs.]
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/06/25
| 913
| 3,608
|
<issue_start>username_0: We are free to grade our students in oral or written exams. Obviously, if only 1 or 2 students take the course, oral exams (~15-30 mins) are the way to go from an effort minimization perspective (no exam creation, room reservation, grading, post-exam inspection/review), as well as written exams for like 1000 students.
Can anyone provide experience on the effort/benefits of oral vs written exams? Is there a magic number of students where this changes?<issue_comment>username_1: *There's really no universal answer, but it depends on the university regulations and on your willingness to listen to students for several hours.*
To give a personal example, I've been running oral exams for about 20 years. My exams, which are for undergraduate students (2nd or 3rd year), typically consist of a written test (2-3 hours) plus an oral exam with a duration of about 30 min for the standard exam or 1 hour if the student prepares an optional part (e.g. the presentation of a scientific paper or a presentation on a lab work). If you fail the written test, you cannot take the oral exam. You can be failed also at the oral exam too.
For me, the critical factor is the distance between two exam sessions because, given the rules in my country, the students who failed in one session should be able to retake the exam in the next one. Typically, in my university, the distance between two exam sessions at the end of a course is of a couple of weeks.
So, in my case, the magic number is of about 100 students, 150 maximum. Of 100 students, typically about 70 students come to an exam session. Of these, about 50% fail the written test, which means that I remain with about 35 students for the oral exam. Assuming that 1/4 take the optional part, I need 9+26/2=22 hours for the oral exams, which can be done in one week, leaving some days for grading and for rescheduling students who can have unexpected issues (illness, other exams on the same day etc.).
The benefits of oral exams have been discussed at length in the answers to [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/82651/20058), and I really cannot overestimate their importance in learning. See also [this related question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/82591/20058).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: My personal tipping point is about 30 students. Below that, oral exams are more efficient, above that, a written exam seems to be preferable for me.
Note that this depends a lot on other factors: where I am, there are teaching assistant that help proctoring and grading the exams, so written exams scale well to large sizes. However, we also have a "grade grubbing date" (exam inspection for the students) and this also takes some time. Also, our regulations state that we have oral exams of about 30-35 minutes for a lecture for which the written exam is about 180 minutes.
Regarding other points raised in comments and answers: Where I am we always need two people for an oral exam and one of them needs to write a protocol of the exam which is kept on file. Regarding the time for the preparation of the exam: I feel that preparing a well thought written exam takes a lot more time than doing an oral exam. For oral exams I usually design just a few core question and the rest of the exam flows around these questions. Sometimes I even make a few of these core question available to the students (and still some of them can't answer than properly...). Also, I find it pretty easy to adapt the questions slightly, if I have the feeling that the students know all my questions already.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/06/25
| 1,779
| 7,680
|
<issue_start>username_0: Question is: For a first year math PhD student, should the student read their graduate level math textbooks page by page, sentence by sentence?
I often hear professors say that that's a bad idea, and that it's better to look at problems first, and then go back to read as necessary.
From undergrad training though, I like reading math books and working through them methodically, namely, going cover to cover (e.g. for calculus, linear algebra, introductory analysis, probability, etc.)<issue_comment>username_1: While it may be good for something, it isn't really the best way to learn anything. To learn, you need to get practice (reinforcement) and feedback. The exercises in the book will do two things for you if the book is a good one. First, they will exercise the more important ideas, giving you the practice, but also giving you an outline of the chapters. Second, the problems will point you, indirectly, to the examples, theorems, and proofs that are the most important to study.
The big idea here is that not every word in a math book has equal weight.
Trying to "memorize" the textbook is also a terrible way to prepare for exams. Find more exercises and solve them.
Your brain isn't like a thumb drive that you can pour information in to an then expect that you have "learned" it. Think of a novel that you read a year ago. How much of it do you really remember? If you read a lot, then it is unlikely that you will have retained very much about that old book. A few people can do that, but they are very rare. Chances are slim that you are one of them.
Finally, if you can't solve an exercise you know what you need to ask the professor about. Hopefully the prof will give you feedback on your work - the other essential to learning. That way you are less likely to develop misunderstandings that need to be corrected later.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The generic answer to this question is: it depends. Textbooks are written in such a way that both instructors and students can use different approaches to teach and learn the material, respectively. There is no one “right” way to use a textbook.
Professors who recommend certain approaches are likely speaking from experience and their own personal preference. It can be a good idea to follow the advice of those who are familiar with the material (because they learned it themselves at one point) and who have been tasked to teach it to students; they will likely have good suggestions.
If you personally feel that you can learn better by using a particular method (even if it is unpopular and not genetically recommended), you should use the book in that way.
The bottom line: if you are actually learning the material and are motivated to continue studying in that way, you should do that.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I would stick with the process that worked well for you before, until, you find it doesn't. As far as glancing at the problems, before. I don't think you have to--think you can use your old practice (doing the problems after). As long as you are reading the text in an engaged manner (working examples, doing skipped steps to the side, etc.) you should be fine. Of course, do the problems after.
One other answer mistakenly thinks you are talking about memorizing the text, but I don't think that was your question, just if you should pre-look at the problems. I don't think it matters that much, especially if the pre-look is reasonably fast. But in any case, there will be some recursion. Because as you work the problems, it will force you to go back and look at the text again.
P.s. Good pedagogical question. Might also be of interest on one of the math forums.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: The answer to your question depends not only on your style of learning but also on your professors and the textbooks they choose. Some professors regard the textbook as just a convenient source of homework problems or a reference for details that don't fit into the class schedule. Other professors regard the textbook as the first place you should learn the material; their lectures are not so much systematic presentations of the material as commentaries on the textbook. This difference in professors' attitudes affects not only what they do in their lectures but also which textbooks they choose for their courses. In particular, some but not all of your textbooks are likely to be appropriate for self-study. (I found that some textbooks, from which I was unable to really learn anything as a first-year Ph.D. student, were excellent references later when I needed some more detailed information about those topics.)
So I suggest you see (or ask) how your professors view the textbooks and then use the books accordingly.
Of course, if you have the time, it's never a bad idea to read more, to attack more problems, and generally to do more mathematics than your professors require. But your first priority, especially at the beginning of your Ph.D. studies, should be to learn thoroughly what your professors want you to learn.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Depends on the book. Undergraduate-level textbooks tend to be easier to read cover-to-cover. After a while books end up being less self-contained and are better as references, like encyclopedias. That suits research-level work which revolves around research papers. Encyclopedic references are not meant to be read page by page.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: I am a second year PhD student in statistics (I know, if mathematics at all it is applied maths). I like to have books around me. I consult them all the time.
Sometimes I realise that for my particular research problem I need to understand some point in complete detail, so complete that I could explain it to a first year undergraduate. In that case, for someone with my learning style, there is no alternative but to slog through every line, in detail, and do all the exercises.
But sometimes all I need to know is that at some point in my thesis I will find myself writing "it can be shown that ..." and just applying the result.
My experience so far in my PhD research is that it is not always easy at first to identify which of these two options is right. But I do know that if I chose option 1 as my default, I would not have got as far as I have with my own research. So my adivce would be: try to understand the main results first until you know which of them you will need to examine in such detail that maybe you might overturn them or add significantly to them.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: There is lots of good advice in these answers. I think it is also helpful to try a method that is in between yours and your professors' suggestions. Go ahead and read the textbook line by line, but whenever you get to a theorem or lemma, try to prove it yourself before you read the proof. This can give you a chance to test your understanding in a way where you can get immediate feedback. If you have no idea how to start the proof, read the first couple lines and then try to finish it on your own.
Of course, there will be several times that you can't do the proof on your own, and you shouldn't be discouraged by this! Trying it first will help you better understand the proof when you read it, though.
Along a similar line, whenever you read a definition, try to think of some examples and non-examples that you're familiar with already. For example, if you were reading the definition of a group for the first time, you might think about how the integers under addition are an example, but the natural numbers are a non-example.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/06/26
| 417
| 1,841
|
<issue_start>username_0: Recently, I have gone through a special issue of a journal and in the special issue, in notification to the author section, it's mentioned that
>
> Reviews returned to authors. Papers will be either accepted, rejected,
> or returned to the authors with requests for changes
>
>
>
There is only mentioned about the **revised manuscript due date** and **special issue published date**. Does that mean "returned to the authors with requests for changes" is another form of **acceptance**? or after submitting the revised document there may become a chance of the **rejection**?
Thanks in advance.<issue_comment>username_1: "Returned to authors with requests for changes" is a "revise" decision. That means the journal wants the authors to make certain changes (e.g., gather more data) before making a decision.
After a revise decision, my experience is that acceptance is the most likely final result. Certainly a paper that's returned to the authors for revision is not going to be desk rejected anymore. However, it's not a guarantee - you still have to convince the editors & reviewers to accept your paper.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As @username_1 pointed out, "returned to authors with requests for changes" is certainly a "revise decision".
However, since this is a paper submitted to a special issue, there are more time restrictions that have to be imposed. For example, if several rounds of revisions are required (you never know), the paper might not be accepted for publication by the *revised manuscript due date*. In this case, it might be advised for resubmission to a regular issue, automatically considered for publication in a regular issue, or rejected (very unlikely, if otherwise the review process went smooth and only the timing was the issue).
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/06/26
| 493
| 1,923
|
<issue_start>username_0: If you post an assignment question on a 3rd party site and get no answers about the subject matter, is it still considered cheating?<issue_comment>username_1: At my university, the answer is definitely **yes**. The rules here clearly state that even the attempt to cheat is misconduct (e.g. bringing a device that is capable of cheating to an exam is considered cheating even if it not used/touched).
(However, *if* asking a question about your assignment in some forum is cheating, depends on the rules for your course/institution. In my courses, this would not be forbidden for homework assignments, for example.)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: **Yes**. As one example of a formal policy, here is the opening definition in the [CUNY (City University of New York) Academic Integrity Policy](https://www.cuny.edu/about/administration/offices/legal-affairs/policies-resources/academic-integrity-policy/):
>
> 1.1 Cheating is the unauthorized use **or attempted use** of material, information, notes, study aids, devices or communication during an
> academic exercise.
>
>
>
Exact penalties will, of course, vary by institution, department, instructor, etc. In my courses, such a case on a homework assignment would result in a zero on the assignment, and a report to the school's Academic Integrity officer (who may lay out further penalties for repeat offenders). On an exam in one of my courses, this would now be an immediate failure of the course for the semester.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes, attempted-but-failed cheating is still unethical/immoral, though perhaps less so (?!?) than successful cheating.
Attempted-but-failed (bad thing) X is bad, but not as bad as succesful X?
Certainly attempted murder (even if unsuccessful) is a serious crime most places.
Really, how much "moral currency" do you get back by trying but failing? Sympathy points?
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/06/26
| 528
| 2,151
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've been teaching a few years now and the number of older editions of textbooks is beginning to pile up in my office. There is no policy at my university for disposal of old textbooks. These books were purchase with department funds and it troubles me to throw them away. They content is still relevant as the newer editions are not ground-breaking in material.
My questions are as follows...
1. Please share how you deal with older editions of textbooks?
2. Is there a policy at your institution (if so please share) or do you have a personal way of dealing with this problem (again please share)?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I've been teaching a few years now and the number of older editions of textbooks is beginning to pile up in my office. [The] content is still relevant as the newer editions are not ground-breaking in material.
>
>
>
Do you need the latest versions? Perhaps reduce the frequencies with which you acquire textbooks.
>
> There is no policy at my university for disposal of old textbooks.
> These books were purchase with department funds and it troubles me to
> throw them away.
>
>
>
Is there a policy for the disposal of university/departmental assets? That might be worth checking. That said, it probably doesn't apply to low value assets such as textbooks.
>
> Please share how you deal with older editions of textbooks?
>
>
>
1. Donate them to the departmental or university library;
2. Offer them to students, especially those that are struggling financially.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: At my school the custom seems to be just leaving them in a stack in the hallway next to one's office door. Anyone walking by can peruse through them and take anything they want. At some point the janitorial stuff disposes of the stack as rubbish.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: At my institution the library of the university accepts donations of books, especially if they are in decent conditions. It seems like the best possible destination for your books since it seems that your institution paid for them, and in this way you'd be "giving them back".
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/06/26
| 1,439
| 6,254
|
<issue_start>username_0: I would like to submit a part of my master's thesis which is more or less close to an end. I wrote the entire thesis without having much feedback from my advisor as he's in a different city and we had literally no chance to meet except a few times. The feedback he had provided was too little and I want to submit a part of the thesis to a conference on my own. I will give his name of course while submitting but do I have to also inform him?
If I have to, then he might not approve this as he contributed very little and still he doesn't like my research much.
What should I do according to your experiences?
1. Should I inform him and bare his negative comments about not submitting at all?
2. Or should I submit as single-author paper as I, from the beginning to the end, was only not the writer (of course it's my thesis) but also the solely contributor to this thesis? (He even said it to me as " you did very much well in fact, **on your own**", in one of our meeting.)
edit: by giving his name, I mean not as a formal authorship, rather than as a footnote, sth like that.<issue_comment>username_1: Your first priority should be to finish your degree. Without more information, I don't know whether submitting alone would jeopardize that or not, so find out first. Make sure you understand the rules at your university around theses and publication.
Also consider what is considered appropriate in your field. I assume it is economics, but I have no knowledge whether it is appropriate for a student to publish without his or her advisor. In some fields it would be fine. In others, it would be considered a transgression.
Your advisor probably knows all of this. If personalities don't suggest otherwise it would probably be best to ask him how you should submit your work to the conference and whether that would cause any difficulties.
My best guess is that he would say ok, but if not, consider what else he says in light of the first priority - completion.
At the level of a master's degree, a joint paper with your advisor still has value, so don't rule that out completely if it is the common practice of your field, or if it would help advance your cause.
But you are probably the best judge here to evaluate both the requirements of your university and the relationship with the advisor.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Under no circumstances can it be ok to submit with his name on it but without his explicit consent. This wouldnt be ok if he'd be enthusiastic about your research, and if he is not particularly fond of it, this will quite certainly end badly.
If you are confident that your advisor did not contribute to the planned submission in a meaningful way, the default course of action should be to sent him a message informing him of the planned submission and thanking him for the guidance received. That way, if he disagrees on not having contributed, there is a chance to fix stuff before they blow.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: I am based in Germany and had a similar problem recently. As it turns out, my university had a guideline which explicitly says that you are the sole author of you bachelor's / master's thesis, since everything else (e.g. co-authorship of your advisor) would be in conflict with the fact that the thesis should be an assessment of ONLY the student's capabilities. I suggest that you find out if your university has a guideline for such issues.
Having your advisor on board might have advantages later, i.e. when it comes to writing rebuttals or preparing the presentation.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: For this answer I'll assume that you already figured out that publishing your results is not a problem per se (i.e., it doesn't put your graduation in danger or conflicts with other guidelines).
You shouldn't inform your advisor - you should **talk** to him before your continue. Preferably in person (don't you have to go to his university and present the results?), if that's not possible on the phone/videochat. Tell him about your plans and listen to what he has to say. I can imagine several different reactions:
1. Maybe he wasn't providing little feedback because he didn't like your work but because there were other things consuming his time (other students to advise, restructuring of departments, private issues, whatever) and he would be happy to be your coauthor.
2. He doesn't want to be your coauthor but is okay with you submitting the work single-authored (note that this does not necessarily mean he believes your paper is good enough to be published, maybe he thinks it's the fastest way to get rid of you).
3. He doesn't want to be your coauthor and suggests you don't publish.
If he wants to be your coauthor - problem solved.
If he doesn't, I'd say your fine to proceed with single-author publication. But please seek advice from another professor/PhD/grad student - anyone experienced with publications in that field. I've seen master theses being published, but they were excellent, not just good ones, and it's certainly not a usual thing to do. Talk to an expert before you submit anywhere, seek guidance on whether your results are good enough for publication and what would be the correct venue to do so. It's little time to invest now, but a lot of time wasted if you just go ahead and get rejected.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: 1. If someone contributed significantly to your research, you should offer them the chance to be an author on the journal or conference submission. They may or may not accept. Financial contribution (research performed in someone’s research group and hence using their resources) would nearly always count as significant, and usually (depending on the field) earn them first refusal on the last-author slot. Mentorship/supervision likewise—if you couldn’t have done it without them, or at least without *someone* playing the role that they ended up playing, then that counts.
2. If someone is a co-author, you should have them at least “sign off” on the full version of the final content that you are submitting, because it is being submitted partially in their name and will reflect on them. Give them enough time to do so.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/06/26
| 1,390
| 6,214
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently reviewing an applied math paper that I don't think is great; indeed, I am hesitant to accept it even with major revisions. The language is poor, I'm not convinced by the arguments, and the numerical results are difficult to interpret based on how they are presented. However, based on other work this journal has published (in particular, other papers by the same authors), I think the quality of the journal I'm reviewing for is a bit lower than my personal standards.
Should I based my final recommendation on my own standards, or the journal's?<issue_comment>username_1: Actually, it is the editor's decision to accept or reject. Give an honest recommendation according to your best judgement.
I suggest you make your best effort to help the author(s) improve the paper. Your recommendation to the editor can be whatever you think best. But don't give it a higher rating than you think it deserves (or lower, for that matter) as that will skew the information the editor has to work with. If you think it has low quality you can certainly say that to the editor.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Just explain the strengths and weaknesses of the paper without judging, give constructive critique where possible. Also try to be concrete, e.g. say that theorem 3.5 is not obviously true as claimed, in fact you don't see how XYZ follows trivially, instead of just saying that it is not convincing.
In the end, you can give a recommendation and you could base that on the level of the journal, yes. However, the final decision is made by the editor, and for them, your observations about flaws and good points are much more important than your personal opinion (unless, of course, you are **the** most famous researcher in this area^^).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: There are many different notions of quality of a paper:
1. accessibility of the presentation,
2. soundness of the arguments and conclusions,
3. relevance of the research.
Ideally, the level of journals only differs in Point 3. Realistically, there are some differences in Point 1 as well (ironically, I find that middle-level journal score best here, but that’s a different story). However, even mega journals aspire Point 2 – and outrage ensues if they clearly fail.
I would therefore not let the level of the journal influence assessment of deficiencies with respect to soundness, i.e., if I consider a paper unsound, I recommend to reject it, no matter the level of the journal.
Also, think for a second what would happen if all reviewers would recommend to accept all papers that are better than the worst paper in the journal in question:
Due to the variability and laziness of reviewers (and the abundance of bad papers), the threshold would decrease perpetually.
Nobody wants this.
Also, irrespective of the journal’s level, I note everything I see wrong with a paper, and let the editor decide whether this is a sufficient reason for rejection. As language problems (and some other presentation issues) can be fixed by a copy editor or similar, I would not even let them influence my main recommendation, but just recommend heavy copy-editing or similar to the editor.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: One thing that would be good to know here is the exact meaning of "accept with major revisions". The emphasis may be on "accept" or on "major revisions". In many (probably most) journals I'm familiar with (I'm from statistics), a "major revision" actually means that the reviewers get the paper again and can still reject it if issues are not appropriately addressed. This is however not everywhere the case (and may in any case depend on what other reviewers think).
My understanding of the question is that there's nothing clearly wrong about the paper, and that there is a contribution with at least some originality and some use to somebody. Such papers should in my opinion be publishable somewhere, and whether the standard of the current journal is low enough is ultimately the editor's call, although you may have your opinion. However it seems that things are unclear, so that currently it cannot be appropriately evaluated whether the paper is correct and/or a contribution of some value.
Many journals offer "reject with encouragement to resubmit" as option in cases like this, in which from the current version it isn't quite clear whether or not a revised version will be publishable, whereas "major revision" in my view implies that my subjective probability that this will be OK after (maybe more than one) revision is substantially larger than 50% (in case "reject with encouragement to resubmit" is not offered I'd cut out the "substantially").
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: As a reviewer, your role is to provide sufficient information to the editor that they can make a decision about how to proceed with a manuscript (accept, accept if major amendments are made, reject). I have reviewed some manuscripts, and used many more in research. From my perspective:
1. manuscripts should have been peer reviewed prior to submission, particularly if there are multiple authors. This solves most manuscript problems.
2. language should be clear. Everyone has their own writing style. I don't suggest changes to language in a manuscript unless there are major problems in my understanding of the prose, and I therefore assume that the journal readers will have the same problem. I don't edit prose, my edit is a comment about what precisely is unclear with a request to amend the text to clarify the content. I do not know if this is what you mean by "the language is poor" or whether you mean that the person does not have English as a first language and therefore their translations into English are poor. See how clarity is good?
3. state how the arguments are unconvincing. Also, your interpretation of how the arguments are unconvincing may not be at the same standard as those of others. Sometimes this has little impact on whether the manuscript is published.
4. explain exactly how the numeric results are hard to understand. You may be the only reviewer with expertise in how those numbers should be reported.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/06/26
| 1,330
| 5,202
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was accepted to a Masters Program at EPFL 5 days ago. I am currently collecting all the necessary documentation to apply for a visa. However there is a chance it will take longer than I have to get to Switzerland (have to be there by September 30). My only idea right now is to use my passport to get to Switzerland as a tourist. Remain there until I get the visa (the 90 days are enough to guarantee that if I get approved I get the visa on time), cross the border to France, cross the border back again with the student visa.
Has anyone done something like this? Is this even legal? I tried contacting EPFL and the Swiss consulate and they were not helpful.
Additionally, EPFL wants me to sign a web form confirming or denying my attendance to the Masters program by June 30 (this weekend). They gave me essentially a week and a half to make the entire decision. Do I have any real obligation to stick to my word? If I say I want to go but it turns out I win the lottery or get into a different program afterwards I prefer and no longer feel like going to Switzerland will something happen? I.e what happens if I go back on my word (EPFL also was very unhelpful answering this question).<issue_comment>username_1: I know of international students in my research lab (in Canada, not Switzerland) that crossed the US borders and came back immediately to renew student visas. In itself, this is not illegal.
However, I don't think that you would be allowed to study in your program without a student visa, because those are usually required by the university to receive insurance coverage (for instance, if you're working in a lab). You really should ask your program director for advice on this situation. I would expect them to be understanding and guide you.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It is normal for students to get their visas late. It is an annoyance, but universities will have a process for dealing with it. The start of your degree may be delayed.
Never lie to get a visa. If you claim to be a tourist when you are really are a student, you can expect to be banned from entering every country that finds out about the lie, except for countries where you are a citizen.
If you break an agreement to enrol, usually the only consequence will be the loss of any deposit you made. If your enrolment is delayed due to visa problems, most universities will do their best to help you enrol later.
Your best course of action is to apply for the visa and then be patient.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I must highlight two important facts here:
(i) Switzerland and Swiss professionals take other people's word very seriously.
(ii) EPFL is a great institution with a thriving academic & creative environment.
Minding the two points above, I'd advise that you take this offer regardless of internal doubts and external procedures. Concerning your visa procedures, I'd recommend you to follow all steps according with the law. I wouldn't worry too much because the Swiss are usually intelligent and willing to help, so they'll see your situation eventually solve it. Once you deliver all papers in due order, giving you a visa and making you legal is *their responsibility* and they will acknowledge that (probably contrary to what you're used to in your own country).
I do not know your nationality, but in principle it is not illegal going to Switzerland as a tourist to finish dealing with your papers and EPFL administration. Just double-check carefully whether any rules apply. Whatever proves legal (in **Switzerland**, regardless of your local laws and values) carries a green light there.
Good luck! Don't miss the chance of enjoying Rolex Study centre and UNIL.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> However there is a chance it will take longer than I have to get to
> Switzerland (have to be there by September 30).
>
>
> Passeport is US.
>
>
>
I think you are worried too much. Today is June 28, so you have more than 3 months to get a Swiss visa. It's very unlikely that it will take more than 1 month.
>
> My only idea right now is to use my passport to get to Switzerland as
> a tourist. Remain there until I get the visa (the 90 days are enough
> to guarantee that if I get approved I get the visa on time), cross the
> border to France, cross the border back again with the student visa.
>
>
>
As a US citizen, you don't need a Visa to come to Switzerland as a tourist. But the university will not let you enroll or do anything without a student visa. So your trip will be useless (and Lausanne is expensive)
>
> If I say I want to go but it turns out I win the lottery or get into a
> different program afterwards I prefer and no longer feel like going to
> Switzerland will something happen? I.e what happens if I go back on my
> word (EPFL also was very unhelpful answering this question).
>
>
>
This is unethical, but there will be no direct consequence to you. You will loose your deposit (if there is any), you may be blacklisted, e.g. you might not be able to apply for a PhD at EPFL in the future should you want to. But they cannot do anything further than that.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/06/26
| 848
| 3,420
|
<issue_start>username_0: The era in which we live is full of competition, I want to know why competitive exams have taken such an important status? I have read about Mr. <NAME>, Mr. <NAME> etc. they are so famous not because of their research and contributions to Mathematics but because they cleared Olympiads at young age and selected for renowned institutes at young age. So, people like me, who are not child prodigy but have a devastating desire to do something in Mathematics, are usually left out and get depressed.
Next come to those coaching institutes who prepare students for Competitive Exams, JEE can explain it better than anything. Coaching institutes in India prepare students for JEE by making them work irrelevantly. They somehow crack the questions which IIT JEE going to give and they teach them all possible questions, thus creating unnecessary pressure. Consequently, paper-setters try even harder to make the exam as tough as possible, so as you can see we the people get thrashed out for no cause.
So, I want to know how can people like me get into higher society of Science , is it necessary for us to qualify some well known examination? Is it necessary to publish some papers which do not worth even reviewing? How can we go on after our desire and accomplish it?
To provide more illustration I'm sharing a link <https://youtu.be/HcZtBr5XlCQ>.
If I want to do research in my preferred field, is it necessary for me to follow the tricks and nonsensical teachings of coaching institutes to clear comptetitions and then get into reputed University or institute and give a rebirth to my desire which was exterminated due to travelling to get here?<issue_comment>username_1: Perhaps this article might help?
<https://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/14/world/asia/squeezed-out-in-india-students-turn-to-united-states.html>
It says that acceptance rates at top Indian universities for science and engineering are as low as 2%. That's ridiculously low for undergraduate admissions. If you want to pursue higher education but the competition is too stiff in India, maybe looking outside India could be an option.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Well, this question sounds like a rant indeed, so I hope I will be forgiven to give a quick answer based on general knowledge rather than specific research works you can dig deeper.
Many countries during certain development phases indeed go through a stage characterized by very high competition and tough exams that often define the fate of applicants. Say, in Japan it was known as "exam hell", which is probably [over now](https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2009/01/20/reference/exam-hell-now-not-so-hot/).
I believe this stage coincides with (a) growing demand for skilled workforce and (b) lack of educational institutions able to provide sufficient training. Putting it simply, there are more people willing to pursue higher education, but there are not enough universities ranked high among employers. Eventually the situation should come to a better balance, but it might take years if not decades.
The core issue for people like you, of course, is what to do about it right now. One answer is already mentioned here -- get your education elsewhere, not all countries are like that. Another answer is to find an institution that is not that competitive but still provides reasonably good education.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2019/06/26
| 1,011
| 4,332
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am planning to submit my paper to an international conference. The level of the conference might be high considering my paper and for my academic background at the moment. My paper can fit in one of the poster sessions though.
However, the scientific committee includes one academics who belongs to one of the top graduate schools in my field, which I want to apply in a few years. In case of a rejection of my paper to that conference, I do have some concerns if that academic person remembers my name, my institution etc. and hold some negative bias during my graduate application (one MPhil programme)?
Should this possibility of rejection of my paper discourage me and should not I submit my paper due to this fear?<issue_comment>username_1: The chance that a rejection would have this impact on your graduate school application is extremely low.
First, check how many members the program committee has, and realize that only 1 - 3 of them will look at your paper at all during review. Second, even if the paper is rejected, there is a chance that the person handling the paper will have forgotten about the details after a year or more. Third, even if they remember, they may not hold it against you, especially if the conference is very competitive, but rather look at the positive things you show in your application.
On the other hand, think about how **acceptance** of your paper would later on **increase** your chances of getting admitted to this graduate school! This would be something that you put in your application anyway, so there's no problem with it being forgotten, and it will make a positive impression even if that particular committee member was not the one to handle your paper. It is definitely a "risk" worth taking!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Don't worry about it. A rejection of a paper and/or poster to a conference will not change your chance to get into grad school, regardless of who is on the committee. Well, unless it was just howlingly, embarassingly, horrifyingly bad or unethical in some manner (mass plagiarism of a published work can qualify). As an example, I was told a story of a time when a professor looked at a submission that was almost a full-scale copy-paste of *that professor's own work*. That is not the sort of thing a person is liable to ever forget, because it is just so brazenly ridiculous that you can safely assume that person would not ever agree to take on such a student.
Any serious high-level academic has had so many things rejected that it can beggar belief. A professor of note is almost certain to have had more of their work rejected than you would manage to submit during a whole bachelor-to-PhD process. The only career I've encountered where you have to deal with rejection more than being an academic is sales.
So really, don't worry about the prospect of rejection, it is the norm for everyone. Focus on whether or not your work is well written, sensible, and clear. Then send it out into the world and see what happens. If it is accepted, great; if it is rejected, great, at least you gave it a shot and hopefully learned from the process, and you certainly learn a little bit about what it is like to work in research, because it is not the last bit of work you'll get shot down.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: You plan to apply to this grad school "in a few years", so let me tell you how I'd react if I were evaluating a grad school application from someone who had, a few years earlier, submitted a not-so-good paper to a conference while I was on the program committee. If I had seen the paper at the time (not very probable), and if I agreed with the committee's overall decision to reject it (probable but not certain), and if I remembered this person's name (improbable) and my opinion of that paper (50-50 chance), I'd probably think "Well, (s)he submitted a not-so-good paper a few years ago; let's see what (s)he's done since then. In particular, now that (s)he's reached the stage of applying to grad school, how does (s)he compare with other applicants?" In other words, I know that students often improve as a result of education, and that it would be stupid of me to ignore the possibility that the few years of education after your not-so-good paper might have improved you.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/06/26
| 395
| 1,885
|
<issue_start>username_0: As a PhD Candidate, I've written several successful recommendation letters for students who I've taught in my classes. Is it worthwhile to include this information on a CV, say under "Service"? I've never seen this included before on a CV, but I was hoping there might be a way for me to highlight my contributions to teaching outside of the classroom.<issue_comment>username_1: I have not seen this and wouldn't recommend it, I would not consider writing recommendation letters to be under academic "service."
If you specifically mentored particular students then it makes sense to note that mentorship, but if they were just people who took your class then writing them recommendations is just part of your teaching responsibility, it doesn't mean anything for your qualifications if your students were successful when you wrote them recommendations, those are your students' accomplishments rather than yours.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: No, you should not list letters of recommendation that you have written on your CV.
It is true that this activity requires time. When you become faculty member, you will write even more letters for students and again you will not list them on your CV. You will also (eventually) write letters of recommendation for graduate students seeking to become faculty, and for faculty peers at other universities seeking tenure or promotions. None of these activities will ever appear on your CV.
Peer review activity that does appear on your CV includes journal, conference, and proposal refereeing activity that you conduct. Of course, you never indicate specifically which works you have refereed.
One more thing: student privacy laws (at least in the US) probably would prevent you from listing student recommendation letters that you have written on your CV, even if it was otherwise a good idea.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/06/27
| 1,062
| 4,501
|
<issue_start>username_0: As part of my Toastmasters club, I am preparing a speech where I have to research a topic I am not familiar with. One suggestion is that I could interview an expert (e.g. a professor) in a field related to the topic I choose. If I do interview a professor, should I compensate the professor for his or her time? What's the protocol for this? Does the answer change depending on whether I use the interview for commercial gains or not?<issue_comment>username_1: Unless you're giving a veeeery long speech or speaking about something highly technical to a group of experts in the field, there is no need to interview a professor. What you're most likely trying to do is give a layman's introduction to a fairly broad field. By contrast, researchers are highly specialised in very narrow fields. A short speech is unlikely to get to any details that you need to speak to an expert to learn about.
You mention that you're supposed to speak about a topic you're not familiar with. That means you don't have the background knowledge about the field that makes speaking to an expert useful. You would most likely get more useful information from Wikipedia, blogs (possibly by professors) or finding an introductory textbook in the library. Asking a professor to give you an introduction to an area you're unfamiliar with (outside their teaching duties) is kind of a waste of time for them. If you want to waste their time, then you should certainly offer to pay them, or at least offer to take them out to a lunch you pay for while they talk to you.
Like @cag51 metioned in the comments, you'll probably have more luck with a grad student. We're still new enough to the whole "expert" thing to be flattered that you would ask, tend to have a bit more time than professors, and never say no to free food.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It's understandable that you don't have time to googling around, and probably asking someone who knows the topic is much more efficient. Plus, if the format of the speak you are delivering **requires** you to have an interview with an expert, then probably you should prioritize searching for someone who agree to interview rather than studying the problem yourself. In that case, when you google the topic, try adding some keywords about the site that experts most likely frequent. Probably Reddit. Asking for help there, and probably you can arrange an interview with low cost.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes, you should expect to pay him/her (the real question is how much)
=====================================================================
As with any expert whose professional services you are engaging, you should expect to pay him/her. The real questions are:
* how much; and
* whom you pay (e.g.: the professor; his/her university; an agency managing his/her speaking engagements; &c.).
If you have a limited budget and know that you cannot possibly exceed it, you should say how much you can offer at the time of writing, and hope that the professor of whom you enquire will agree to it (but ensure that it really is the maximum you can offer -- many professors have neither the time nor inclination to haggle, and will simply ignore your enquiry if the amount you offer is too little).
If you do not have a particular limit in mind, you can ask the professor for a quotation -- the amounts can vary considerably according to the professor and according to the context, so it is worth giving a brief description of the event you have in mind and your own position. Unless you are manifestly wealthy, giving such context will probably work in your favour, but do not lie (e.g.: do not say "this is a charity event" unless there really is a registered charity involved).
Once the professor expresses interest in the engagement, you should ask how/where to pay him/her. He/she may undertake external speaking engagements:
* as a freelancer (in which case you pay him/her directly);
* through his/her university (in which case you pay the university); or
* through an agency (I know several academics in literature and in music who have agents).
One final point: a professor may be subject to restrictions on the freelance/external engagements he/she can accept, especially if he/she is **not** a citizen of the country in which he/she works. If that is the case, he/she may agree to work *pro bono*, in which case you should offer to make a donation to a cause of his/her choosing.
Upvotes: -1
|
2019/06/27
| 1,014
| 4,288
|
<issue_start>username_0: Lets say I decided to write a small textbook, similar to how people have all sorts of "Learn to Program" books, but for other subjects like Calc, Chemistry, or similar. If I used examples problems, say from <https://www.math.ucdavis.edu/~kouba/ProblemsList.html>
or
<http://tutorial.math.lamar.edu/Classes/CalcI/CalcI.aspx>
(for calc, popular sites used for practice)
Would it be legal to just copy paste those problems (not the whole webpage but pick and choosing certain problems) in the book?
The reason Im asking is because Ive seen a few books like this, and always wondered if they had to come up with problems on their own, or if they pulled from a bank. Obviously lots of calc problems are similar to eachother, or the exact same, so I figure there is no copyright on any given problem, but I wasnt sure how it worked. Interested to find out!<issue_comment>username_1: In general, no. You may not republish materials found on the web unless you attend to copyright laws in your jurisdiction. These laws vary quite a lot, but for your intended purpose - inclusion in a book - you will need permission in most places.
Sometimes the original publisher will explicitly give permission on a web page, such as a Creative Commons permissive license or a statement the the material is public domain. But even a license comes with restrictions, such as, perhaps, attribution.
Sometimes the original publisher will include something like terms of service like [these from Lamar University](http://tutorial.math.lamar.edu/Terms.aspx). Your use is bound by those unless you make other arrangements with the copyright holder.
In the absence of any statement to the contrary, you should probably assume that the creator or other copyright holder "reserves all rights".
When in doubt you can and should contact the creator of any materials. Both of the links you provide actually have contact information.
In addition to copyright law, for which you can be sued, there is the question of plagiarism. It is considered unethical to claim any work created by others as if it were your own.
I'll note for the record that there are a few exceptions to copyright law, but they don't include republishing the work of others. If those problems have "value", then that value is owed to the creators.
Also, copyrights generally expire, but the terms are normally very long - something close to 100 years at this point.
---
There is one subtlety, however, that partly explains why you see the "same" questions in multiple places. Note that it is words and "expression" that is the subject of copyright, not ideas. The only "ideas" that can be protected from reuse are those covered by explicit *patent*. That is a completely different thing. There are some things, however, for which there may be only one way to properly express it in a given language.
"Integrate f(x) = sin(x)"
is one of those things. The sin function and integration are ideas with common terms. There are very few other ways to write that problem. So it will appear in that form or one closely similar to it in most calculus books. In general, the ideas are free to use.
---
Finally, you seem to be asking for legal advice and no one here can give it. In particular, no one here can give you permission to do something that is illegal to do under civil or criminal law. I am not a lawyer. My advice is conservative to help you avoid stepping into a problem that is best avoided.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In any field, there are some problems that are so basic that almost any book should include something like them. If this is the case, you do not need to cite them, even if you got the idea for including them by looking in a textbook. For example:
>
> Find ∫ x sin(x) dx.
>
>
>
But it's a bad idea to copy more complicated problems verbatim. If there is a substantial text component of the problem, then you are probably violating copyright by copying and pasting. And if you don't know the field well enough to tell the difference between basic problems and complicated problems, and you can't modify problems to avoid committing copyright violations, then you shouldn't be writing a textbook, or putting problems on your webpage.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/06/27
| 3,213
| 14,246
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a second year mathematics PhD student (Austria) in computational geometry, although I have obtained my Master's in algebra. However, I have the impression that I must have done my stuff severely wrong since I started my PhD.
I haven't published anything so far, or developed to an extend that deservers being published. I have certainly learned less than in any semester of my studies. I waste a lot of time because I either have no idea what to work, or, if I occasionally find something I could try, I have no ideas how to work on that problem. This is particularly surprising to me because I had been used to working very efficiently during my studies, not to wasting tome, to knowing what I do, which material I want to understand, whom to talk to if I struggle etc.
My supervisor (halftime of is tenure track, no gradudated PhD student until now) doesn't care very much. His style of "guidance" has been very hands-off from the very first day; according to him, doing a PhD is about becoming an independent researcher, so I should not expect anyone telling me what to work on, which attempts to try, or anyone explaining me particular mathematical topics. Probably, this is due to his background being in geometry. He has accepted me as his student because I am supposed to work on algebraic problems arising from his fields of interest. I wasn't aware that this means that I am supposed to cover knowledge he does not have.
**Questions.**
* How do I succeed in a PhD without relying on anyone else to ask for explanations/problems/advice…?
* How do I find promising problems, acquire the relevent knowledge and eventually solve them on my own?
* How can I spot and learn relevant things in self-study as fast as I did when taking lectures during my studies?
* How do I get rid of my imaginary need for exchange with experienced researchers fellow students?<issue_comment>username_1: During my time in grad school I found it quite essential to work on something closely related to what my adviser has written paper(s) on. This is because if I had worked on something quite far off from my adviser's expertise, I would not have had the resources to work on the problem. Also other people might be thinking about a problem that you stumble upon on your own.
Independent could mean that you don't have a boss saying exactly what to think about and when. But an adviser can still suggest a toy problem to work on, which the adviser can solve if he/she thought long enough. Such a result would probably not be a significant result, but it would be something, and you would be able to put it on the arXiv. Then with your new knowledge you can continue to other problems now that you have more experience. So, small steps. Even with such a problem there will be a significant gap between what you know, and what you need to know to solve the problem. Then you can ask your adviser what books or articles he/she recommends to learn some topic.
Being an independent researcher does *not* mean that you are not allowed to get help. Actually, the more help you can get, the more efficient you will be. Ultimately reading papers is one way to get help. If you can't ask people for help, then why would you be able to consult expository books? You are not asking people to do the problem for you.
The thing about finding your own problem...it can be great if you do find one that is
-interesting,
-non-trivial,
-that nobody else is thinking about, and
* is doable in the time you have.
But it is unlikely that a beginner in the field will be able to find a good problem by oneself. In fact, many papers are written in which the acknowledgments say, "We thank (blah) for suggesting this problem." And these are papers written by well-established mathematicians.
Let me be clear: you are *supposed* to seek help. Talk to your grad student friends. Talk to postdocs and faculty. It helps to have a small team of experts. Mathoverflow exists for a good reason. This is important especially because there are "well-known" facts that the experts know but are hard-to-find or not even stated in the literature. Example: that the poles of Eisenstein series are given by their constant terms.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I had a similar experience to yours, I did my PhD with a junior faculty, I was her first PhD student and she hired me to work on something she wasn't particularly interested on, while she was looking for funds to work on her passion project. She was not hand off, by any means, and she was always meeting with me, discussing the project, giving me ideas, etc, but she gave me a lot of freedom to do what I wanted.
I must admit that's difficult and you see friends that get plugged into a lab that has projects ready to go, years of expertise and accumulated information, and they basically start getting into publications very early. It does require a lot of self discipline, because the research must be interesting to you, and you alone should have the drive to move forward. This is true for any PhD, but in your case, you usually don't have the support people in more established labs have. In my case, as my advisor built her program and recruited for her project, there was a postdoc, couple of students, meanwhile I continued to be the only student working on the other project.
I finished my PhD and I must admit I owed a lot to my advisor pushing the right buttons. I do appreciate she trusted me to come up with a project myself, I learned a lot about thinking globally about projects, because you usually think about experiments in a piecemeal fashion, and that's not always the best way to do things. And I understand where you're coming from, as people here has commented, what that entails is that you have to create the group yourself. Talk to other people working on similar problems, engage a lot. The support will come from somewhere else, and use your advisor wisely.
Good luck with this, I know it's difficult, especially if you're not the self-starter kind of person, but you'd learn way more about academia than someone that just gets plugged into a massive lab, gets a project from upstairs and that's it.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: While supervision styles differ, a good supervisor will adapt their style to the needs of the student. Some (very very few) students in mathematics come out of their masters fully independent, full of ideas what to work on, able to find their own literature and not relying on their supervisor knowing more than they do. Most students have to reach that point *in the course of their Ph.D. studies*. An important difference between Ph.D. student and postdoc is that *you should not be expected to fill your supervisor's expertise gaps*.
My main piece of advise: **I would recommend you that you escalate your concerns higher in the departmental hierarchy.** You are saying that your supervisor has not yet supervised any students to graduation. That means that whatever their views and expectations are, and whatever legitimate variance in those views there may be among academics, your supervisor does not really have much of a right to have high confidence in their views, and must be open to mentoring. It is the department's responsibility to ensure that adequate mentoring to your supervisor and safety nets are in place. In many departments I know, there would be an obligatory co-supervisor assigned to you. In any case, just like it is your supervisor's responsibility to help you gain the skills you need to become an independent researcher and get a Ph.D. degree, so it is the department's responsibility to help your supervisor become an effective supervisor. Neither is a set of skills that anybody is born with.
There is a lot of advice out there on how to become an independent researcher (specifically in mathematics), how to find good problems to work on, how to learn to absorb new literature quickly, etc. Some searching will get you lots of reading. But nevertheless, I maintain that throwing people in at the deep end when they cannot swim, while it sounds romantic and may sometimes work, will regularly lead to avoidable deaths. Insist that your advisor is only permitted to do that if they know what they are doing, and if they secretly have a safety buoy up their sleeve.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: There are two sides to this; I believe that indeed you should have more supervision than you have, and that your supervisor doesn't give you remotely as much help as you deserve and should have a right to receive. On the other hand you may be right about not yet being independent enough and that there's some skill set that you need to learn.
There is a huge variety of supervision styles and supervisor behaviour and your supervisor is certainly far on the "hands off and rely on student's independence" side of things. There are supervisors who support their students *much* more, however your supervisor is by far not alone with his interpretation of his role. Unfortunately, for many PhD students this will not work (you are absolutely not alone with this problem).
"According to him, doing a PhD is about becoming an independent researcher" - that's fair enough, but surely it's not about being an independent researcher already, which he apparently expects you to be! A good responsible PhD supervisor should *lead* their students into such a position rather than assuming that the students get there on their own!
Not sure to what extent you already tried to get more help out of your supervisor. Surely "independence" also means that if your supervisor tells you "leave me alone and find your own problem" you shouldn't necessarily just say "Yes, supervisor!" Being "independent" as a researcher doesn't mean not to talk to anyone, not to admit where you are struggling, and not to ask anyone for help!
Maybe you can "milk" your supervisor better by telling him that and in what way you are struggling, and to ask him to talk more with you about the research he is doing and how a problem could be found for you that he is actually interested in and that may help his work somehow. Try to get out of him as much as you can, and if that means not accepting his initial idea about supervision, so be it. Also try to connect things that you already know to what he says. What do you like in mathematics, in algebra or elsewhere? What kind of problem do you like to work on (for a moment ignoring whether that would fulfill requirements for a PhD)? Can you somehow make a connection between this and what your supervisor is interested in? (You can also ask him whether he sees a connection.) There are by the way textbooks that have exercises that in fact are research problems in disguise, so looking at textbook exercises in the area might help.
Once you have a problem, obviously the first step is to look for literature and to find out how other people solved similar problems, and whatever you can find is connected.
In case you don't manage to get more out of your supervisor, I agree with another posting that you should contact somebody else in the department. Isn't there a person such as a PhD tutor to which PhD students can go with issues? Somebody more senior you trust? Student representatives? Ultimately the department should make sure you get enough supervision, and there should also be some point to go to for students who have problems.
The side of your own attitude is somewhat difficult to assess. Let's say I'm somewhat surprised that it only dawns on you 1+ year into your PhD programme that you have no idea what to work on. Would it be like this even in algebra or the area of math you are most familiar with/like most? Have you done a Masters project or something like that? How was it? Have you ever worked on a problem, even a set exercise or something, that made you wonder about whether something more can be done there than you were asked for, or where you even had an idea what else to ask or what else to do connected to the problem? You surely need some proper curiosity and drive for doing a math PhD. The problem of matching your interests with the supervisor better can in all likelihood be solved, as can the problem of generating suitable problems "between" your interest and the supervisor's. If your supervisor is not the best person for helping you in that respect, talk to others. However, if you don't *have* a genuine interest for research and some curiosity and drive, your position isn't that good.
I think in your position, without supervisor help, I'd have grabbed a sufficiently sophisticated textbook about something somewhat related to computational geometry and something that seems interesting to me, and would've started to work through the book, trying to understand more or less everything, do some exercises, with particular awareness for any hint what could be a direction for my own research.
Last remark about "waste of time" - it's an experience, and many PhD stories involve being stuck and feeling that it's not going forward for quite some time. If you manage to dig yourself out of such a hole, you will feel the success and with hindsight will probably think that this phase was a valuable part of the experience. Don't forget that as long as you're studying just the stuff others tell you about and solve the exercises they have solved already, you may learn, but you don't push science forward. If after three years you have spent half the time in a hole trying to find your way out, and half the time doing something that is really your own project, this is quite a bit more productive than learning stuff that was spoonfed to you and passing exams on it, be it with flying colours. Many PhD projects, particularly in math, don't lead to published papers in the first two years. When I got my PhD after 3 1/2 years or so, I only had a paper on some earlier work from my Masters project; it took almost a year more to get something from my PhD out - this was the old days when there was less pressure to publish though, but really still it can pay out to take time to try to get into things in some depth rather than going for anything that could be publishable on the quick.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/06/28
| 1,743
| 7,281
|
<issue_start>username_0: I notice that, quite often, exams have a rule similar to this:
>
> You may not leave the exam theater during the first ten minutes and last ten minutes of the exam.
>
>
>
I'm wondering what the purpose of this rule is. In the first ten minutes presumably nobody would have finished the exam, but I don't see why that should stop anyone from leaving. As for the last ten minutes, if I had to guess, it's to prevent an "arms race" where examinees race to leave before everyone else so they can avoid the traffic jam at the end of the exam. However this hardly seems like a deal-breaker. There're also exams where nobody can leave the exam theater until the exam is over, and usually the end of those exams aren't a complete mess: examinees just wait until scripts are collected and then leave. Besides, having this rule just pushes the "arms race" to ten minutes before the official end.
What is the point of this rule?<issue_comment>username_1: Well the 10 minutes at the beginning is to allow some to arrive late without the possibility of collusion.
Where I work, it is 15 minutes at the beginning just for any who are late...
The 10 minutes at the end is probably to allow those rushing to finish a quieter time to concentrate - most students leaving manage to make noise - chairs scraping etc
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The 10 mins at the beginning is possibly to prevent cheating - an examinee sees the paper, leaves the room and phones it to friends who have arranged to arrive late. Or am I being cynical?
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: When you forbid students from leaving early, this is usually a trade-off between the total disturbance caused by leaving and the discomfort caused to the student.
To summarise:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/lhyJN.png)
* Without that rule, far more students would leave early, because the vast majority of students actually uses most of the time.
Most of the students who leave in the last ten minutes without the rule leave because the few remaining minutes do not allow to reasonably start a new task or revise anything – not because they finished everything.
These students would not want to leave earlier with the rule in place.
* A single student can easily leave in an orderly, quiet fashion.
Multiple students can’t.
They are going to be in each other’s way, will accidentally talk to each other, etc.
In the last ten minutes you are very likely to have such an accumulation.
* In most exams I attended or proctored, we used the following rule: If you want to leave early, you raise your hand, a proctor collects your exam, and then you leave quietly (to reduce the disturbance).
However, if you stay until the end, everybody stays at their desk and the proctors go round to collect the exams and then everybody is free to leave (because the number of proctors is limited, and to avoid last-minute cheating).
Obviously this only works with a forced separation of the two phases.
* In the beginning, you will have some people arriving late, whom you do not want to confuse with the people leaving very early.
* The first ten minutes establish the behaviour for the rest of the exam.
Therefore you want to avoid disturbances as much as possible.
(Thanks to [O.R. Mapper](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14017/o-r-mapper) for pointing this out).)
* In some systems, there are always some students who just take a look at the exam and then immediately leave due to being discouraged or because they just want to know the tasks.
If the students at least have to wait for ten minutes, they usually have nothing better to do than to actually look at the exam, and thus get an idea of what the tasks are like, be it to better prepare for the repeat exam or to think twice before impulsively making a bad decision.
If they still want to leave after that, there is probably no helping it anyway.
Moreover, those who do leave tend to spread their departures a bit (unless you publicly announce that the ten minutes have passed).
* If something is horribly wrong with the exam, there is a good chance that it will be found in the first ten minutes; the professor or proctors can then take immediate action.
In some systems, it may be helpful to ensure that all participants are present for this, to avoid somebody complaining of unfairness later (“If I had known about the correction, I would not have left early.”).
So, to summarise, the ten-minute rule avoids of the trouble caused by early leavers, without causing too much discomfort to those having to wait.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_4: I find that having students leaving near the end
* is disturbing to students trying to finish the exam
* creates an environment where distractions make proctoring and monitoring for cheating difficult.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: In general, start and end are crucial moments.
The beginning is when explanations are given and questions answered, papers distributed, seats assigned, presence taken.
Conversely, the end is where paper are collected, some anti-cheating mechanism might take place (e.g. leave the document on your desk).
You would like these moments to be quiet so that all tasks can be performed with ease.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Where I work students are required to sit for at least one hour when taking a final exam (which cannot be less than 2hrs in length). Students cannot enter the exam room 30 minutes after the start of the examination. They also cannot leave in the last 15 minutes: if they are done within this last quarter hour, they must remain at their seat and examination copies. will be picked up while they are seated.
This serves multiple purposes.
First, it give the instructor/invigilators time to verify that the students sitting at the exam are actually students in the course, so that "phantom students" cannot leave the examination room with a copy of the final exam for whatever ulterior motives. It is not possible for one student to get an exam copy, leave the room immediately, and give the copy to another student before he/she enters the room.
Next, it avoids situations where a swarm of students "rush" the instructor or invigilator at the end of the exam period and makes it easier for the instructor or invigilator to verify that each student leaving the room has submitted an examination copy; it avoids increased noise levels in the examination room or adjacent corridors in the last minutes of the exam for those students needing concentration to finish their test.
Overall, my experience is that this policy has decreased the number of "blank copies": students show up and immediately give up. When you are forced to stay at least one hour, you are more likely to attempt some questions than just draw tanks rolling uphill.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: To add to the other answers: Students who finish the exam early enjoyed a quiet and disturbance-free room. The other students deserve to finish the exam under the same conditions.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: So that they don't loose concentration, to avoid them using unorthodox means to pass the exam, Some may run away if the exam is complex
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/06/28
| 909
| 3,632
|
<issue_start>username_0: The altmetric score is a summary of the online attention a publication has received. More tweets, hits and chatter makes a bigger score. But what does the popularity contest mean?
I've heard of researchers being officially judged by their Research Gate scores, but this one is new to me.
Have you ever tried to boost your altmetric score? Is it as easy as just posting a [link](https://www.liberquarterly.eu/article/10.18352/lq.10289/)? <http://dx.doi.org/10.18352/lq.10289> Here's my two cents to help with the experiment.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Like any metric, there’s a potential for gaming of altmetrics:
> Anyone with enough time on their hands can artificially inflate the
> altmetrics for their research. That’s why altmetrics providers like
> Altmetric, PLOS and SSRN have measures in place to identify and correct for
> gaming. Don’t forget to look at the underlying qualitative data to see who
> has been talking about the research, and what they’ve been saying.
>
>
>
I conclude it is very easy to game the score. Gaming is also easy to detect. Gaming altmetrics is neither ethical nor useful.
<https://www.altmetric.com/about-altmetrics/what-are-altmetrics/>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I do not see the point of *gaming* one's paper Altmetric score, although I certainly see the point of **boosting** a paper Altmetric score. Sure: both mean increasing this number on purpose, but it is the purpose which is ultimately different.
To the best of knowledge the Altmetric score in itself has no official nor institutional value. My colleagues are next to ignorant about the altmetric counts of papers they published, what to say that they read. What's more, when you understand the details behind altmetric scoring, you'll be logically unable to take it as a measure for paper quality.
Altmetric scores measure the online visibility of a given paper. It works as a thermometer for the chance that anyone at random will get exposed to a given paper. More remotely, that paper's potential of being cited in the short- medium-term. Therefore, I do see some value in boosting a paper's altmetric score, and I am pretty sure that are a lot of researchers actively doing it.
Your altmetric score goes up immediately as you successfully promote and divulge your papers online. This is something that many researchers have been doing naturally, for different reasons, and surely even more nowadays, encouraged by seeing their scores going up dressed in fancy colours.
I would call it gaming altmetric score. I'd say that altmetric has benefitted science communicators via **gamification**.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: You can do things like tweet about your paper, and you should. It will increase your altmetrics score, but not as much as dozens of people RTing your tweet because they thought your paper rocked.
I suggested initially that you might be able to make a bot that tweets about your paper 5 times a minute, but people would likely pick up on that and it could be bad for your reputation in your field. @username_2 says in a comment that won't work, but seeing how Altmetrics is impacted by my twitter discussions of my papers I think it isn't just once per account if it's different days and different text, so I still suspect you could hack something up, but I still wouldn't advise it.
The bottom line is that many of the things you could do to "hack" Altmetrics would actually be promoting your research which is what people want you to do in the first place. There's no point to doing work no one reads.
Upvotes: 1 [selected_answer]
|
2019/06/28
| 875
| 3,600
|
<issue_start>username_0: Recently, I have completed my PhD in Biomedical Engineering from a 25 - 30th ranked USA university and got a Post-doc offer from a 9-12th ranked USA University. To keep me, my PhD advisor offered me a non-tenured tracked Research assistant professor (RSP) position with 1.5 times of offered Post-doc salary. I will be funded through my advisor grant and need to conduct research related to the funded project. However, I will also have the independence to pursue my research interest and apply for external funding. I have a very good relationship with my PhD advisor and good publications in my PhD. Eventually, I want to get a tenure-tracked faculty position. What is best for me “stay in my current university as an RSP ” or “ get the post-doc position in the more reputed university”?<issue_comment>username_1: I think you need to think about what that post-doc position can really offer you. Going from a 25th-30th University to a 9th-12th University isn't *that* significant, since the precision of ranking schools is iffy, at best. Therefore, think about what opportunities the post-doc will offer you: exciting research? Connections/contacts? Does the PI have a solid track record of post-docs getting tenure-track positions? On the other hand, being a non-tenure track research professor may be the better option if you think you can get enough data to apply for a grant. The bump in income is nice, too, especially given the high cost of education in the USA. I'm guessing you probably don't have student loans from grad school, but what about undergrad?
tl;dr- Post-doc:may lead to tenure-track job, possibly better contacts? Research asst prof: may lead to tenure-track job, but with better interim salary.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Depends:
* Scientifically you will advance more if you change the lab (also
grant proposal reviewers, hiring panels etc will pick on this if you
don't change lab after PhD)
* Position-wise it might be better if you stay with your former
supervisor (if he is influential and might be able to get you a
tenure-track position at the same department eventually)
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Similar to above answers, what do you really want from a post-doc? It should be a learning experience to get to a more senior academic position. University rankings is not everything (though I know the US thinks strongly of this). I think it is also important to consider the lab, what they offer, or their reputation. Many top famous professors do not work in the absolute top universities.
Your current advisor is offering you quite a good opportunity with high independence and applications to funding, both important and good to show you can do if applying for a higher position in future. This is in addition to the benefits you mention of higher salary and good relationship.
I would only consider moving if you think the new lab can offer you ideas intellectually that may allow you to develop something you are interested in, in future.
PS - on a personal note, I declined a position at MIT for a global top 40 university, as I was interested in the professor, rather than the institution. So my suggestion is partially based on my own experience.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: All I can say is it is not easy to meet a mentor who has both the faith in OP, the project that led to a successful bargaining position of OP and capacity to offer what he/she did for OP. I know the publication proves the capacity, but next lab performance... past is no reference point, based on my experience.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/06/28
| 1,081
| 4,716
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD candidate in the very early process of writing my dissertation, and I'm presenting my first chapter at an international humanities conference soon. I received an email from the managing editor of a well known University Press that was impressed by my topic and wants to meet to discuss possibilities. **How common is this?**
Is it quite common for University Presses to solicit meetings with PhD students? Or is this a rare opportunity? His interest was so unexpected (because I always assumed you approached editors if you wanted to publish) that I'm not sure if this is a promising opportunity.
**So how often do managing editors of University Presses solicit authors that are ABD?**<issue_comment>username_1: I'll note that the question was changed (not by the OP) to focus on books. I'll answer that first.
I think it is unlikely that publishers, often represented by senior (acquisitions) editors, to solicit books from students, but very common for them to talk to professors about book ideas. In some cases, the professors might send them to students who have some interesting work. Some of my books were solicited, but I'd established a reputation by then.
Book chapters are a bit different. Beware that some predatory publishers are on the prowl among the unsophisticated to get materials for less-than-reputable publications, but really good publishers will do this also.
In my opinion (note: *opinion*), the best such books have been suggested by some senior researcher who has some, but not enough, material for a book and has convinced a good publisher to help put it together, perhaps by going on the prowl for submissions. But here, the senior researcher, not just an editor has some control over the book, which should guarantee both success and quality. In such a book, the sponsoring professor or researcher will probably write the introduction and have one or more of the major contributions. The contributions may all be recent or the intent may be to bring an historical consolidation of some topic.
Other meetings of publishers and doctoral students are more likely to be just informational, with no commitments being made. The publisher is saying "We Exist - consider us for your next paper". The discussions will be informational in nature, mostly: This is what we want to print (or not). But you wouldn't' get any commitment to publish even a completed paper at a conference if the journal has any credibility. The paper will still need to be reviewed by subject matter experts with an eye to improvement.
That said, it is good to establish such relationships with journals, even if they are very tentative.
Upvotes: -1 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I interned at a university press, and it was common to go through conference programs and identify interesting topics/papers written by PhD candidates/early-career scholars. It sounds like it's a little early in the process for you, but it is definitely worth taking the meeting.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: This isn't common. It's common knowledge in publishing that for books to sell well, the authority of the author is of huge importance, and as a PhD student you're not likely to be an authoritative author.
My guess is that the acquisition editor is either unaware that you don't have a PhD, or (rather less likely) is making contact with you so that when you become an authoritative author in the future, you'll keep them in mind.
Having said that, there's no drawback for you to go ahead and meet them. If they are indeed aware that you don't have a PhD, but are willing to collaborate with you anyway, so much the better for you.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: In the humanities this happens all the time especially if you have a well known supervisor or are at a good program. While top presses try and entice senior academics to write a book for them, they want first crack at the book that comes out of a humanities thesis. They know you are motivated to write the dissertation whereas a tenure professor is likely going to be flakey and also want some money. Spending 15 minutes and a couple of emails networking with a student is totally worth the editors time.
Being approached doesn't mean much. It most definitely isn't a contract. It means your book is probably on topic for them. It means when you have a sample chapter written (or a book proposal), they will read it. At that point they might either blow you off, give you feedback of how to make it more appealing to them, or tell you to send them the book when it is done. Even if they eventually ask you to send them the book, that doesn't mean much and is not a contract.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/06/28
| 1,195
| 5,062
|
<issue_start>username_0: Since a short time ago, I refuse to try solving math questions of which there is no solution available, unless I'm working on an own/open problem in my thesis. In subjects however, I refuse, because it is frustrating to get stuck for days and knowing that a solution exists. So knowing that I miss some important way of thinking.
Now you might think Why? If you can't solve it, just look at the course material and if that doesn't help then ask the teacher. Yes I tried that. By both mouth and mail. Unfortunately a lot of them don't like to get disturbed by students, because they are actually not real teachers, but very busy researchers who hardly have time for anything else. I also tried google, mathstack and asking students, but without a solution book it seems like it is always possible that nothing helps and you thus stay where you are: stuck.
Having said this, is there a way to learn without solution books but with the guarantee that you can always get access to the solution for the problem you work on? Maybe I do something wrong with the ways already tried?<issue_comment>username_1: Actually, you will learn more without the hints provided by a solution, provided that you can find a way to get some feedback on your attempts. Perhaps your professor or someone else can provide that.
But you should investigate the [Moore Method](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore_method) of teaching mathematics, created by <NAME> and used by some of his successors. It is, roughly, a discovery method of learning higher math with few hints (hmmm, no hints). Some of Moore's students have become outstanding mathematicians and educators.
The method sounds a bit brutal, of course.
However, if you are in a graduate program, you need to understand that being able to re-prove things that are already known is a lower level skill than *true* mathematics. Even being able to prove things never proven before, but having been given a good statement of the problem requires only a lower level of insight. But you have to achieve at least that before you can reach the highest level of insight - having a good idea of what *might* be proven and thus worthy of exploration.
I suggest you press on. But also that you find some way to get feedback. If you go wrong somewhere it is good to know where and why so that you don't develop misconceptions.
However, to avoid frustration, it is also useful to put hard problems aside for a while as you work on other things - or even just take a break. Trying to run your brain on "nitro" all the time leads to burn out and poor results. Give yourself a break in general, and specifically a break from any problem that is eluding you at the moment. Insight will likely come, but it can't be scheduled or forced.
---
For what it's worth, I don't think I had the "higher levels" of insight into mathematics until I'd completed by doctorate.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> frustrating to get stuck for days and knowing that a solution exists.
> So knowing that I miss some important way of thinking.
>
>
>
So your solution to missing some important way of thinking is ... to not think at all?
If you try hard to solve a problem, you *are* learning. You learn what doesn't work and why. That's a valuable lesson, and it's how you get better. In fact, I'd venture to say if it takes you 4 days to solve a problem, then even if you don't end up solving it, you probably learned more than the person who solved it in 1 hour.
In mathematics, knowing the exact solution of some made-up problem usually isn't the key. After all, the exercise question *tells* you the conclusion of the solution. You already know the result from the onset. You just have to prove it, and it is the things you learn from proving it that are important, and that's my point: even if you don't manage to prove it, you still did worked with the details and learned similar concepts to the person who did manage to prove it. You just learned it slighty differently, e.g. somebody who proved it learned "okay, this technique works in this case", while you learned "okay, this technique doesn't work in this case". Both are equally valuable.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: You should find someone who is willing to spend enough time helping you get unstuck. The generic answer is: asking classmates, asking professors, asking on MathStackexchange and MathOverflow. Of course when you ask a question you should have thought about what you really don't understand. Do you know the definitions? Are there similar examples in the book? Can you ask a simpler question that you don't know the answer to? If you spend some time with your book and you're not making progress then you should ask for help if there's no solutions manual.
>
> is there a way to learn without solution books but with the guarantee that you can always get access to the solution for the problem you work on?
>
>
>
No. Ask people for help and hope that things will get resolved.
Upvotes: 1 [selected_answer]
|
2019/06/28
| 640
| 2,680
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have enough work done for my PhD dissertation, but I also have one on-going project which I don't plan to include it in my dissertation. My advisor suggests that I have to finish all the work before I graduate. Is it so?
My advisor doesn't currently have funding and I am not being paid now. He also wants me to share my codes with him and other students, should I do so? I don't quite want to share my work because 1) I was not be paid; 2) I wrote the codes totally on own and didn't receive any technical helps from my advisor (my advisor is a good story-teller, but he barely knows anything concerning technologies). Am I thinking correctly?<issue_comment>username_1: Well, no and yes. In general, it is good to carry away a lot of unfinished projects so that you don't need to start your career with a clean slate. Having a notebook full of research ideas is a big advantage.
But, and this may be the overriding concern, you probably need to do what your advisor requires. It may not be a good career move to push back too hard on such things.
But maybe you can find a middle ground. If there were things s/he has long expected you to complete you would probably be wise to make that happen.
As to the code, it is hard to say. If your project is part of a larger, multi-person, continuing project then the code may well belong to the project. Otherwise you may need to do some negotiating. You will want, at least, recognition, acknowledgement for any future use as well as to guarantee that you may use it for other things.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: I recommend trying to go ahead and get the Ph.D. and giving vague assuarances of taking care of the other project. After you have the union card in your hand, your negotiating position is much stronger and you can decide how to play it. Prior to it, your advisor can and it sounds like is extorting things that are not a part of getting the degree.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: If you are not being paid, you should not be spending your time on a PhD. You should tell your advisor you are not able to continue without financial support.
It is your advisor's job to recommend what you should include in your thesis. Nobody who has not read your work will be able to advise you on this.
You want to keep the code you have written secret. To determine if you can do this, you need to consult your university's intellectual property policy. Very likely the policy says the university owns the rights to all your work, in which case you should hand it over. In any case, keeping secrets when secrecy is not an ethical requirement is poor scientific practice.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/06/28
| 667
| 2,824
|
<issue_start>username_0: How to prepare for a meeting/discussion with a major University Press editor when they solicited/sought you out on short notice (4 days)? Because I didn't solicit them, I don't have a full manuscript -- just my conference paper, abstract, and general research ideas. What is expected in these impromptu meetings solicited by University Press editors? **What should I bring to the meeting? Do they expect me to become prepared with a pitch and write a book proposal overnight? Or do I simply bring an abstract and a CV?**
I would like to make the most of this opportunity, but I was solicited out of the blue during a conference and feel so unprepared. I don't want to blow an opportunity or ruin future prospects, but I have **no idea what to expect.** *Are they meant to be low-key casual?*<issue_comment>username_1: Well, no and yes. In general, it is good to carry away a lot of unfinished projects so that you don't need to start your career with a clean slate. Having a notebook full of research ideas is a big advantage.
But, and this may be the overriding concern, you probably need to do what your advisor requires. It may not be a good career move to push back too hard on such things.
But maybe you can find a middle ground. If there were things s/he has long expected you to complete you would probably be wise to make that happen.
As to the code, it is hard to say. If your project is part of a larger, multi-person, continuing project then the code may well belong to the project. Otherwise you may need to do some negotiating. You will want, at least, recognition, acknowledgement for any future use as well as to guarantee that you may use it for other things.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: I recommend trying to go ahead and get the Ph.D. and giving vague assuarances of taking care of the other project. After you have the union card in your hand, your negotiating position is much stronger and you can decide how to play it. Prior to it, your advisor can and it sounds like is extorting things that are not a part of getting the degree.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: If you are not being paid, you should not be spending your time on a PhD. You should tell your advisor you are not able to continue without financial support.
It is your advisor's job to recommend what you should include in your thesis. Nobody who has not read your work will be able to advise you on this.
You want to keep the code you have written secret. To determine if you can do this, you need to consult your university's intellectual property policy. Very likely the policy says the university owns the rights to all your work, in which case you should hand it over. In any case, keeping secrets when secrecy is not an ethical requirement is poor scientific practice.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/06/28
| 274
| 1,180
|
<issue_start>username_0: Assume I am submitting my paper to Journal X, which rejected the paper. After making modifications I am going to submit the paper to Journal X again. At the same time can I also submit the paper to another Journal Y (which has a lower impact factor than Journal X). As the Journal X has rejected it the first time, I think it may be rejected again. So I want to publish my work anyhow in a journal.<issue_comment>username_1: No, not the same paper in two journals at the same time.
Either submit to X again or submit to Y.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: No.
---
You must not submit to more than one journal at a time. Most journals explicitly forbid this in their policies. The reason is that people agree to spend a significant amount of time reviewing your paper essentially as a favour and their effort is completely wasted if you then say, "Thanks but my paper was accepted somewhere else."
You must decide now whether to resubmit to the same journal or to try for a less prestigious one. Since you're asking the question, I assume you're a student: discuss this with your advisor! That's what they're there for.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2019/06/28
| 851
| 3,514
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a social scientist about to finish my PhD program, and I'm hoping that I will get an academic job that will enable me to PI my own studies. However, I think there is a chance that this will not happen. I love doing research, so I'm wondering - is there a way I can affiliate with a university so that I can use its IRB and do (self-funded) research part-time?
I was thinking I might try to find a job that pays well and then do it just 4 days per week so that I can have the 5th day to myself to do research. I am in the U.S.
Please also feel free to suggest tags in the comments so that I can get this post seen by the right people.
Thank you!<issue_comment>username_1: I will guess that this will be difficult to do in your early career. Universities have a lot of rules and a lot of lawyers worried about liability and such. If you teach part time, perhaps in the evening, then it would be a different situation. The pay is terrible, but it does establish the relationship you need.
But note that the IRB process isn't limited to universities. There are companies who are qualified to do it for a fee.
Anyone can do research and anyone can submit to conferences and journals. It is a way to build up your credentials. You don't need academic affiliation to do, or publish, research. Finding collaborators is a bit harder, but you can manage that as well, perhaps just by visiting a local institution and opening a dialog. Perhaps you would be permitted to join a research seminar or such. And joint publication with someone affiliated avoids some of the complications.
But, as you know, the best path is to get an academic job if it otherwise appeals to you.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: **Yes, by continuing to collaborate with your PhD advisor, you could continue to do self-funded research part-time**
If an academic job doesn't materialize, but a private one does, you could arrange to continue to collaborate with your advisor on that 5th day of the week.
If what you want to do closely matches with your advisor's needs, you might even be able to negotiate a part-time post-doc position. Besides the 1-day aspect, this is very similar to what sometimes happens to recent PhD graduates during the summer after graduation. They continue to work with their advisors until they start a post-doc or some other job.
If your interests are further away, you could try to arrange to be a lab 'volunteer' and use that time to develop a grant application or collect preliminary data (as long as your advisor consents). In such scenario, you would need to talk to your advisor about the IRB process to collect the preliminary data. If there are any costs or you need equipment, you could offer to pay for them out of pocket (using the money you earned from your private sector job), and work out the details of what would happen to the equipment when/if you left.
From the advisor's perspective, you would be a 1-day-a-week, low-risk (they know you), post-doc-level research associate that provides their own equipment and funding. If you offered authorship on any resulting papers and helped with grant applications, there is very little risk to the advisor.
You could continue to do this until one of the grant applications go through and you can make enough money to quit your private sector job.
If you get a grant that allows transfers to other institutions, then your prospects of getting a full-time academic research job become much better.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/06/28
| 967
| 4,220
|
<issue_start>username_0: I wonder in some good journals, there are articles that are quite short. Maximum 10 pages. How come such papers, with quite a short introduction with a brief lit-rewiew, are published? They are because of the quality, to do point conclusion and precise findings?<issue_comment>username_1: In mathematics and, perhaps, some other fields, a paper doesn't need to be very long to be significant. This is because it is directed at other mathematicians who understand generally what is going on, and already understand the methodology.
It might only take a few sentences and a couple of references to place the new work in context. It might only take a few sentences to point out the significance. Normally the statements of theorems are pretty short. The proofs can be long or short, but mathematicians prefer shorter proofs. In addition, if the audience is already skilled at this, the gaps between stated steps in the proof can be pretty large, though some proofs fail for this reason. But if you expect that the intended audience can fill those gaps, there is no reason to state them all. A presentation to undergraduates would probably require much more detail, of course.
So, a couple of significant theorems with supporting material and complete, if sketched, proofs can easily fit in five to ten pages.
In other fields, none of this might be true. It might take many pages to set the context and several to explain the significance. It might be necessary to explain in great detail the research process in detail as well as specifics of the data collected. Arguments in some fields can be very long, drawing on the expertise of many others. In some such fields, a ten page paper might be seen as impossibly short.
And all of that is under the assumption that the work is high quality. There are exceptions to both scenarios, of course.
Note that [Transactions of the American Mathematical Society](https://www.ams.org/publications/journals/journals) puts the break between "normal" and "long" papers at 15 pages. It accepts only the long ones. Proceedings is appropriate for shorter papers.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In physics, a lot of “letter” journals or sections of journals limit the contribution to a few pages. The better known example is [Physical Review Letters](https://prl.aps.org) where the current limit is 3750 words, or about 5 pages depending on figures etc. (The one recent exception is the initial paper on gravitational wave detection, which was allow to go well beyond the normal page limit). PRL is currently ranked [top physics journal](https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=top_venues&hl=en&vq=phy)
by Google and its Clavirate impact factor score is also one of the highest for a physics journal. People read it precisely because it’s to the point and usually timely.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In many journals that have very short publications (e.g., 2-4 pages), a short publication is often effectively a summary of the conclusions that can be drawn from a much larger body of work that is contained in the supplementary materials.
The "glamour" journals such as Nature and Science are particularly notable instances of this. This approach is likely highly beneficial for them in part because their audience is so broad and they are so widely read: the articles are thus essentially executive summaries that are sufficient for the needs of most readers, while those who want more depth can plunge into the sometimes voluminous supplementaries.
A "mid-sized" article on the order of 10 pages, on the other hand, may simply be a complete work that is simply limited in the amount of verbiage needed to present it. Here, the field and sub-field matters quite a bit: in areas that are more focused on experimental data, a vast a of the work may summarize down to a relatively few data points in graphs. In theoretical areas, by contrast, papers often balloon in length because the paper *is* the work. Other fields, such as engineering, tend to fall more in the middle.
Thus, different communities can reasonably have highly significant papers that vary by more than an order of magnitude in their expected length.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/06/29
| 534
| 2,176
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am submitting the final version for an ACM sponsored conference and I am dubious about what would be the correct format to include multiple authors (with multiple I mean more than tree). The ACM template has the following author heading:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/27pJB.png)
in which I need to add another author, but If I do that in a new line (apart that the Word template moves horrible to the left side) then I will be out of the limits of pages that the conference established.
I would like to know, and maybe it sounds like a silly question if I can do the following:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/7kGEs.png)
The four authors belong to the same institution, and the only thing that changes is the email. Any help?
Thanks<issue_comment>username_1: The conference chair might tell you otherwise, but you could probably do it. I've even seen (with ACM conferences) putting both emails on one line as
(author1, author2)@institution.edu
But that assumes the email addresses are easy to associate with a person's name.
But there is no particular reason not to submit it with your best effort as to layout. Maybe it gets edited after review in any case.
But also note that most people in CS expect that the author listing will be alphabetical. But the "true" meaning of that is "the order doesn't matter and we all built this together." So, it might not be a problem.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Interesting... I'm not familiar with ACM standards, but in engineering journals I've come across exactly what may be asking for... its all in a single column, then all the (same-institution) authors simply get attributed to one university address and only the corresponding author (denoted by \*) has email/address details below.
It would be most appropriate to ask the conference chair or your advisor ASAP if you can deviate from the SIG format or how they would approach your situation. Don't assume anyone will edit it upon submission, if anything, submit now and ask later :)
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/06/29
| 510
| 2,179
|
<issue_start>username_0: My question is about "soft-skills", i.e. knowing how to handle Latex, giving a speech or giving a lecture, or other knowledge that could be useful for a career in mathematics.
Skills that (all) mathematicians need, but which are not necessarily something that one learns studying the mathematics of text books or lectures.
This knowledge should therefore benefit mathematicians of varying disciplines and not only the algebraic topologists or the number theorists.<issue_comment>username_1: A few that come to mind, and are probably valid in other fields also --
* Learn how to give good talks.
* Learn how to describe your research informally. Say you meet someone at a conference, and they ask you "What do you work on?" Can you convince them that what you work on is interesting?
* Learn how to come up with interesting questions that you don't know how to answer.
* Learn how to read a paper. Can you figure out "the big idea" without getting bogged down in the technicalities?
* Learn how to meaningfully participate in a math discussion when you're less than 100% sure what's going on.
* Develop a gut feeling for when a subject will come in useful. For example, "This lemma feels like I could use algebraic geometry to prove it", without knowing initially what that form would take.
* Get a sense for what other researchers in your field consider interesting. What is worth writing a paper about, and what is worth giving a talk about?
There are many, many more -- and none of the above are easy.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: **Understanding the research process and how to overcome hurdles and frustrations.** Some of these points have already been addressed in other answers, but I think an explicit list of things around this is good. This means:
* Knowing how to find interesting research questions.
* Knowing how to get started on the research process.
* Understanding what it means to put time and effort into solving a research problem.
* Knowing how to find collaborators that would be interested in working with you, and then working with them in a productive manner.
... and many other things
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/06/29
| 410
| 1,874
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been asked to review a paper that has been accepted for publication in english because I am a native english speaker. This request is coming from the director of a center. I am still a student. I don't technically work under this person or this center but I do have an affiliation. The review is going to take a couple hours of work. Is there any appropriate recognition or compensation for doing this review?<issue_comment>username_1: If I was the author, I would offer you an acknowledgement in the paper in the form of either a footnote on the first page or a sentence in the acknowledgement section.
In my opinion not offering you this acknowledgement would be rude and ungrateful, but this kind of contribution is definitely not enough for co-authorship. About compensation, I doubt you can get much more than a free coffee: academia is not exactly the ideal environment in terms of fair compensation in my experience. However the "team person" image you give to the people involved might bring you some good karma later, for instance if the director remembers you positively they might be more likely to think about you if a funding opportunity arises.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: I would expect no direct compensation. However:
* This is a good networking opportunity which will improve your reputation if you do a good job.
* Tell your supervisor about it. They may later mention it in a letter of recommendation.
* When applying for jobs, you will be asked to give evidence you have great communication skills. "I edit papers for senior professors who are English language learners" is one way to do that. It also works as evidence you can collaborate with diverse people, which is another common hiring criterion. Do not name the person you helped in a job application, as that could be viewed as criticism.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/06/29
| 988
| 3,998
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am submitting my Aerospace engineering PhD thesis in August. However, my colleagues have pointed out that I am very late with postdoc applications for this year. I should started searching much sooner.
Now, I am still being funded by my PhD supervisor, and she has said that I can stay in her lab after my PhD as a postdoctoral fellow until I find something else. I personally would like to do that because I have lot of publications pending and staying back will help me push those through. Also it would provide me time to learn a new modeling methodology which will significantly improve my profile and improve my chances of securing postdoc positions.
However, my colleagues are saying that doing postdoc from the same place is extremely bad for an academic profile. I do want stay in academia, and I am now regretting my delay in applying for postdoc positions.
How should I proceed? Is it true that my profile is going to be looked at negatively if I continue under my current supervisor for the next 6-8 months after my defense? At the moment, I don't have any financial debts or anything. But, I am really concerned how my future will pan out provided I have to stay here. This is really stressing me out.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> my colleagues are saying that doing postdoc from the same place is extremely bad for an academic profile
>
>
>
Doing a postdoc ***only*** with your PhD advisor might look bad, because it looks like you *couldn't* get a postdoc somewhere else. But a *brief* extended stay at your PhD institution is more likely to be seen as a no-op—most people will understand that it was just a timing issue—especially if you later have a productive postdoc somewhere else.
In any case, you don't have a time machine, so worrying about what you *should* have done is completely pointless. Your job now is to make sure your eventual postdoc/faculty application package is as strong as possible. Do that research! Publish those papers! Give those talks! Build that network! Cultivate those letter-writers!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Let's assume that it is the start of July and your funding ends at the end of August. That gives you about eight weeks to look for a postdoc. This is plenty of time, assuming you do not have too many other duties.
You only need to plan far ahead if you wish to apply for fellowships that are only available once a year. Many postdocs are advertised throughout the year.
A bigger concern is how you will pay for your relocation costs and the associated gap in employment.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: 1. Pay attention to <NAME>, "skate to where the puck is going to be", not where it is now. Yes, of course, you were late applying for things before. You should do that all of last year of Ph.D. school. Of course, you can't go back in time, but change the behavior NOW at least. (Your tone implies that you are considering not going after stuff even now.)
2. Think about "option value". If you look, you may find something marvelous. If there's nothing good, you can stay where you are and keep looking. But not even looking? Please. Knowledge is power. Go do a search. Create options.
3. Don't be scared to leave the nest, don't be scared to be an independent researcher. You can figure out that new modeling approach on your own. Or correspond, or whatever. Or find something else cool to do, all new. Really, by the end of your Ph.D., in addition to being super productive, you should feel like you could do this stuff on your own. Ideally, you'd move right to a PI position, but this is not the norm in the increasingly ossified overdeveloped academia infrastructure. But at least a postdoc in a new place. You will be a bit of a visiting scientist--is good for your development of independence.
4. Hanging out for a few months, sucking up pay, and doing some more work (while you search your ass off) is fine. But no more dawdling. Search is first priority.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/06/30
| 1,302
| 5,390
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently scheduled to start graduate school next semester. I've been going to the lab that I'll be working in for the past few months now. I had a question regarding graduation after talking with some of my seniors from the lab.
Just for some background info, I'm currently attending school in South Korea. I'll be pursuing an MS/PhD integrated degree in computer science. The lab that I'm working in is a lab that does research on machine learning and deep learning methods.
My initial plan was to go to the US after finishing my undergrad, but I figured that with my specs I'm not going to get funded and probably won't be able to get into a top program. Also fortunately enough the aforementioned lab's research coincided with mine and I would be getting funding so it seemed like the wiser choice.
I wanted to complete the requirements for a master's and then apply for PhD programs abroad. My supervisor advised that it'd probably be better to just get my PhD here and apply for post-doc positions in the US (or anywhere else) but he said he's also open to the idea of me quitting halfway.
The reason why I'm posting this question is because in Korea (I can't speak for other Asian countries but I heard Japan is also very similar) the professor who runs the lab is basically a "king" in that lab. Pretty much everything is according to his/her will and they also get to determine if they want to "let their students graduate." It's one reason why many people are reluctant to pursue graduate studies here if they had the choice.
Fortunately, my professor seems to be nice and at least considers his graduate students to some extent alongside his own personal interests.
I'm curious though, is this kind of thing also normal (or at least prevalent) in other countries in the Western world? The impression that I get for those countries is that graduate students are pretty much independent researchers/students and their supervisors are just that - supervisors. Does one's graduation also depend on their signature?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Pretty much everything is according to his/her will and they also get to determine if they want to "let their students graduate."
>
>
>
This is how it works in the U.S. also. However, the proper behavior is for the supervisor to have a collaborative working relationship with PhD students. I think Germany is similar.
In Australia, and I think Canada, the award of the PhD is decided by an external committee. Members of the committee all work at other universities. This substantially reduces the power of the supervisor.
Practices vary by region, and even among universities. For example, some U.S. universities require a committee to approve the PhD thesis, with one member being from a different department. At other U.S. universities the committee does not have this external member as a check. Generally the committee does what the supervisor recommends.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Depending on the country and even institution, academics have varying amounts of accountability to their universities. In the UK where there isn't such a thing as legal tenure, an academic who behaves unreasonably towards their students runs the risk of being sanctioned or sacked. Of course, this doesn't mean the university can't turn a blind eye (as can be the case if they are a bit of an academic celebrity) but it does mean a complaint to the institution about an academic carries a lot more weight.
You generally have the option to change supervisor if you feel there is a good reason to do so. Though whether you need the permission of your current supervisor in all cases will again depend on the institution.
The way laboratories and equipment are managed may also make a difference. In my school the majority of equipment is managed by technical staff and experimental officers (a kind of halfway role between academic and technician), not academics. So it would be hard for an academic to prevent students using that equipment and other resources.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It's pretty similar in the USA, with the PI being king.
What you want to do is be selective about who you work with, within the department. In general, pre-tenure is bad. As are recently tenured profs running slave labor camps. Older profs near retirement tend to be better--even the ones who used to be unreasonable will have mellowed out.
In addition, you can just ask and find out typical graduation times by group. 7 years is bad, 4 years is good (in the US). You may get some blabla about "it depends", but just ask for the last 5 students and what their duration was and then do the math yourself.
Caveat emptor...
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: Concerning the following quote:
' professor who runs the lab is basically a "king" in that lab '
I don't have much experience in western world of academia. Yet, I feel it is more like person by person basis (even in Asian countries). I have seen both "holding hostage" type and "open" type.
Since your professor already told you that he is open to you quitting half-way, I guess yours is the latter type. After all, the rate of quitting worldwide is around 50% so ... any smart professor won't feel too much of their students quitting (otherwise, they will feel very bad 50% of the time).
Good luck.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/06/30
| 803
| 3,544
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have applied for an integrated MS and PhD program. I have sent am email for that purpose. The professor had an interview of me via skype. Then he sent me 6 of his papers and told me read those. At the same time, he told me to apply for scholarship via the general admission process of his university. I am now reading those papers.
But I am confused that whether he is positive to me or not. What should I do at this stage?<issue_comment>username_1: I would guess that he is a bit positive and a bit neutral. I hope he knows a bit about you from your earlier contact. Otherwise he has no reason for anything but neutrality.
Read the papers. Make notes. If you are interested in that subject matter you could then ask one or two questions based on those papers. Even questions about things you don't (yet) understand can be valuable at this stage. But you might just get pointed to more papers. But if you work with this person, there will be papers and papers.
But it is likely a mistake to flood him with questions (or emails). Start the long term relationship gradually. But don't be shy about expressing interest if you really have it.
But, for any future conversation, even by email, make sure you are informed about his interests and research direction.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The fact that the professor followed up to your interview in any way is at least a mild positive; if they had no interest in you they likely would not have had any more interaction with you.
However, depending on where you are applying, the professor may have little influence on your application success; in North America at least, graduate admissions is often kept separate from individual professor's preferences. So even if the professor is positive, telling you to apply to the general process may be all they can do at the moment.
Do as the professor suggests, and good luck with your application.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It sounds generally positive to me: after an interview it's hard to know how good a student is, so the professor probably came out of it cautiously optimistic, and waiting for further indications that you're good.
Other relevant points: the question mentions "applying for scholarship", which to me implies admission + funding.
Regarding admission, as username_2's answer says, graduate admissions are usually separate from the professors' preferences, so you have to go through that process. Typically you might identify a prospective supervisor somewhere in the application, and they will be consulted -- it doesn't guarantee anything, but it means that the student will probably have someone to do his/her research with. So here it's good that you talked to this professor ahead of the application process, and I would guess that he'll have a positive recommendation, otherwise he would probably have discouraged you from applying.
Also note that after admission you have a fair bit of coursework and general training ahead of you, so during that time you probably won't be working too closely with the professor. But if he gave you those papers, it's also a way of pointing you in the right direction to get familiar with the research area.
As for funding, if I understand correctly he's asking you to look for funding elsewhere, but this doesn't imply that he doesn't want to hire / pay you. Ideally, you can get other funding, which is a win-win: it's good for your CV, and for him it means he can hire you with less strain on his research grant.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/06/30
| 472
| 1,877
|
<issue_start>username_0: The manuscripts version made online in journals are often updated. For example, from the "Accepted" to "Final" version.
Many times the version retrieved by sci-hub is outdated, is there any way to force sci-hub to get the last published version?<issue_comment>username_1: From my understanding Sci-hub works by granting access to papers through the official system [credentials "donated"](https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/04/whos-downloading-pirated-papers-everyone) by users around the world.
Therefore, I'd think the root of this artefact relies on the user's access credential settings or terms as used for those specific papers at the time the mirror database you're using was last updated. [I know it sounds unclear, but read carefully and I am sure you'll get my meaning.]
Given this is probably automated by Sci-hub internal system, and there are likely very few active programmers behind the interface, I don't think asking them directly would return any answers.
My best bet is that you try out accessing the paper you want through a [different database mirror](https://sci-hub.now.sh) which might be more up to date.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: You can request a newer version of an article using the "reload" button.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZH8qX.png)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: A reload button does not show up anymore.
Also, this problem is likely related to storage of pre-print versions in sci-hub databases. From what I know, sci-hub only uses credentials on the first request for a paper. At that moment, it also saves a copy of the pdf and that copy is what is given as a result on subsequent requests.
So, I guess a solution to this problem has to involve updates to sci-hub's database.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2019/07/01
| 731
| 2,832
|
<issue_start>username_0: As a marker, there are always some students who will email requesting to meet as they disagree with the marking. According to the professor, the marker should solve students' marking issues but I am uncomfortable with those students who insist that marks should be given in their way. Some of them are disrespectful. If I refuse to meet them, they will complain to the professor about me not engaging with students and the professor will criticize me. Should I engage with these students?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> According to the professor, the marker should solve students' marking issues
>
>
>
There you have it. Yes, meeting with students and explaining your reasoning is one of your job duties. Even good graders make mistakes, and even good students sometimes don't understand where they went wrong.
>
> I am uncomfortable with those students who insist that marks should be given in their way.
>
>
>
You do not need to negotiate with students. You need to explain why they were incorrect, and explain how the point deduction was calculated. (Hopefully you've been using a rubric so that students are consistently docked the same number of points for each offense -- if not, you should start.)
When students try to "insist," you can explain that it wouldn't be fair to adjust penalties on a case-by-case basis. You can be pretty blunt here: "I provide these meetings so I can answer your questions. I've already explained why you lost points; I am not going to debate with you on every question."
>
> Some of them are disrespectful.
>
>
>
You certainly don't need to tolerate this. "I find that statement very disrespectful. If you continue to be disrespectful, I will ask you to leave." If you do in fact ask a student to leave, or not to return, you should pre-emptively send the professor a note *concisely* explaining what happened (e.g., "FYI, I told John he was not welcome in my office after he called me a \_.").
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Almost everyone is uncomfortable with confrontation. Being an adult means being uncomfortable when you have to.
My announced policy was that if I had made a mistake, I'm happy to change it. If not, we're not going to have a discussion about harshness. They love the word "harsh," and no matter how little you deduct for an error, you're still "too harsh" for their taste.
Nope, the sentence I used was, "Everyone gets screwed the same. That's fair." You get better grades by being a better student, not because you're a tenacious negotiator. In extreme cases, I would eventually say, "OK, at this point you're cheating and I'm about to turn you in to the Student Judiciary." What? "It's academically dishonest to try to get an unfair advantage over your fellow students. So it's cheating." Game over.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/07/01
| 792
| 3,195
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a junior postdoc (1st year) part of a program committee in an international conference. As a member I have been assigned with several papers that I would like to delegate to subreviewers.
I have in my network researchers who are also postdocs but, they could be regarded as senior. Is it rude, or weird, to ask them to subreview a paper? If so, should I try to find PhD students or other postdocs in my range? If not, to what extended may I ask for a subreview?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't quite understand the premise. Are you as part of the committee tasked with **finding** reviewers (in which case they are not "subreviewers") or are you a **reviewer** and seek others to do part of your job?
I don't see anything weird in the first case. You are at the program committee. It is your job to identify the most suitable people that can act as reviewers. By contacting the appropriate people, i.e. experts in the respective field, you are doing a good job. This has nothing to do with the seniority difference.
The second case seems a bit more problematic. In my field it can sometimes happen that senior people delegate reviews to juniors. But that is usually confined to the immediate environment of the senior person (e.g. his lab or department). And it is more of an exercise and experience building and it is very likely that the review will be reviewed along with the paper again by the senior. If you would like to delegate your work to senior researchers, you can expect that it will be done by their students if it is accepted as such at all - people might not be fond of doing reviews outside of the formal channels.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: You can always ask and they can say "no". It's surely not rude and weird; people are asked to review stuff all the time. The probability is not too low that one or more of them will say "no", but you may be lucky.
In my experience, more senior people are more likely to say "no", but of course if they say "yes" they will be the more competent reviewers. And some say "yes".
Don't be worried about asking somebody something that they don't want to do. If you ask and they say "no", it won't reflect in any way negatively on you.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Is it rude, or weird, to ask them to subreview a paper?
>
>
>
No.
---
There is absolutely nothing rude, weird, presumptuous, or inappropriate about asking a more senior researcher to review a paper for a conference. It is an utterly standard and expected part of your role as a PC member to ask experts to review papers. Conversely, it is an utterly standard and expected part of their role as active researchers to be asked.
Of course, anyone you ask could say no. And indeed, more senior experts are more likely to say no, in part because they are likely to receive more than their fair share of these requests. That's why you should *always* ask for suggestions for additional/alternate reviewers whenever you ask someone for a review; more senior experts are *also* more likely to know who the good reviewers are!
[Checking my inbox for review requests in 3... 2... 1....]
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2019/07/01
| 6,583
| 26,546
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm taking the last and hardest exams of my master degree. During the exams we aren't allowed to use anything else but our brain. Cheating is pretty easy though: one has the lecture notes and all the past exams with solutions on the phone and can easily consult them without being caught, therefore the majority of the students does it. I scored pretty good on the first exam but didn't get the best mark like some cheaters did. I feel at a disadvantage here with respect to the majority of my colleagues who will take better grades in these exams and I'll end up with the US equivalent of a C
My main problem here is my disadvantage towards everyone else, especially in PhD application where the transcript of records plays a role.
I also firmly believe that the cheaters will be be caught sooner or later by showing their own incompetence when they for example do research, but this isn't helpful since they may have been given the chance to do research instead of me.
So should I put morals aside and simply go there and cheat if I need to? Is there any justification for someone to do it?
I never did it so far but this time I've taken I've been very tempted.
I can't actually think of any way of justifying me cheating in the next exams. On the other hand I'm not having a fair competition at all here and even if I know some of them are better physicists than me and I'd finish behind them anyway I also know that some of them are worse than me.
I know I'm basically asking if cheating can be condoned, can it?
I don't want to report them, I probably don't have the guts to do it, especially because it's such a socially accepted practice.
Do I have any alternatives beside taking the exams while pretending other students don't exist, pass the exams and go on without looking back?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I don't want to report them, I probably don't have the guts to do it, especially because it's such a socially accepted practice.
>
>
>
A "Snitches get stitches" mentality will not solve your problem. Cheating is unethical. You know that you are "at a disadvantage" if you keep your ethical behavior and the others don't.
>
> Cheating is pretty easy though: one has the lecture notes and all the past exams with solutions on the phone and can easily consult them without being caught
>
>
>
You seem to know how people are able to cheat at the exam. I would suggest that you *report how people cheat* (not who) to the professor in charge of your exam. He will either be able to implement counter measures to prevent cheating or change the exam format. This way you can avoid denouncing specific individuals while still preventing them from cheating.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_2: If I were you and my primary concern was the PhD application (but also not being bugged for the rest of my life if I cheat), I'd ask myself the **following questions**:
1. How limited is the number of available PhD positions in my university?
2. Are all those cheaters going to sign up for such a commitment as PhD[1]?
3. Where on that imaginary unbiased leader-board do I belong? I.e. what are my odds of getting high enough grades to be able to do my PhD elsewhere without cheating?
Answering these questions will help you to be more honest with yourself and distinguish between the **two possible dilemmas** here:
* I am good enough as a physicist but I'm being robbed of my future by the cheaters. Should I give them a taste of their own medicine?
* I am not that good after all and I want an unfair advantage on the international arena because everyone in my class does it. Is it OK if I just go with the flow?
---
[1] My personal anecdotal experience suggests that a cheater's mindset is often to cheat their way out of the situation as quickly and with as least trouble as possible and forget about all of it the next morning. If this is the case you may not face that much competition in the end.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: **If everyone cheats, and the professeors tolerate it, you might as well do it too.**
In every modern society, there are things that are formally forbidden but informally everyone expects everyone to do them anyways. If that's the case, you're not doing yourself any favours by trying to stick to honor codes from US universities - your university is not in the US, and neither their written rules nor their unwritten rules apply to you.
For what it's worth, in my European university, especially in the undergrad, it would have been unthinkable for me to report a cheater. That was something between the cheater and their own conscience - there are no honor codes here, and I would have felt like an horrible person, since the mindset is generally "If the professor doesn't care enough to prevent it, go ahead and do it."
If it was clear that a professor didn't care, I wouldn't have felt bad for cheating myself - the idea was that preventing that behavior isn't on the students but on the teachers.
If it was clear that a professor did care, I would have hesitated to devise some elaborate scheme for cheating anyways -- if the teacher cares, then going around it would have felt like doing something morally wrong.
If everybody else cheated, repeatedly, and the department did nothing about it, I wouldn't have cared. The idea behind honor codes is precisely that you can't expect students to report cheaters, or not to cheat themselves if it is made too easy for them, unless you respond to it with draconian measures.
The goal of preventing cheating is of course to keep test grades meaningful, which is only possible if there is a large amount of non-cheaters. However, I don't see how any moral claim follows from that at a university where everybody cheats -- if you personally don't do it, you can have a nice superior feeling, but it won't help to make the grades meaningful.
That's a bad situation, to be sure, but it's really on the university to improve it. You don't have to throw your grades away to make a statement that no-one but you will know about.
Note that I'm assuming here that cheating is actually wide-spread, and that professors know about it but don't really care. If you think that reporting the ways of cheating would make a big difference, you probably should.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: If you have to ask, you know the answer. Don't do it. Cheating now puts you on the same level as the other cheaters. Pass the exam on the strength of your knowledge of the material, not on the basis that you cheated better than your compatriots.
Tell your professor about the cheating. If you are scared, it's OK to [do this anonymously](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/19259/84834). You'll feel much better about yourself.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I would argue that the real problem here is deeper, provided that it actually exists.
Grading of exams should *not* be competitive
--------------------------------------------
On any exam, the grade given should depend only on how the individual student does, not on what others do.
A system in which the only way that one student can do better is for another to do worse is deeply immoral. It also provides a serious inducement to cheating.
Sometimes "grading on the curve" has an aspect like that. The grade distribution is assumed to be normal with C as the median. That is a foolish assumption. First, the sample is too small to assume that the sample distribution is close to the population distribution. Second there is little reason to assume that the sample is randomly drawn from the entire population. If I happen to teach the 30 best qualified students in the world on an exam, why should anyone get less than a perfect mark.
But, perhaps you are only assuming that this is what is going on. If the system is such that everyone can get perfect marks and the grades are determined only by your own performance (objective grading), then it doesn't really matter that other people cheat. You get the grade you deserve - good or bad.
If, however, that is the situation (competitive grading) then that is a valid basis of complaint to the administration. Other people cheating should have no affect on your grade.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: Have you considered what happens if you get caught *during the exam*?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Unless I've missed something you haven't talked about what actually happens if a cheater gets caught (during the exam I mean).
If it's a bigger deal than a slap on the wrist, consider that **if you go ahead, cheat, and get caught, you'll probably be treated like any other cheater**, and saying "I cheated because everyone else does it, but I still studied and did my work and I wanted to secure my place [...]" will put you in a *very* awkward position, perhaps even more awkward than an "actual" cheater.
Yes, eventually most of the "true" cheaters will appear to be frauds when they reach the research field, but getting caught cheating in an exam? **In some countries (mine included), that gets you a five-year interdiction to pass any other exam, may it be school stuff or driver's license.**
Don't cheat.
It may appear that cheaters won't get caught, because if they've been watching their phones all this time without being afraid, the supervisors likely don't mind. True, but what if this year is the one they wake up and get stricter? Or, another student warned them/the dean/higher-ups of the situation? You're probably not the only non-cheater facing that situation.
Don't cheat.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: Complain about cheating. You don't have to report any person if you don't want to. But complain about having a disadvantage because of playing fair.
When you feel like "everyone cheats", it could be that the professor also feels like "everyone cheats". The professor might need to see that not everyone cheats. To see that not everyone is on board with that.
Receiving complaints should encourage professor to fight cheating. It will equip professor with something more than "cheating is bad" when arguing with cheaters or superiors who want everyone to pass. These will become available and the prof will be able to say it with confidence knowing it's true.
>
> No, not everyone is cheating. You are cheating. There are others who are not cheating.
>
>
> No, it's not harmless, there are honest students screwed over by this.
>
>
>
As for yourself - don't cheat, of course. The cheating mentality is idiotic. You are taking the test to test your knowledge. If you cheat, you just waste your and the professor's time. That might be desirable for some of those other people, but not for me or you. For us it's unacceptable, as you have already stated in the question.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: Actually don't pay attention to what majority do. It's vital you know that cheating makes you weaker and weaker over the time. And you get more stress and torment instead of self confidence and pride. Be the strong C , not a weak A . :)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: This is truly a dilemma. But let's analyse your options:
1. Do not cheat. Cheaters will outperform you and you might get compared with their grades and considered to be among the worse ones.
2. Cheat. If successful, you will catch up with cheaters and get a good grade. If caught, you get the worst case scenario.
3. Do not cheat and anonymously expose the cheating issue without calling names. If there was a leak, that should fix the issue entirely.
Now let's evaluate each option (with scores, highest being best) (see "Moral" as a broader term mixed with consciousness, and "Result" as your grade with context):
1. Result: 2/4, Moral: 3/3. This is the passive option. But you came hear to seek for alternatives. You will get the worse grade and compared to others you'll be among the worse ones.
2. Result: 4/4 or 1/4, Moral: 1/3. You cheat, you are lucky, everything is fine. You may betray yourself, however be reminded - it's only grades. Real skill and competence does not only come from the amount of knowledge you can sponge together for a short time, and then forget most of it anyway. It's quite possible that the cheaters will perform well in normal job domains because they possess other characteristics will are good as well. Also it does not mean they are incompetent in the matter either, just may have just skipped a bad educational procedure. Regardless, you still need to compare it in regards to those who don't cheat - it's unfair to *them*. But many/most are willing to do it already. However, if you get caught, you'll get the worst outcome. Be reminded that it also takes some skill to cheat, and perpetual cheaters may be less likely to get caught unlike you.
3. Result: 3/4, Moral: 2/3. Sabotage your colleagues and friends, flatten the ground and force them to be measured based on true test-writing performance. You may inflict 1-2 semesters of additional study time or even cause an even greater consequence. Maybe it's good, maybe it's bad, maybe the people affected deserve it. Compared to cheaters you should come out ahead or equal, however you'll still get the worse grade.
---
**Personally I'd advise you to option 3.** Let the bomb lose, even the playfield, play fairly, and let your colleagues feel the consequences of cheating, by being unable to do so when they relied on it. You are in a vague competition after all, and this is the compromise which yields the best outcome for you, each with the second best outcome by result and moral. I'd rated it 3/3 for "Moral", but I assumed you care about your friends being sabotaged who intend to cheat. If not, you bring justice and fairness to a place which was devoid of it. Still, depends on if you consider these barricades as reasonable in the first place.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: **Ask your university to change its policy on mobile phones in exams.**
My university has a university-wide policy that all mobile phones and similar devices are to be turned off and removed from your person during all exams (typically being placed in your backpacks at the front of the examination room). This should help minimize cheating since if they don't have mobile phones, they can't use them to cheat - and if they do have a mobile phone, they're violating university policy and can be punished as cheaters.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: One way to approach the problem is: "How do I equalise or negate the value gained by the cheaters?"
To answer this one needs to carefully examine what the value gained by the cheaters is.
You say that the cheaters access notes and past solutions on their phones. How useful is this information? Perhaps the instructor expects you to have this material committed to memory (in some way); in that case you need to put more effort in that. Perhaps the instructor *is* looking for new approaches and solutions to existing problems and all he is getting is the same old churn; in that case you need to try out-of-the-box approaches to the old exam papers.
Grading "on a curve" still means that the questions are set to meet the expectations of the examiner. Perhaps these are unrealistic and students are cheating to meet these unrealistic expectations. Even in such a case, trying to meet these in an honest way *will* improve *your* skills.
Talking to the instructor to find out what the expectations are can help in some contexts. In others, you may need to change your approach.
Ultimately, learning is about increasing your intrinsic value, examinations are a way to learn to evaluate yourself (by understanding the corrections to your answers), grades are what determine your opportunities.
In that sense, your worry about being denied opportunities is correct. However, how much of the first two aspects have you incorporated?
Here are two examples.
It was common for students in the school I went to to memorise English essays on various topics and reproduce them in the exam (a form of plagiarism). Some of them may even have brought the essays unethically written on "chits" into the examination. It turns out that the English teacher was tired of these boiler plate essays. When I wrote an essay giving free rein to my imagination and my interests, it was given a high grade.
In a certain physics paper, the instructor often had questions like "Describe such-and-such apparatus and a give an example of it's use". I requested the instructor to make this either/or with a "numerical" which made use of experimental data from the same apparatus to analyse the experiment. So, at least for me, the "advantage" of the rote memorisers and "notes copiers" was equalised.
Both the examples may give you a feeling that they are dependent on an enlightened instructor. However, you must remember that, the examiner gives the grade. Hence, regardless of what *you* feel the purpose of the course is, you need to meet the instructors expectations. If you can find these out, or perhaps modify them(!), you will get better grades.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_12: ***Don't Cheat.***
As you have stated, there are students in your class who have cheated, and others who have not cheated. You have noted that *cheating is pervasive and accepted*. You observe that the majority of students cheat. It is not clear whether this has been the case for previous courses, and whether grades are already final for other courses. Are there any students who have not cheated on any courses, projects or exams? *Have you or the other students learned the material, and how well?*
* *Cheating Harms Everyone*
As you have noted, *students who cheat have harmed you and other students who have not cheated*, and they have *harmed the reputation of the school*. The sad part is that because cheating behavior is accepted, you will finish your Master's and find it has diminished value because of the cheating.
* *Report Cheating*
*Report the cheating* to the professor(s), the dean, the office of student integrity. *Report the cheaters*, inform the school both that they cheat and *how they cheat*, and request that the *exams be monitored to prevent cheating*. *Document everything*. And *do not cheat*. Should the Uni do nothing, then you may get lesser grades, but you will have earned them.
* *Caution*
***Do not study for a PhD at a Uni that accepts cheating***, that would further waste your time. Find (another) Uni where you can study and succeed. Have you learned and prepared well, and are you ready to succeed at the PhD level (*without cheating*)? Then *find a Uni which aligns with your principles*.
* *Excuse: "I'm taking the last and hardest exams of my [M]aster degree."*
Irrelevant.
PhD study, research, and work do not get easier. Whether the exams are hard or easy, do not cheat. Learn and master the knowledge. Find your own place. Earn what you can; accept what you earn.
* *Constraints: "During the exams we aren't allowed to use anything else but our brain."*
Irrelevant. Learn the knowledge.
This is one of the more asinine practices at Uni. Especially at graduate level. You should learn to think, synthesize knowledge, and seek deeper understanding. Exams should not be the only measurement.
*Rote memorization is for elementary school.*
* *Cheating is Easy, Pervasive*
*"Cheating is pretty easy ... one has the lecture notes ... past exams with solutions on the phone and can easily consult them without being caught, therefore the majority of the students does it."*
You stated that the Professor and Uni do not allow anything but brains.
The Professor and Uni should not allow these materials, and the Uni should have policies and procedures to enforce the integrity of exams.
* *Fairness: "I feel at a disadvantage ... [cheaters] will take better grades in these exams [in comparison]"*
Which is exactly why the Uni (and Professor) must express and enforce clear integrity policies. It keeps the playing field level.
Read about the *Prisoner's Dilemma*. Suppose you cheat, how does that affect those who do not cheat?
Your PhD application may already be impaired by your Uni's reputation, which may be known and have been damaged by tacit acceptance of cheating.
* *Consequences: "[C]heaters will be be caught sooner or later by showing their own incompetence ..."*
No guarantee here.
Sadly, some cheaters are not caught because they have learned the material, and cheat to make the exam easier. They harm their own preparation, but may still have learned enough to perform well. This may be a consequence of the weak exam format.
* *Morals: "[S]hould I put morals aside ... and cheat if I need to?"*
No.
Your integrity is important. Earn the grades you deserve on your own.
* *Justification: "Is there any justification for someone to do it [cheat]?"*
No.
You have already answered this question. Don't let others or even your own struggles diminish yourself. You have done your best.
* *Temptation: "I've been very tempted."*
Learn and grow.
Studying an advanced topic in depth is hard. It challenges our ability and forces us to think (hard), learn, and grow (when we can).
* *"Even if I know some of them are better physicists ... anyway ..."*
This is an interesting observation that some students (and cheaters?) are *better* than you. Which implies that students have learned the material, and there is a disconnect between the exams and the material. *Clarify with the professor that students are not allowed to lookup answers.* It appears that the problem is the exam format.
* *Cheating should not and cannot be condoned.*
You will face decisions in your life where you will need to choose between right and wrong. *Make the right choice* and stand by that choice. You will become a better person.
You are about to earn a Master's degree. You are an adult. Act like an adult. Accept responsibility.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_13: Here's a relevant [story](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1996/10/honesty-a-moral-compass?lang=eng) about how someone in a very similar situation resolved the problem:
>
> Getting into medical school is pretty competitive, and the desire to
> do well and be successful puts a great deal of pressure on the new
> incoming freshmen. My husband had worked hard on his studies and went
> to attend his first examination. The honor system was expected
> behavior at the medical school. The professor passed out the
> examination and left the room. Within a short time, students started
> to pull little cheat papers out from under their papers or from their
> pockets. My husband recalled his heart beginning to pound as he
> realized it is pretty hard to compete against cheaters. About that
> time a tall, lanky student stood up in the back of the room and
> stated: ‘I left my hometown and put my wife and three little babies in
> an upstairs apartment and worked very hard to get into medical school.
> And I’ll turn in the first one of you who cheats, and you better
> believe it!’ They believed it. There were many sheepish expressions,
> and those cheat papers started to disappear as fast as they had
> appeared. He set a standard for the class which eventually graduated
> the largest group in the school’s history.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_14: My philosophy about cheating is somewhat morally relative.
I must confess that, on some of the take-home exams, I had collaborated with another student or two. But it was mostly in the effort to clarify what the exam problem really was and what it really meant. But it was really in clarifying a deliberately nebulous problem that the solution becomes apparent. (i.e. the prof was not gonna do that for us.) Probably, the other students benefited more in the collaboration than I did. It's not *exactly* plagiarism but something like it. As a result the three of us, collectively, got a better grade on the take-home exam than we would have if we did not collaborate and that was unfair to other students that did not collaborate. But, word spreads, and I don't think there were many others, if any at all, that did not collaborate in their own little cliques.
That confession made, I think that you do yourself little favor by joining in on wholesale cheating similarly by joining in on looting with the crowd. Consider your long-term best interests. Also consider (if this interests you) the qualities of leadership. Sure, with Trump (or W), it looks like a successful cheater has no limits, but, for most of us, it's the people who accomplished impressive goals based on their authentic skill and authentic gifts that are appropriate leaders and that quality will (eventually) be recognized. Just because cheaters like Trump or W got to be President, doesn't mean that you will make genuine accomplishments by cheating.
You're in college to learn stuff. Stuff that really works. Cheating will result in only the illusion of learning something. You might, in your professional life, be called upon to accomplish something based on *"knowledge"* that you *"learned"* by cheating. But because you cheated, you may not have **really** learned it. And bogus *"knowledge"* will become useless for **really** solving **real** problems that **really** come up.
Once in a while, someone like Trump comes along pretending that they can solve these real problems and brags about their *"solution"* (sometimes to a problem that **they** created), and it's only later enough people figure out that the solutions are bogus and don't work.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_15: IMHO, there's no need to cheat.
Students are fed the lie "you need to get good grades, because..." almost from birth. It's rubbish. Many very successful people were dropouts. Sure, grades can open doors in the short term. But a grade rapidly becomes unimportant as time goes by.
In my experience, opportunities find ***you*** if you forget about being competitive and focus on being awesome. My motto was always "why cram for exams, when you can study properly and actually *retain* valuable knowledge and skills?" If you are competent, capable, creative, or quick, people will want you to solve their problems and great opportunities will come your way.
My advice is to treat exams like:
* something to keep you motivated to work hard; a goal to keep you focused
* rough and imperfect feedback on what your strengths and weaknesses are.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/07/01
| 400
| 1,681
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm comparing my method against existing methods by doing some experiments on one dataset.
The existing methods do not provide results on the considered dataset.
My question is: Can I use default parameters from the existing methods? The fact is that there are plenty of existing methods and it will take a lot of time to fine-tune for each existing method.
Thank you.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Can I use default parameters from the existing methods?
>
>
>
Yes, but should you? Default parameters are unlikely to provide optimal performance, so you may like to try various parameters.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In my view this depends on a number of things:
a) Are the default parameters of the competing methods advertised as being widely applicable?
b) Have authors of competing methods provided appropriate guidance for how to tune?
c) Does what you are proposing require a lot of tuning, and did you tune yours in order to beat the others?
Answers a) yes b) no c) no point in the direction that you can use other methods with default tuning. If the resulting score is 3:0 or 0:3, my advice is clear. If it's 1:2 or 2:1, well, one needs to look at details, for example, is provided guidance by others so weak that chances are 95% of the users will use the default tuning anyway etc.?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Assuming that your goal is to publish a paper about your method, a way to answer your question is to ask yourself: given clear indications about how your method is evaluated and how the other methods are evaluated, would a reviewer consider this comparison inadequate, sufficient or convincing?
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/07/01
| 573
| 2,385
|
<issue_start>username_0: This is probably a silly question, but I really need some advice.
I'm an undergraduate student and I want to take a different major in grad school. Luckily, my university offers you a possibility to take a different major in grad school provided that you pass certain exams and show that you'll be able to follow the program. Now, I've sent an e-mail to a professor that's in charge of all that at the department that I want to get into, and he said that for a start I should send him the list of all the courses I've taken with corresponding grades.
Now I don't know if I should write it manually (so it's going to be a really really long e-mail) or if I should take screenshots from this "program" we use at university that contains all the information about my academic success? For this second option, I'm worried it might seem impolite to just send multiple attachments and I know some people don't even open attachments because they're afraid of malware...
Thanks in advance for your help.<issue_comment>username_1: If you really are stuck in this dilemma and there is no technical solution, then you can do both. Provide your own typed summary *and* attach the evidence as attachments. But give a warning that the attachments are just the proof and add no additional content.
Then the person can look at the attachments or not.
But commenters have suggested other, technical, solutions that might be better.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> he said...I should send him the list of all the courses I've taken with corresponding grades
>
>
>
That's a bizarre requirement, he should have access to that information.
>
> I don't know if I should write it manually
>
>
>
I suggest you **write it manually**, as you have suggested. In addition, **offer to send screenshots as supporting evidence**, should that be required.
>
> I'm worried it might seem impolite to just send multiple attachments
>
>
>
My approach leaves the decision to the professor.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: If you are worried about the actual number of attachments, you can put all your screenshots in a text document and then export it as a pdf, for example. That makes it more clear than multiple attachments.
Otherwise, I would also suggest to write the list down manually as suggested in the other answers.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2019/07/01
| 5,761
| 24,417
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a second year PhD student at a technical / interdisciplinary lab in Europe wondering when to quit and leave a seemingly unbearable situation behind.
My supervisor (a young-ish professor) mostly works alongside an older professor (his own PhD supervisor back in the day). I am one of his first "own" PhD students. The project that pays my salary is a joint project with another group with a focus lying outside my supervisor's main interests (so he also doesn't care too much about it).
I have mostly spent my time working on ideas suggested by the old professor. Every time he makes a suggestion for something I should work on, I look into it until my supervisor says the results are good. Then we meet with the old professor who basically says the work is ridiculous. At this point in the meeting my supervisor agrees with the old professor and they tell me to do something else. This has happened maybe 6-8 times in the last 1.5 years and all my work has been scrapped.
My supervisor, on the other hand, spends most of his time providing supervision to the old professor's PhD students, pushing them to make the most out of their research (ideas given by the old professor). The result is that they publish really nice papers (and he is of course a co-author). I on the other hand don't really have something going on, and my colleagues really let me know that my PhD is going nowhere (instead of providing encouragement or responding to offers of collaboration from my side).
I know that getting a PhD means being able to conduct research independently and I am trying to get there. I have had a number of ideas for research but when I suggest something to my supervisor he doesn't really care about the topics. All the old professor's students work together on everything but I am pretty much isolated. This makes it really hard to learn what I need to learn and to achieve something I would consider publishable. Most ideas that I try out for a few days / weeks or longer lead nowhere. I think one reason for this is the lack of feedback or helpful ideas etc. that I would expect from my supervisor and/or colleagues which I simply do not get.
One good example for how things are going is the paper that grew out of my MSc thesis. It has been more than 1.5 years and we are still in the process of "making it ready for publication". We meet every few weeks and the old professor (who is a coauthor) demands substantial changes (often reversing decisions that he himself made some meetings ago). My supervisor doesn't really seem to mind that this paper doesn't get published (in the meantime they have put in lots of effort to publish a number of papers with the old professor's students at top conferences and journals).
Overall this situation is obviously very frustrating, up to the point where I have set myself multiple deadlines until which things need to have improved or otherwise I start looking for another position. But I haven't.
I do some teaching which I really enjoy. This is my main (actually only) source of positive feedback (from the students) and as such really motivating. As I have taken up these and other duties at the lab I am under the impression that I am to some extent indispensable for my supervisor as I do lots of valuable work for him (work that he doesn't have to worry about). Therefore I think that no matter what happens he will at some point make sure I get my degree. As the situation currently seems, though, I will have a sub-average research record at best which will make any academic career impossible.
*Sorry for the long text.* My question is: how bad must the situation look before it is advisable to quit and move on? I am not a quitter and would hate doing so but my personal life and mental health have been suffering to the point where I find the situation unbearable.
---
Note that there is no such thing as a thesis committee at my university. Everything depends exclusively on the PhD supervisor.<issue_comment>username_1: This can really only be answered by you. But here are some thoughts.
There are two doors. One leads to a doctorate and the other does not. If there is no path to the first door, then the decision should be clear. But there are a couple of possible paths to that first door.
One is to move elsewhere or get a different advisor. If that path isn't closed to you then you should be considering it. Expensive and time consuming, yes. But whether it is worth it is up to you.
Another, possible, path is to cut the old prof out of the picture and work exclusively with the younger one on some idea and just finalize it without consulting the older prof.
A third, is to cut out the younger prof and work exclusively with the older one and his group, perhaps getting some support from them and hopefully more from the old professor.
But it seems like you are being whipsawed. Find a path that works. Even if it is to the 'no degree' door. But make sure that you will like what is on the other side of that door before stepping through it.
My personal preference (maybe not yours) would be to work with only the younger prof. But get a plan agreeable to both of you that if you follow that path you will find success in a reasonable amount of time. I mean, preferably, a written plan, or at least one that clearly lays out the parameters.
If you don't have a plan, you probably don't have a path.
---
My situation was a bit different, though also difficult, but I switched universities after four years in grad school and found a much better situation and an excellent and helpful advisor. My future seemed bleak at the time, but it was with the encouragement and help of another professor that got me situated.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: First try to contact your own supervisor, see if you can find a way to convey the message you wrote here to him in a non confronting manner. If he can make some change, then problem solved.
If not (and sadly it has substantial chance), try to reevaluate your future plan. If you still want to get a Ph.D. then you might want to consider a different supervisor, a different group, or even a different department and school. Exactly how you should do depend on the rule of the department(s) and university(ies). If you decide to not get a Ph.D. (which should not be viewed as failure) then go ahead preparing the job applications. You might find this decision rewarding a few years later.
I understand you don't find the situation fair, you did nothing or very little thing wrong, but are put into this stressful situation, that could potentially make you lose a few years of effort getting nothing. Unfortunately there is very little you can do in this hierarchical academic world.
FYI, 5 years ago a few colleagues and I had the first hand experience of the story similar to what you had here (with Europe replace by US, and minor difference in detail), from a problematic supervisor. One chose to leave to get an industry job, one found another supervisor in a different department in the same university (and graduated), I quit to reapply a Ph.D. program in a different field (also my major in undergrad) and currently 4th year in the new program. As far as I know all of us are doing OK now. Hopefully these information will make you feel less frustrated.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: 1. You are early enough so that you really could bail. And Ph.D. school is in general a bad choice for many\* kids. So nothing wrong with getting a real job. That said, the key thing is time to completion. In some systems (Britain?) the course can be very short...3 years...so you might as well stick and get the credential. If you are 1.5 years into a 5+ year endeavor, you should probably bail if it is not working. You would have to stick a long time...and it's not working. There is an OCEAN of other fish in the sea in industry real jobs.
2. I don't completely understand the changing your course of action. I was always self directed and just did what I wanted (and made sure to be very personally strategic about picking something that "would work" and that I enjoyed). Like I would blow the old man off (both the younger and older version) and just do what I thought would work and write it up for publication...and push it over their objections...fight a little...show some claws. Once you are producing peer reviewed work (even if not Science/Nature), all the fussing will back off...since you have shown you pull the sled. But if you are less self-directed (and it sounds like that is the case), than you probably need to bail.
3. One other option is to consider a switch of advisor. If you're about to bail anyhow, there's nothing to lose. And, in the US at least, sometimes going to the department and they will want to make it work out. I would have someone in mind that is sympathetic.
P.s. Never work with a young professor. [Note: I don't mean this literally...sure there are people who have good experiences...but...odds are against you.]
\*Many...not all...real analysis pedants and academia defenders.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: As well as the advice in other answers about options for your PhD and your research, I think it is worth mentioning that there are also options about how to improve the way you are being managed. These mostly amount to taking over your own management.
If you are having regular meetings, try following up the meeting with a summary 'confirming' what was agreed. That email should include what actions you will be taking (eg do XYZ analysis using ABC method, read DEF) and deadlines. Critically, it should also state why that action was decided - what are you trying to find out etc and, if there was discussion about the alternatives, what were they key arguments on each side of the discussion.
Then when you have the next meeting, you can send an email in advance. That email would say something like 'Please find attached the materials for our meeting tomorrow. We had agreed to do THIS for REASON. The initial analysis confirms our idea...' The idea is to outline your position in the email. If you have a suggestion for the next step, you should also be putting that in as a possible discussion point.
Busy people forget what they asked for and why. The emails both remind them, but also ensure that you have not misinterpreted. They also give you something to go back to. If they change their mind (perfectly reasonable if the results differ from expectations), you can then discuss how that fits with previous ideas.
Good practice is to have these summaries anyway. You will need to recreate your research path when you write things up and you don't want to lose interesting discussion points. Using them this way may reduce some of the frustrating back and forth that you are facing and will also help focus the discussions.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree with both gemma and username_4, good advice on both counts there. What I noticed most in your write up is this:
>
> The project that pays my salary is a joint project with another group
> with a focus lying outside my supervisor's main interests (so he also
> doesn't care too much about it).
>
>
>
This other group could prove to be your academic salvation. Are you in direct contact with them? If not, can you arrange to be, even if only at first under some trivial pretext? Assuming the project's focus is something that interests you, this group can supply you with the feedback and exchanges you need. If you take the initiative to find out what they're trying to do, how you can help, what your part could be, you could either present your unsatisfactory supervisors with a plan to finish this PhD that they couldn't object to, or just find yourself a much more congenial new supervisor.
Don't give up, OP, you really are not the first to find yourself with this kind of problem :-(.. Most likely a change will be needed, but it's common enough that you won't have any real long-term trouble from it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: You could try to tell your supervisor that you do not think it is going well, and that you would like to know *what you have to do* in order to get your PhD. If they are puzzled by this notion, explain that you would like to make a list of research topics that define the scope and goal of your thesis.
If they are unable to come up with a more or less structured plan within a reasonable time frame after supervising you for 18 months, I would quite seriously consider getting out of that research group. It is not their job to research for you, but it *is* their job to provide direction.
Now at this point you can start working actively towards your thesis, with clear goals in mind. Keep maintaining the list that defines the scope of your thesis with your supervisor (see username_4's answer for some very relevant advice here), and continue to write the thesis according to the list. Be rigorous about not extending the scope unless you feel positively excited to do so. Also know that you *will* fail a lot, research is 90% failure, 9% miserable failure, 0.9% catastrophic failure, and 0.01% progress.
If you follow this process however, you will at some point have something written that contains research. Maybe the results are bad, maybe the results are all negative, I don't know what field you're in. But you will certainly have done *something*. In the worst case, it's a terrible thesis and you'll know for sure that you have no chance at success in academia. However, it could also turn out to be a really good thesis. Or more likely, something in between.
At that point, hand in your thesis.
Now, without knowing you and the general situation in your field of research, it is quite impossible for me to say whether this course of action would be good advice for you. I can tell you, however, that for a PhD student in Mathematics in Germany, if they followed that procedure, I would be extremely surprised if they did not get their degree. And I also know from experience that when you are anxious about your progress, it helps a lot to have a clear bar to measure it against.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I was in a similar situation that what you describe: I was the first PhD student of my adviser that he ever had in that university. He had started in that University literally months before I started my PhD, and was so disorganised that he could not cope with the amount of work. The supervision was very, very poor. When I had meetings with him, he told me my work is alright, but when we were in the group meetings, and that the emeritus would tell me that's crap, my supervisor would say "You see? told you so". I was baffled. Most of his answers to my questions were wrong so I gradually stopped asking him questions. I went through a severe depression, and often considered quitting. Ultimately, I thought, if I quit and people ask "why", quite often they wouldn't understand, perhaps some would just think you are trying to find excuses for dropping out of the PhD. Psychologically, the PhD experience destroyed me, no doubt about it, but I decided not to give up and I got it.
Post-scriptum: The experience was an absolute suffering but looking back, I am glad I survived it. If anything, it made me understand the suffering in silence that so many experience. What doesn't help is that it's actually very difficult to share any concern with officials. I did an attempt to raise concern in a very gentle, subtle way, and it backfired spectacularly. Some other PhD student were less careful and more upfront in raising concerns, and sadly none of them (I say : NONE) is there anymore, as all have experience some level of retaliation by the "system" who ultimately made their life impossible, forcing them to quit if they wanted to keep any residual of sanity.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: One and half years isn't a long time in the long run to change the institute or the prof. Your prof won't change unless you confront which is bad idea and self-destructive. Only when you leave him will the realization dawn upon him. As he hasn't established himself yet as a researcher, he is basking in the glory of his guru. In many ways, this is bad for you.
And it also depends on how you see research. Whether you are passionate about it like the legends or it is just an employment sort. If the latter is true, then you need not worry much, just continue until you fulfill the institute's norms, get the damn PhD degree and find a job.
Suppose you are passionate. Currently you are teaching which is very good thing going for you, continue for some time and at the same time learn about what research actually is and why you are getting stuck in the ideas. We usually get stuck when we don't have any set goal. Consider you are running in the evening. You may stop running at any time, may be after 10 minutes or say 3km. Because you haven't set any goal. Now, you set a goal that you want to run, say, 7km. Then you will finish it. Then tomorrow you will finish 7km in 17 minutes and so on.
Research requires comprehensive understanding of the subject. Read more textbooks on the same subject. This will give you better understanding. I have read Albert Einstein's biography (Einstein: The life and times by <NAME>). In it he thinks like 'what happens if I travel at the speed of light', then he works towards it for about 8 years. 'Traveling at the speed of light' was his goal. And the rest is just hard work. See <NAME>, he worked for 10 years on the script of Inception (2010). You need to develop awareness.
Maintain a healthy lifestyle for healthy ideas. Eat healthy food and do exercize regularly and maintain your circadian rhythm perfectly for better research and for better society. Good luck...
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: I spent 3 years of my life in a similar situation as yours. There were also 2 supervisors, one older the other younger. One of them the former phd student of the other, more students on which they paid more attention, I was totally isolated in a different research center, no one cared about me... what I regret the most is to stay hoping they will stop messing me around. In the same way too, many times they suggested me to work on something which after months of work suddenly it was unnecessary meanwhile the other students succeeded in their tasks. This gave me enormous amount of stress and sorrow. In the end they never tried to guide me in anyway, just kept me busy in order not to bother them.
My advice, just quit, the sooner you can, because they have shown in many ways they will not let you work in a proper environment. They can have strange and obscure reasons in order to keep you as a PhD student so never think about "the hired me for a reason". Even though in the case you finnish the phd by yourself alone, you will produce worse scientific results (this is the case of some collegues of mine) compare to others. 1.5 years is not so much time invested yet. So it would be better you start a phd in other place where people will really appreciate you from the beginning. Europe is plenty of them if you want to stay there.
My experience was in Spain. I feel in science, specially when people are PhDs students, workers are not prone to change or to quit because we understand a PhD project takes years of constant work. Meanwhile in industry if you are not happy you just quit and change to another company making profit of the new knowledge you just acquired in a few months. In science this is not the case, since if you quit you probably need to reestart with a totally different project.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: I was in maybe the similar situation like you, but reversed - elderly supervisor, young consultant, so I would like to share my experience.
I realised that something is wrong after one year, when I summarised some of my results into coherent form. His e-mail was very offensive, stating that my text is absolutely unacceptable and we should immediately meet. He was very harsh in his critics, told be that I don't understand even basics and I have to start to study more and gave me several books and papers.
After some time I realised, that he is actually not interested in the correctness of result, but in something I would describe as "formal" correctness; even worse he has certain beliefs (like Fortran best, others shit), and feel anxious about going out of comfort zone.
So I had had two supervisors - young one to do the science, older one to write the essays.
It took us three years to write together the paper, and one and half year to write the joint paper with my consultant. Anxious before submitting, he had been checking every sentence, rewriting it again and again, in order to catch even the smallest error. He prices these papers very high, although I hate them. The review was quite fast, reviewers had required only minor changes.
After four years, the consultant left to industry for financial reasons (born kid), however, he mentioned that he had no motivation to continue and indirectly suggested that my supervisor had been one of the reasons. We wrote together a paper, which took us three months. My supervisor was upset after seeing the paper (after acceptation), stating that he would never let such a "piece of garbage" (citation) go even into the review.
After four years I found a job in the industry, feeling great again, being motivated and gaining back my lost self-confidence. I worked on PhD occasionally during the weekends and evenings. I wrote also one paper by myself, he described its conclusions as weak and incomplete and again, he would never let it go through the review.
It took me almost seven years to complete my PhD, it has been very painful experience. If I wouldn't have my girlfriend, now wife, which supported me a lot, I would probably end up very badly.
If I had had a time machine, I would have returned back to the end of the first year, slapped the young, naive, submissive guy and told him "run away and find regular job or different supervisor." Then I would have returned to the fourth year student, slap him again, and told him "focus on your job, and leave the school."
Some possible solutions from my side:
1. Quit
2. Talk to your supervisor. Explain him why are you dissatisfied, and try to find a solution to your situation. Be honest, tell him that the professor is the main reason why are you dissatisfied. Mull your situation over, prepare some points and suggestions how you imagine your work. If you will not be able to find the solution, try to find new supervisor, another PhD position, or quit.
3. Try to survive - from my point of view and experience the worst option, and prepare for several years of suffering and tentative result. If you decide for this option, be very careful to stay up to date, you can easily find out your knowledge (which you will gain from the professor) is deprecated and you will have to fill the gap in order to find the job.
What is positive on my story is that the professor is retired now, so he won't discourage students anymore.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: Your situation is not unique, as can be inferred from the other answers and from my personal observations in academia as well. I agree with your feeling that something needs to be done now or the PhD part of your career is not going to be successful.
I would ask these questions:
Are you capable of and willing to finish your PhD?
* If no, just leave it, find a good job (you probably will with a Master's), and do not worry about it anymore.
* However, from what you write, I would say: you probably are. If you agree, I see the situation as follows:
Supervision has failed. Is there a chance that you can finish your PhD in the current scenario without being supervised by the bosses? That means to conduct research on your own, with only occasional feedback from your (junior) supervisor. It will only work if the old supervisor ceases to care about you and your work and will not be a reviewer of your thesis. Then you could continue.
If not, change PhD projects and do not look back.
I believe the latter option is your path. Some people would not mind and continue their PhD anyway. Since you are asking here, you are apparently not one of them.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/07/01
| 2,424
| 10,425
|
<issue_start>username_0: Some months ago I was promoted with a managing position inside the university (in my case, associated chair of my school, being for instance the head of admission committee and the director of doctoral studies).
At least in my country, these jobs have a teaching reduction. However, my intention taking this position was to try to make contributions to the bad way that my university is doing right now.
However, I have encountered a really big issue that I was not expecting:
1. The type of duties I have are really of ‘administrative’ nature. This means: preparing schedules of courses, preparing calendars of bachelor thesis defenses, preparing slides of how satisfied the students are with their courses. I found that there are no really ‘important’ duties to do, i.e., strategic duties.
2. What worries me more: Due to all these monotone work, I am feeling discouraged about my research. For three months, I arrive home every day after dealing with this administrative things and say to myself: ‘Today is another day that you both did not finish several things, and even worse, you did not have even one hour to work on your projects.’
Some months ago I was somehow discouraged about my place in this university, but after taking this position I feel that I am going directly to a disaster. Either if some months ago I was a little tired (maybe burnout), I had still some energy and feeling happy making research. But now I had arrived at a point that I have started giving a deadline for this situation (December 2019), and if this does not change, start looking for something else outside academia.
What do you recommend to do? I have considered to talk with some senior professor here, and even to quit this administrative duty, but the thing that worries me more is that nowadays I have lost the passion I had for research that make me sense to stay at the university.<issue_comment>username_1: The situation is often discouraging but rarely hopeless. I had to do committee work along those lines, where any serious strategic thinking had been taken away from the committee.
There are several silver linings.
First you have discovered that you are not the administrative type, and from what you say you are unlikely to get fooled again. Next, you have an appreciation for how the system works, v.g. how important these surveys are to the administration etc.; you now also have an appreciation of who are the real “doers” and who are the simple paper pushers, not only in the administrative side but probably also in the academic side since you likely interacted with other faculty at some point. In other words, you now know potential allies and who to avoid to get things done.
I gave up on one particular committee because of lack of stimulation at the work and lack of open-mindedness by the administrators in charge: I cannot imagine making a career out of this work, but if some find this interesting thank God it’s them not me.
Given how hard it is to find academic positions, I would never quit because of administrative duties unless there was no escape. Enthusiasm should come back once the burden is gone.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: First, I absolutely do appreciate your disaffection with the situation.
I would wager that some of your disappointment is due to pointlessness of *some* of the administrative activities, or the pointlessness of trying to "over-perfect" things that only need to be "good enough".
Also, some administrative problems will never be solved/resolved, but only "stayed", and require a certain (perhaps small) effort forever. Expending more effort at this moment will not solve those problems. Staying up late will not solve the problems. They're like laundry or dishes that just have to be dealt with, regularly, and "doing a great job on laundry" this week will not really reduce the laundry burden for the next week.
But, yes, these administrative things are very important to keep things going. So there is some exercise of thought to see how much of one's motive force to allocate to "routine" tasks, etc.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: From the job description and title it sounds like a job that is designed to take over some of the less strategic duties from the chair as well as administrative duties off the faculty. Hence you can end up doing lots of stuff no one wants to do (including yourself). One thing is you should be able to push back in both directions, and have the chair and faculty handle a bit more of their busy work, so you can focus on more strategic aspects of your role. Your tasks like preparing syllabi should be opportunities to plan the content and future direction of your field. If these strategic decisions are already made by someone else, then perhaps you can press them to also handle the time-consuming aspects of filling in detail while they're at it. Then you finally just pass the result along with a rubber stamp. Along those same lines you may be taking on a lot of work yourself that you can ask of someone else, even if it's not their job (either).
As for research, in my opinion the biggest problem with administrative duties is all the things that need to be done on short notice with a short deadline. This makes it really hard to block out time for other aspects of your job. Important things will just keep popping up. No time of day or day of the week is ever sacred. That block of time friday afternoons you always save for your writing is the only time everyone else saved too, so a big series of meetings gets put there. I don't have a lot of suggestions to offer there, other than to note that the cognitive load goes down as you get experience with the role, even if the workload doesn't. Research requires deep thinking, while you barely have to think to handle most administrative duties after a while. I'd give it some time and see if you still feel as overwhelmed with those same tasks after doing it a few more months and becoming fluent with the system and process.
Finally I'd note that everyone tends to feel this way about research a lot of the time, whether "too much" of their time is spent doing classes or writing proposals or whatever limited service they have to do. Only postdocs have it easy. So you might look into more general advice on this issue. Consider that you might be blaming your administrative duties a bit more than you should (and devoting more time than needed to them since the research has less attraction). Perhaps the most important thing is to find a direction that excites you again.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: You may know the saying "if a job is worth doing, it's worth doing well". The opposite is also true: "if a job is not worth doing, it is NOT worth doing well." Most administration falls into that category.
Take a step back and figure out how important your admin tasks really are. Admin work isn't like writing a paper, where poor work will be rejected, or be visible for the rest of your career.
To deal with your two examples: obviously organizing thesis defences is important, but whatever timetable you produce, most of the candidates will think they are being stressed by the time table. So don't waste a lot of time trying to do a "perfect" job - just get some dates in everyone's diaries, and move on.
For the slides showing student satisfaction: well, who will actually *check* whatever numbers you put on the slides? Everybody wants to hear the message that satisfaction is improving, or at least that it is not getting worse. Put together some numbers that tell them what they want to hear, and that's the job done. If it's only based on 80% of the data that might *theoretically* be available if you searched for it and chased up people who didn't supply it, don't waste your time chasing the other 20% - just use what you have.
To summarize: think about how your "admin" output is going to be *used*, and much of the work will probably disappear. The irony of management and administrative jobs is that they are often done by people who never find out how *quick and easy* management and administration really are, once you filter out all the tasks that are just creating random noise in the organisation.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: The actual question: "What do you recommend to do?"
Answer: Get busy with your admin work and create time for your other priorities.
Explanation -- why this answer is useful and correct: Your institution is not wrong -- your job is not wrong -- you are wrong.
Academia is not so special that it can afford to pay people to not do their jobs. Everybody wants a paid hobby -- so far, you do not have one. Your desire to "fix" the University is colliding with an iron rule of the workplace -- and your pay should clear up any misapprehension you may have aabout just where you are -- and the rule is that you do not start out in charge.
You say that in the following duties: "preparing schedules of courses, preparing calendars of bachelor thesis defenses, preparing slides of how satisfied the students are with their courses," you have found nothing which you deem important. Yet when you were an undergraduate, weren't these invisible processes important to your very ability to attend class, much less to do great things?
You may feel that you have no duty to help others. This is where you are wrong, especially when you are being paid to do just that. You may misunderstand the purpose of a University, which at any rate is not to pay you to have fun thinking.
If you are worth your pay, then you will demonstrate the mental and moral fortitude to accept your tasks, do your best, prioritize things, take responsibility for how you spend your time, communicate your success and failures, desires and disappointments, and succeed despite adversity. If you cannot become the master of some administrative tasking, how on earth can you be trusted to do greater things?
It is not as though you have passed through this phase of life, excelled, and now have proper expectations of respect and deference. You simply do not wish to be bothered.
I encourage you to do just what you have said, and seek other employment. No need to wait around issuing deadlines to your benefactors, either. Just go now. Good luck.
I await the downvotes of those who always got a trophy for failure, and who prefer happytalk.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/07/01
| 565
| 2,304
|
<issue_start>username_0: I understand this question is not strictly academic, but what I hope to find here is some feedback from someone who already had similar experience.
I live and study Electronics Engineering in Parma, a small town in northern Italy. I'm considering to move in order to get my Master Thesis done.
Now, as far as I understand, in USA the masters are somewhat different from what we have here in Europe. To the point that "Master Thesis" is not even a thing there, in fact I'm not able to find proposals online.
That said, I have friends who have done "gradated level" work there and validated it as a thesis back in Europe. So let's just assume I can get a place somewhere and be able to go there.
I immediately understand I will have to pay for my staying and the chances to get a salary are really narrow.
So, as per the title: can I work there (like weekend jobs) while studying?
Any help would be appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: Slight segue, but practical advice. Consider to do a Ph.D. instead. You would get the degree paid for and a stipend (at most competitive schools, large state schools as a floor, MIT as a ceiling). You can always bail part way through with a masters. Or maybe you find you like it and just persist and get the union card.
If time spent is an issue for you (and it SHOULD BE) than do some shopping around to find the departments or advisors that tend to the "old school" 4 year expectation rather than the modern bloat to 7 years. Despite what Anonymous Phys says, there are some available like that if you shop around (I went to one).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Most often, visitors to the US study under an F1 visa.
[F1 visas do not permit off-campus work during the first year](https://www.uscis.gov/working-united-states/students-and-exchange-visitors/students-and-employment), and after the first year off-campus work is limited to work related to the degree; on-campus work is allowed but limited to 20 hours per week.
Schools you apply to will be familiar with having international students attending; you should direct questions about employment opportunities to the programs and schools you may apply for; any larger institution likely has a dedicated office for international student needs and questions.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/07/02
| 2,307
| 9,832
|
<issue_start>username_0: I published my PhD thesis three years ago.
I have just come to know that a master’s student has copied three chapters from my PhD thesis half a year later. My PhD supervisor was also the supervisor of his master’s project. Each and every word and mathematical symbol is exactly the same. That person is now a PhD student himself. I’m obviously extremely shocked, angered and hurt by this. But before I take any action I wanted to ask the community.
How serious is plagiarism in a master’s thesis? I suspect that my PhD supervisor also had a role to play in this. He either tacitly ignored this blatant plagiarism or even actively suggested it. How should I deal with this given that my relations with my PhD supervisor will become strained if I report this?<issue_comment>username_1: Edit based on subsequent info by the OP...
This has to be raised with the relevant department / committee / Dean so that it can be addressed in a manner they see fit.
They could demand changes, or they could leave all alone.
If you don't report this, then if the Master's thesis gets published first **YOU** will be accused of plagiarism...
So you have to report this, but how you do that is going to be a difficult choice.
1. you could see your advisor first and get the master's student to change those chapters.
2. If that is not successful, then you have to go further, as the possible consequences of leaving it could be serious for you.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> How serious is plagiarism in a master's thesis?
>
>
>
In a word - very.
If someone knowingly copies verbatim *three chapters* off of another thesis (within a group or not), this is cause for severe disciplinary action.
You have graduated, but this puts you in a bad position as well - if you published your thesis after them, then your work will appear to be plagiarized, which may come back to haunt you.
First of all - do your research: your advisor may not be aware that this happened (they may have inadvertently given access the student to your thesis), and such a heavy accusation should be well backed up with timestamped details of both your thesis and the masters student. A person who will lift three chapters from another person's work may easily turn this into a I-said-they-said situation. For example, did you submit a draft to your review committee? Did you send a copy to a friend/colleague to read through?
Next, talk to your advisor immediately; raise the subject directly and politely, with the evidence you have collected.
If I were your advisor - I would immediately check the details of the case and see what happened. It could be a simple misunderstanding (the student took the chapters as reference and meant to completely rewrite them in their own words, and hadn't had a chance to do it), sheer stupidity/incompetence, or malice. Depending on that, I would act. If it were a simple misunderstanding, I would alert the dean of graduate studies (or the equivalent) and demand that the masters student apologize in writing to you (so that there's a timestamped email describing the incident, just in case). If the student is doing a PhD in the same institution, I would require that their studies be suspended/terminated/put on disciplinary review (they misrepresented themselves to the selection committee). If something unethical went on, I will push for both the masters degree and the graduate studies now to be revoked and terminated, respectively.
If your advisor protects your intellectual rights, you're fine.
If not (e.g. the advisor doesn't care enough, which is unlikely honestly **if you are indeed correct in your assessment**), you need to bring this up with an ombudsman or student affairs in your school. One of you won't be able to publish your thesis (in particular whomever publishes last). You must understand - the advisor and the school's prestige is at stake as well; having students publish plagiarized work is not something one wants to be known for.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: To answer your initial question: plagiarism of that degree (three chapters copied from a PhD thesis into a master's thesis) is a career ender. In contrast to PhD theses, masters' theses do not have similar dissemination and reference value, so the likelihood of this blowing up tends be quite less than when plagiarism occurs in a PhD thesis. Nevertheless this is sufficient for having a degree revoked.
You state "every symbol is the same". That makes it likely that the text in question was not even typed off but that electronic copy has been used, meaning that the student in question committed his fraud with the aid of people with access to the electronic copy of your thesis.
You write:
>
> How should I deal with this given that my relations with my PhD supervisor will become strained if I report this?
>
>
>
but that is quite underestimating what you are dealing with here. If this is dealt with according to academic standards and properly investigated, your PhD supervisor may well no longer be in the position to supervise either PhD students or master students for a significant amount of time if ever since it is rather likely that he was involved with handing electronic copy of the thesis to the master's student and with having his thesis be accepted.
So before you start anything at all, build and collect and corroborate your evidence to a very high standard since if push comes to shove, it is rather likely that your PhD advisor will prefer shoving you under the bus over ending there himself: after all, having to change careers is much easier for someone at your stage of life than for him.
It is unlikely that your case is a singular exception to how things do or at least can work at this institution, so having this dealt with will be a service to science. But you will make no personal friends by dealing with it, only enemies. It's still the right thing to tackle this rather than leave it to "someone else" but you really have to get your ducks in a row before anybody gets sufficient wind of what you are doing. If anybody checks back with the advisor before you have everything pinned down (of course, having properly published your thesis is a very solid reference point, but they could still claim that you stole your material from the master's student unfinished work), you could well end up being the one who gets his degree revoked since it may end up being the word of several people against yours.
So be sure to have the hard evidence you need, and be sure that there will be certifiable copies of it safe from tampering.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: The other answers are correct. This *has* to be reported. Doing so both protects yourself from accusations of plagiarism and protects the value of *your* degree. An institution that allows academic fraud quickly gets "a reputation."
Other answers have suggested that wholesale copying means that the plagiarist had access to an electronic copy, and that's quite likely. However, that *does not* indicate that the plagiarist was aided by someone in authority. Isn't your doctoral thesis available electronically in a database like ProQuest or one operated by your university library?
The real question is not whether to report; you have to. It is *how* to report. The question says, "I suspect that my PhD supervisor also had a role to play in this." That would be bad. My guess, based only on what's in the question, is that it was a passive role; your supervisor either didn't recognize the plagiarized text or chose not to do anything about it. You don't want to antagonize your supervisor by going over his or her head, but neither do you want to give the supervisor a chance to choose independently to do nothing about the matter.
So, pick someone in authority, like a department chair, dean, or university ombuds. Write to that person and your supervisor in the same message. Request a meeting with the two of them. Explain that the purpose of the meeting is that you have come to believe that a portion of your doctoral thesis has appeared unchanged in another student's master's thesis. Go to the meeting armed with the proof.
Most important, **do not accuse your supervisor,** who will surely deny complicity and will in any case be embarrassed at not having caught the plagiarism. Just present the facts and let others decide what, if anything, should happen to the supervisor.
There are three potential outcomes. First and best is that appropriate action is taken against the plagiarist. Second, the university either recognizes the problem but declines to take action or decides there really is not a problem; the latter seems very unlikely. Finally, your request for a meeting could be declined.
In the case of no meeting, you probably want to insist on seeing individually someone other than your supervisor so that you get your case on record. In the case of no action, you will have to decide whether to escalate to a higher authority in the university.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Someone at that level has been warned repeatedly about the dangers of plagiarism. Someone can't accidentally commit plagiarism to that degree any more than they could accidentally shoplift a book from a store.
If the problem is not addressed, the problem could get worse because the person has already been rewarded for "getting away with it."
**Many universities have an ethics department (or something similar).** I suggest you start by reporting it there to ensure it's handled appropriately and not just ignored. They may just bring the matter to the attention of the supervisor, but if it goes through the proper channel, then it will receive the proper due process and University control to ensure it's handled correctly.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/07/02
| 729
| 2,890
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm an undergrad who is applying a scholarship for Phd. I have already sent heck a lot of documents ranging from my academic background, letter of purpose, research statement etc.; it took more than two months to prepare them. There I - more than once - explained my future plans extensively.
Now, we are called for an interview, and we, again, need to fill a document where there is this question:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/wHcdR.png)
**What is the purpose of this question, exactly ? What do they expect to see ?**
I mean I have already explained what I wanted to, what are my plans extensively, and now they want me to (I guess summarise) write it again with less than 51 words.<issue_comment>username_1: I suspect there are two purposes.
1. To make it easier for the committee by giving a synopsis. They are busy. A short blurb is helpful to keep track of the different applicants.
2. To test your ability to synthesize and present information concisely. (The "elevator speech".)
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: **Question 1: Why the prompt?**
I had similar prompts during grad school when I had scholarships, both through the university and third party foundations. Another answer noted two reasons, but I would add more possible reasons:
1. To help them better know you. They probably don't have a hidden agenda.
2. To make sure your goals line up to the scholarship's mission (e.g., if the scholarship wants to train future research scientists and you write "become a corporate intellectually property lawyer" you probably won't get the scholarship).
3. To have something to share on their webpage if you get the scholarship (e.g., a University page about their scholars or a foundations page about the people they help).
4. To have something to share with their donors or funding agency. People like to hear about those who they are helping.
5. Sometimes universities have *scholarship pools* where all students apply to the same pool and a committee matches applicants to scholarships. Both my undergrad and graduate programs did this. This is related to my first point as well.
**Question 2: What should you write?** What you want to do. Try to match the scholarship's mission or purpose if the provide one. Examples might include:
* *I want to work towards discovering a cure for cancer as a researcher at the CDC. Specifically, I am interested in examining molecular carcinogenesis of throat cancer and how it may be used to predict cancer risk.*
* *I aspire to become a professor who teaches young minds about importance of conservation in a changing world.*
Also, make sure you have 51 words or less. If it's a web form, their software may truncate without telling you. If it's a paper form, they might disqualify you if you go over.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/07/02
| 333
| 1,354
|
<issue_start>username_0: According to this [site](https://research.moreheadstate.edu/c.php?g=107001&p=695202), when you're using the APA reference style, if a source has 3-5 authors, all authors should be mentioned in the first in-text citation, while only the first author need to be mentioned in the subsequent citation. Does "subsequent" applies to the whole work or just the current chapter or section?
I am writing a master thesis.<issue_comment>username_1: The website seems pretty clearly to refer to "document", not chapter. You should believe them and assume that they probably thought about it and didn't make an exception for a reason.
The intent is to clearly reference back to a particular source without unnecessarily making the document harder to read.
Document.
An exception might be assumed if the "thesis" is really just a collection of papers, possibly already published. Then, it might be assumed that "document" and "chapter" are the same thing, rather than "document" and "thesis".
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Though not explicitly stated in the original post, the question pertains to the use of "et al."
This is mostly a nonissue for APA 7th edition because three or more authors are now cited as "et al." from the first mention, whether parenthetical or not, except where it would create ambiguity.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/07/02
| 730
| 2,979
|
<issue_start>username_0: I did my Ph.D. from Germany where I received a tax-free fellowship, and now I got a postdoc offer in Bremen with salary range TVL-13. The 'Stufe' depends on the previous experience of the employee, but since I was not paying tax and was on a student visa during my Ph.D., will my previous research experience count in this case?
Would be great if somebody could answer.
Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: **In general, no.** The previous work experience you can claim for a higher entry point on the scale needs to be relevant for the job for which you are applying. There are very general rules about this (since the TV-L covers everything from dishwashers to head physicians) so there is some leeway in interpretation, but the basic assumption is that the duties of a postdoc are different enough from those of a PhD student that experience as the latter does not count for the former. Time in education (which a PhD counts as) are also explicitly excluded by the regulation.
It might be possible to claim that even as a PhD student, you already performed duties of a postdoc (independently organizing tutorial sessions for a large class, say, or managing the IT needs of your department), but the usual case for a higher entry point is if you previously were on a fixed-term contract of, say, five years where you received your PhD after year four. Then you could claim the last year as previous experience for a postdoc position at another university.
**EDIT:** See also [my previous answer to a similar question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/84647/13852). In short, you need to distinguish between times which *must* be counted by law (which your PhD experience definitely doesn't fall under) and times which *may* be counted if argued for specifically, e.g., with arguments as in my second paragraph.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The answer is a clear "it depends". For instance, the DFG has a document explaining this available [here](https://www.dfg.de/download/pdf/foerderung/rechtliche_rahmenbedingungen/sonderfall_medizin/handreichung_dfg_hrk_tvl_070911.pdf), where it is stated that this is decided on a case-by-case basis.
During the hiring process, there will be a form that you will have to fill out about your previous working experience. Feel free to list your PhD studies under a scholarship there as long as you don't make it appear like you were salaried. The decision whether it counts will be based on the information that you provide. If you can prove that the work you did was equivalent to salaried position (e.g., involving teaching and research, both with provable outcomes), this may work.
Bremen has the reputation for being a bit special, though, as they involve the "Personalrat" in many decisions during the hiring process, which most likely includes determining whether your previous experience counts, so the rules of thumb from other German universities should not be relevant for you.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/07/02
| 521
| 2,151
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been struggling with finding the right title for a section in a scientific paper (in computer science but I think it can apply to many other fields). I know it's not the first time I encounter this problem, so I guess it's worth asking the question.
For now the outline of the paper resembles something like this:
* **Introduction**: where I describe the problem and the outline of the paper
* **Background/Related work**: where I describe what the state-of-the art is in the field
* ***Big picture***: where I describe where we want to go and how we will go there from a high level standpoint (more detailed than the intro, but less detailed than what follows)
* **[... Implementation ... Technical Details ... Application ... etc]**: the body of the article
* **Conclusion**
I'm struggling with the title of the third part ***Big picture***. I want a title that conveys the idea of a high level description of what will follow so that the reader does not get lost in the technical details and keep in mind what the general plan is. Things I had in mind so far: big picture description, methodology, strategy, overview, plan of attack, ... However, none of these section title conveys exactly what I want.
---
**Is there a common practice for the title of such a section of a paper?**
**What could be a good fit?**<issue_comment>username_1: In my research area (software engineering), a widely used name for this section would be **Overview**.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I've used headings like "General Formalism" myself (not in CS), before turning to detailed examples. I think I've seen "General Approach" too, which seems close to what you want. In any case, "General X" is a useful construction, signifying a treatment of X on a higher level than will follow, yet still in more detail than in the introduction.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: In this paper (received best paper award at at top conference) <https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2462179>, such a section is called "**Approach at a glance**"
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: Overview. Approach. Schematic view.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/07/02
| 1,670
| 6,583
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm curious about the correct way to cite a paper which is flawed when I publish in academic journals. In the past I've added annotations to the bibliography (or included text in the main article) stating what the problem was. But now I wonder if instead if such annotations should sometimes start with "The authors have been notified that...."
The reason is that I have encountered a professor who shamelessly fails to issue errata for mathematical errors and (worse) also fails to issue errata when overlooked prior work (not mine) completely scoops her weaker results by 25+ years. (The weaker result has eclipsed the older one, drawing on the order of 100 citations.) More recently, I found that she has another article failing to cite a similar article proving a similar result, and she failed to issue errata for mathematical errors in 3 of her papers.
Her lack of citation case wasted a month of my time. (I wrote an article improving upon her paper, only to find my manuscript was still weaker than the original she failed to cite.)<issue_comment>username_1: If the paper duplicates or rediscovers earlier results, you can simply cite the earlier work together with the new one.
>
> All splines are reticulated [Smith 1963; Jones 2008].
>
>
>
Or if only the earlier paper is really relevant, you can cite it alone. But if the Jones paper is commonly cited in this context, and you don't cite it, a reviewer may wonder why. You can of course explain why you don't want to, but it may cause more friction between you and the reviewer than you want. Or, your apparent unfamiliarity with the famous literature in your field may, in a borderline case, cause your paper to be rejected before you have a chance to explain.
If you feel strongly, you can say something like "The work of Smith is often overlooked, but is particularly significant because blah blah blah...". In other words, you can promote the work of Smith if you don't think it is as widely known as it deserves, but don't explicitly put down Jones.
If a paper has an error that is *relevant* to what you are discussing in your paper, then describe it in the text.
>
> It was shown by Jones that every snark is a boojum [Jones 2008]; note that Equation 4.16 in that paper contains an error, where X should be replaced by Y.
>
>
>
I do not see any reason to mention that the authors have been notified. The reader will presume that you did so, because that's what any sensible academic would do. If the authors didn't do anything about it, you can take it up with the journal if you feel it's really important; but I think it's unprofessional to use your paper to passive-aggressively shame them.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think one should always cite the original proof of a result, if you can:
>
> This result is due to [Author1 1950].
>
>
>
Older papers are often difficult to read though, and if there is a more recent source which your readers may be more familiar with or find easier to understand, I would say that can and should be mentioned as well:
>
> For a modern treatment of this result, see [Author2 2018].
>
>
>
If this more recent source does not seem to be aware of the earlier proof, it may be reasonable to write something like
>
> (A weaker version of) this result was rediscovered by [Author2 2018].
>
>
>
But before you write this, be **absolutely sure** that you are correct that Author2's result is a special case of Author1's, and **absolutely ask someone more senior in the field** (who knows the history and the personalities involved) whether what you are writing is indeed correct and appropriate. On the other hand, don't let anyone convince you to write in such a way that gives Author2 credit for Author1's theorem (if it is indeed Author1's theorem).
There is no need to include remarks such as "The authors have been notified that . . .". However you still should notify the author (for one, they may convince you that their paper does not in fact have an error---there is no short supply of badly written papers which seem to have mistakes but in fact are easily correctable).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Just cite things based on your best knowledge. I wouldn't try to run some campaign to fight bad papers, though. You will get too distracted from your main topic, to show your work.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> The reason is that I have encountered a professor who shamelessly fails to issue errata for mathematical errors and (worse) also fails to issue errata when overlooked prior work (not mine) completely scoops her weaker results by 25+ years. (The weaker result has eclipsed the older one, drawing on the order of 100 citations.)
>
>
>
In this case, you don't need to cite the new (weak) work at all, unless it has other advantages.
>
> More recently, I found that she has another article failing to cite a similar article proving a similar result,
>
>
>
That's a fairly benign case of not having read enough. Just cite her paper and write "(see also [similar article] for a similar result)".
>
> and she failed to issue errata for mathematical errors in 3 of her papers.
>
>
>
This is trickier. If you depend on any results of hers that have incorrect proofs, you can point out the errors and how to correct them in a footnote after you cite them, or you can even include complete proofs in your paper if the error is sufficiently deep (the standard language to use is along the lines of "In Appendix A, we shall give a [streamlined / more accessible / corrected] proof of Theorem [number]", but make sure you still credit the original author with the rough ideas of the proof; e.g., "The proof follows an outline given in [original paper]"). An alternative way, avoiding the airing of dirty laundry in the refereeing process, is to post [errata on your personal website](http://www.cip.ifi.lmu.de/~grinberg/algebra/algerrata.html) (just make sure the website is going to stay up). This has the advantage that not only the readers of your paper find it; but it has the disadvantage that the readers of your paper will probably *not* find it unless you cite your errata. Finally, another alternative is to ever-so-slightly generalize the result if possible, which gives you a legit reason to include the proof without side eyes from the referees. None of these ways is guaranteed to completely avoid any bad blood, but this isn't something you can avoid when working in a field with a "publish first, think later" tradition.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/07/02
| 1,603
| 6,500
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a plot like this in my paper, but one of the co-authors says The x-axis is backward. I think as long as keeping all figures in the same style, it is ok. But I am not sure if there is really such a rule that years should increase from left to right? My field is environmental science.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/EvApj.png)<issue_comment>username_1: I think readers will be strongly expecting that time increases from left to right in a graph. It's probably not a "rule" that you'll find written down anywhere, but it's certainly the overwhelmingly common practice. Having time go from right to left will very likely confuse your readers, and I don't think it should be done unless there is a very strong reason for it.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_2: It is most common to increase chronologically from left to right any time you plot a timeseries along an x-axis, so that would be the standard unless you have a good reason not to do it that way. You are certainly allowed to do it differently - but you should have a good reason.
If you didn't do it that way a reader will tend to assume there must be some specific reason you chose to do it in a non-standard way. Alternatively, they will assume this must be done in the usual way so many readers will initially interpret it as if it was done in the usual way.
For your example image, even though I knew to pay attention to the x-axis, I initially thought there was a decrease in whatever you were studying over time. It took me a few extra moments to go, "oh, right, its the other way around, so I have to flip the trend...so it's actually been increasing over time, yes?"
One way to think of it is: readers are accustomed to being right-ward facing, wondering what comes next in the series. If you were trying to estimate what the past must have been like, based on more recent times, then it makes sense to start with the most recent time period on the left. If you are trying to imagine how things will be in the future, it makes more sense to start with the oldest time period and work towards the future on the right of the scale.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: The "rule" is that you should create figures that make it easy for readers to understand what you are showing. That's because we use figures to *convey* information. So, if your choice of axis is confusing readers, then you've violated the rule. Looking at your figure, I find it confusing, and several of the others here appear to have had the same reaction.
So yes, in this sense, there is a "rule" that years should increase left-to-right unless you have a very specific reason to it the other way around, and that reason is to make something easier to understand -- for example, if you were talking about what someone would experience who is traveling *backward in time*.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: The problem is that axes usually can be thought of a having an origin at 0 and extend from there in negative or positive directions. Normally on a horizontal axis the positive direction is to the right and negative is to the left. So moving from left to right moves to higher numbers. Of course time series plots don't usually show year 0, but you might want to think about where the origin (x=0) would be on your graph. It's true that this is really just a convention and probably one enforced by people who are used to left to right languages (not to mention people who think maps should have north at the top).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: As others have already pointed out: The *convention* is that the numbers should increase from left to right. And even though it's not really a *rule*, but only a *convention*, it is **so** common that any deviation might be hard to justifiy.
---
However, it **might** be the case that you're just using inappropriate labels. You mentioned that your field is environmental science, but did not exactly say what the graph shows. For example, if your graph shows information about something like "How much of a certain substance that was emitted in year X can still be detected today", then the order might make sense. But then, the labels should be "The number of years that have passed", turning the *absolute* years into a *duration*, then being properly ordered:
```
^
|
|
+-------|----------------|------------...-----------------|----------->
after 1 year after 10 years ... after ~100 years
(from 2017) (from 2007) (from 1917)
```
(That's only a wild guess, based on wondering why you chose the "wrong" direction in the first place - but you might think about it...)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: A graph axis is a (segment of a) [number line](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_line). Numbers increase to the right on a number line. Not all variables are numerical and therefore not all variables support axes: categorical variables are a prominent example.
The *first* thing readers notice about your graph (even before meaningfully looking at it) is that there is a decreasing trend. Do you intend to convey that some quantity is decreasing? If so, then this graph conveys your intent.
Only after carefully inspecting the horizontal axis does a reader discover that you have a non-numerical independent variable (because your labels are not in number line order). Do you intend to treat years as non-numerical data? If so, then this graph conveys your intent.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: >
> Is it acceptable?
>
>
>
If the paper is written in a right-to-left language - then yes, but then - please also place the Y axis labels on the *right* side of the figure.
Otherwise, it's only appropriate if:
* you have a reason to plot your figures like this, and
* you clearly indicate, graphically, the direction of progression along the X axis, with text or graphics or both, e.g.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/fNhux.png)
(ugly PNG image, but you catch my drift); and it wouldn't hurt to switch the Y-axis labels to the right *right* in this case as well.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: Backwards graphs are fairly common in some circles:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/BvcOa.gif)
[Source](https://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/last_400k_yrs.html)
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/07/03
| 1,840
| 7,822
|
<issue_start>username_0: My PhD involved using a commercially available software to carry out simulations. Now I am pursuing postdoc at another lab. My current advisor wants me to develop new complex models for which I don't have any academic experience in. I have 3-4 months before he starts expecting outcomes.
I am panicking as I don't have theoretical background to do the job. This will involve studying 2 courses right from scratch. (continuum mechanics, non linear finite element analysis). This, I have to self study right from basics and I am feeling that I will fail.
I never lied on my resume. I knew this project will involve more rigor than what I had done before. But now, I feel that I should have done more coursework during my PhD. My undergrad was in different field, so never took classes for these subjects. Now, as a postdoc in a lab, it's impossible to do actual courses in a university. I feel miserable.
Do you have any suggestions on how I should proceed with this?<issue_comment>username_1: I started my PhD in computer science in 2002. My last prior formal education was a master's degree awarded in 1975. Everything I knew about the prior quarter century of developments in computer science I had learned by self-education from books and papers, as well as practical experience and a couple of industry courses. Although I did take courses during my PhD studies, my dissertation research depended on basic ideas in linear algebra that I learned from books.
I find it hard to understand deciding in your 20's that you are too old to learn new basic material from books, papers, on-line tutorials, and other self-education.
To proceed, I suggest discussing your need for more basics with your advisor, not in a spirit of expecting failure, but asking for advice on what you need to know and how to go about learning it. Your advisor may recommend books, or a course you can audit.
For your long term future, it would be better to learn now how to learn without courses, and get over your current block. Avoiding it by collaboration will just leave the block in place to stop you the next time you need to add to your basic knowledge.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You need to disentangle *your expectations of yourself* from *what other people are expecting from you*.
You have every right to feel uncomfortable about this situation, simply because from your life experience so far (as you have described it, at least) this is a new situation for you. You have spent a long time being educated. Education often works by teaching you how to do something and then asking you to do it. This is a comfortable situation: "We won't ask you to do something you don't know".
After this, having to do something that you really have not studied and really do not know how to do is naturally rather a shock.
First thing: eliminate guilt about not having studies these subjects earlier. It is not doing anything useful, and you can't go back in time.
The next thing is that this is going to be a good step in finding out who you are. Some people are at their best doing what they know how to do, becoming more and more expert at it throughout their lives. For others, the delight is to be always doing something that they do *not* already know how to do. I know a plumber who sorts out people's PC catastrophes for them: he has never trained for it, but he loves learning new things. I have just been proof-reading and editing some texts in Malagasy, a language which I do not know *at all*. It was tiring, but I enjoyed the challenge.
Some people are one way, some are the other way. There is no dishonour about being one as opposed to the other.
**The one valid concern you have** is that your advisor may be misunderstanding your level of knowledge. If you think your advisor thinks you are expert in fields that, in fact, you know nothing about, then you need to correct that impression. But don't do it in terms of "I can't do it because I haven't been trained". Do it in terms of "I don't know *this* or *that* subject, so I will have to get up to speed on them in order to get this work done". That way your advisor has been warned there is a risk that you may need extra help; but will also be encouraged by seeing someone who *wants* to learn and is *willing* to learn.
If I were you, I think I would go ahead with the job. But it is **your** decision. Just make it for the right reasons. Don't include any guilt about not having done the right courses before. That isn't relevant. And don't include *too much* worry about not being 100% successful, or taking longer than you should. As long as your advisor has been warned, you will not be letting anyone down.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> I am panicking
>
>
>
First, try to stop doing that :)
There's nothing particularly alarming in the situation you describe. It's common not to have all the ideal conditions for a research project to succeed. Sometimes some of the conditions are our own level of knowledge in a certain area of expertise. It's fine, nobody knows everything. You are not required to be the best at everything, you are required to do your best with whatever the conditions are. If the PI chose to hire you for this job knowing your background they certainly had good reasons to do so.
There are two keys in this kind of risky project:
1. A good plan
2. Good communication with the PI
At the start it is crucial that your PI knows about your doubts and that you agree with them about a plan. The plan should be detailed enough with milestones and preferably an exit strategy if things don't work out. You should have a regular meeting with the PI to inform them of your progress. It doesn't matter if the plan has to be changed during the course of the project, what matters is that you and the PI know where things are at any time and discuss every option. The goal is to avoid high expectations due to a misunderstanding of the details, and to avoid discovering critical problems too late.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: **You learn.**
You've already done undergraduate studies, a Masters, a PhD. You've learned what it's like to learn. All you need to do now is self-teach. It's easier of course if there's someone else to teach you, but that situation won't persist forever. If you only ever learn when someone else teaches you, you restrict yourself out of many fields for which there isn't a convenient teacher. Further, at the edge of human knowledge there's no teacher; you must teach yourself.
This situation really isn't that different from finding an interesting research paper not in your specialization. For example when the first exoplanets were discovered, it was a very exciting result, and lots of astronomers were interested. You can bet that many of them didn't know anything about how to find exoplanets. They taught themselves. You can do it too (you've undoubtedly already done this too actually, when you did your PhD).
I'd start by going to the library and getting some textbooks/monographs on the topics. Read them, work through the exercises. If the topics really are elementary, then even better: you can ask undergraduates at your institution for help. There's no rule that a postdoc should know more than an undergraduate - in physics for example it's possible to earn a Bachelor's degree in most universities without ever taking a course on General Relativity, which means one probably knows less about the theory than an undergraduate who's taken the course. That's not a problem, since one undoubtedly knows more about other areas of physics than the undergraduate.
It's likely your supervisor is not expecting instant results, especially if they're aware you don't have the necessary theoretical background, so you'll have time.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/07/03
| 470
| 1,930
|
<issue_start>username_0: >
> Is it okay to mail an Associate Editor in his personal e-mail?
>
>
>
I have submitted a manuscript in a journal and I want to know the status of my manuscript.
The publisher of my journal is "World Scientific".
There is no option to mail the Associate Editor of the journal to whom I have assigned my manuscript.
Neither is any email address of the Associate Editor provided in the Journal Hoempage.Only his name and affiliation has been given.
Also there is only two templates of email address provided which are
1.Extending Submission Deadline.
2.Extending Revision Deadline.
There is no template to ask about the status of the manuscript.
Is it fine to mail the Associate Editor in his personal email provided in his homepage?
Kindly comment.<issue_comment>username_1: I would avoid doing that, except as a last resort. The person is likely to be confused (best) or offended (bad). Try to work first through the journal itself.
But also, it often takes quite a while for information about progress to filter through the system and it often takes quite a while for reviews themselves to be conducted.
If it just "wanting to know" for informational purposes, I recommend patience. If it is "needing to know" for some other purpose then you can press it, but, again, go to personal accounts only as a last resort.
You could, of course, ask the journal itself how to contact the editor and whether it is appropriate for your needs.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Maybe not send stuff to journals with no route to ask questions? Plus I don't know the publisher. Sounds sketchy. Why not IEEE or APS or the like?
I wouldn't ever contact the editor via personal channels. He will want there to be a wall to separate admin stuff like you have. I would pull the paper first. Although even here sounds like you will have to use their awful contact system.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/07/03
| 2,005
| 8,077
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently finished my Ph.D. in the U.S. and will be leaving soon for a job in industry. I have got a precious gift for my advisor as I really admire him and he is one of my role models and totally deserves it.
Now for giving him the gift I was thinking maybe I should take him out to dinner or something and then give him the gift. The problem is during these years we’ve never had such a relationship! Like we’ve been cool and he’s always been super friendly and supportive, but I have not even spoken to him over the phone!! Like we’ve either met in his office for in-person meetings or have been in touch via emails (although he twice invited the whole department to his house for barbecue and I went to his house, but that’s pretty much it).
So I feel like it might be a little weird to ask him out for drinks or dinner, especially since he has a family and kids and I’m single. I mean if I had a wife I would totally invite his whole family but now I don't know what to do.
I am not planning for a farewell party either otherwise I would have invited him.
Should I just go to his office like always and give him the gift and say goodbye? Or should I ask him out? Or should I ask his whole family out? What is the professional/moral way of doing this?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> What is the professional/moral way of doing this?
>
>
>
I think that if you have never invited/been invited to a casual gathering involving the advisor's family, it will be awkward to do so now. If you feel like a one-on-one dinner invitation is too much, how about a lunch appointment?
I will say this - many universities have strict rules on receiving *expensive* gifts from students/subordinates. If your meaning of precious is simply "of significant emotional value" (say, you made a piece of art yourself, or found a book that they really like) that's fine; if you mean expensive (say, an expensive watch) - your advisor may not be able to accept the gift at all (or, as is the case in my university, will have to report the gift and then give it to the school).
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Since you have completed your doctorate, you are no longer bound by gift rules, I suppose. Your relationship to your advisor now changes from one in which you have a subordinate role to one of collegiality.
I don't see any particular issue here, but suggest, pretty strongly, that you invite the prof and his spouse. You don't need to invite the whole family, as it can be a more adult affair with just you three, or you three and a "date". Unless the spouse is in the same field, the conversation will be more general and interesting, I think.
Presumably you aren't strapped for funds at this time or you wouldn't be considering this. If he understands that then he won't necessarily be uncomfortable accepting the invitation.
It is good to thank your advisor. But things of monetary value aren't really that important. Saying *thank you* is more "precious", actually.
But it is also especially good to maintain that collegial relationship and let it develop over time if you can. But if you are staying in the same general area or expect to return, doing this in a year or so, rather than immediately would be even better, IMO.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Don't invite the family. Too much a production. And this is more of a colleague interaction. Even dinner alone is a hassle because he doesn't want to lose evening and be away from home.
Maybe do lunch. Less of a production and easier to get away from family. Probably easier in summer when no teaching.
No meal is a fine option also.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: First, congratulations.
Second, thanks for wanting to thank your advisor.
I hope what's "precious" about your gift is "appropriate" and not "very expensive". If the latter, perhaps reconsider, or wait a year until you've been employed in industry so there's no question that you can afford it.
Ask him out to lunch - not dinner with his whole family. Extend the invitation in a way that allows him to say "no" graciously.
Finally: when I defended my dissertation my advisor and his spouse asked *me* out to dinner and gave me a small gift for my then one year old daughter. (I had moved away to a job so they couldn't include her or my wife.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I think lunch is completely appropriate and dinner with family sounds awkward if you have never met his family. At the time, my advisor was very supportive and encouraging as yours but he has always remained very professional and never got into discussions regarding his private life but once I have finished my thesis, he became more informal and started to talk about his family, grandsons and his vacation time and also about politics, by giving his political ideas during the lunchtime. The informality comes with time I suppose.
I think a very expensive gift will surely put him/her in an uncomfortable situation. You can simply buy flowers or a nice box of chocolates. This was what I have done and he was very happy that I brought some nice chocolates to him! (I have already known that he loves particularly chocolates so much.)
You can also have a coffee in his office as well if he does not have time for lunch.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Make sure you have graduated, so you are no longer a student, and there can be no perceived connection between the gift and your grades. You want the gift to be outside university rules.
University teachers often are not well paid. How shabby are his clothes and car? The reason I ask is this: If you take the teacher and his wife out to dinner, they may have to hire a babysitter, which may be expensive for them.
Lunch is usually ideal. It has the significance of a meal, without the cultural connotated social pressure of dinner. It also does not interfere with his family time, which may be precious to his family.
If the gift is not so expensive, (Maybe $20) but more symbolic, then you may give it earlier in the meal. The advisor will likely not want to talk about the gift very much. If it is more expensive, ($50-100) then give it to him as you say good bye, and ask him to open it later, so he will not open it in front of you. This way he can be much more comfortable during your meal together.
Do not give an extremely expensive gift. Honestly, a used book with a short note explaining why you love the book would feel like a significant gift to the teacher, even if the book only cost you $2. Cherished books are much more valuable than their price tag. University teachers often are not well paid. How shabby are his clothes and car? The reason I ask is this: If you take the teacher and his wife out to dinner, they have to hire a babysitter, which may be difficult for them.
If you are from another country, you could give something from your homeland. (That might end up being more expensive, but because it is a cross-cultural gift, you can get away with something higher. Your university may have rules regarding the value of a gift, so please protect your advisor from professional difficulty. My husband used to teach at the university. and I teach now. Our experience is that the international students tend to give more expensive gifts, (a fancy pen, a large hand painted scroll, a small teapot) so even though they were sometimes costlier than we would have been comfortable with, we recognized this was a cultural difference and were humbly grateful for the respect and appreciation the student was clearly expressing.
Here is a thought: You can tell/write to him "I would really like to take you out to lunch or dinner this next week to thank you for all you have done. What is your schedule like? How would Tuesday or Wednesday work for you?" He will probably say it isn't necessary. If you tell him again that you would really like to do this, he will probably accept. But by asking him *which is better for him* he can chose the situation that can fit with his family's needs.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/07/03
| 1,038
| 4,311
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've studied in this college for Diploma and have now proceeded to the Bachelor's Degree. I am facing some problem that may cause me to extend my course.
The system of the faculty is like this: When you want to take certain subject, you need to pass all the prerequisite subject for that subject in the previous semester. This is reasonable by far. The prerequisite subjects are listed on the booklet sent to us during the faculty briefing.
But up until recently (my second last semester), I was told by the faculty staff that I cannot take my FYP (Final Year Project) because I did not finish all my prerequisite subjects. I was shocked and I showed her that the booklet of faculty briefing didn't state that at anywhere. She told me that this information is stated on a separate website specially for FYP. The problem is, I didn't have a single clue about the website before I went to take it. How was I suppose to know this information in the past semester?
There is no post about this information in the college official bulletin board website, and I didn't even receive a single email about this. The staff told me that I should be alert with all that kind of information.
I tried to appeal to the dean, wanted to talk about my issue face to face. But the staff stopped me and didn't allow me to talk with the dean. The reason they give is that dean has no time for me. They suggested me to write a formal letter and wait for dean's reply.
I have submitted my formal letter, but the due date for the registration of FYP is few days later. If they do not reply me for this issue, I cannot take my FYP in this semester. If this happen, I will have to wait another year just to take the single subject for two semesters (FYP part 1 and 2), and my graduation will have to delayed for one whole year. I don't want to extend my course because of this reason.
They do have a course structure for us to follow, but it didn't force us to take exactly same as the course structure, so we can plan our course before every semester. I didn't follow it because I need to handle harder subject in the earlier semester so that I can focus on my FYP in the later semester.
What should I do and try, so that I will not have to extend my course? I have also tried emailing to the dean about this problem.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't know anything about your university or its normal practices, so this is only tentative.
If your university has any sort of office for student advocacy, go to them with your concerns. Hidden rules aren't appropriate in any situation, though they may be permitted - unfortunately.
In case there is no such office, go to any professor that you trust and who knows you well, and ask him/her to be your advocate. The dean will certainly offer a bit of time to a professor that they won't to you. You are asking for an exception to the "rules". Make sure that you have a basis for the exception (you have the needed knowledge to proceed) and not just that the rule is unfair if it is hidden.
Unfortunately, you are possibly making people uncomfortable and when that happens they sometimes behave badly. The more confrontational you make it, the worse it may get, so be aware of the risks.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Three suggestions:
* Does your university have a "Dean of Students"? (This is usually a different position than the "Dean".) An ombudsman? A "Student Success Center"?
Probably none of these people could override a faculty member's decision, but they could at least give you a sense of how the university's bureaucracy works and what your options are.
* Are you a strong student overall? Have you exceeded expectations in any of your classes? Otherwise made a positive impression? And have you found a faculty member who is willing to supervise your thesis?
If you have a faculty mentor who supports your case, believes that the prerequisites should be waived, and volunteers to supervise your Final Year Project, then you have much better chances.
* If you are able to negotiate a waiver of the prerequisite requirement, you should make a plan to learn it on your own. For example, depending on circumstances, you might volunteer to take an exam on the subject at the beginning of the next semester.
Good luck.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/07/03
| 597
| 2,483
|
<issue_start>username_0: I just submitted a part of my thesis to a conference. But in the document, although in fact it is a paper to be submitted to a journal, I have mistakenly left a few words as “in this thesis, my thesis,.. etc”. Because of the deadline and some timing constraints, I could not find time to replace them.
Do you think it’s a bad thing to upload a paper with thesis words in it? Would it be a negative consideration in terms of the perspectives of the scientific committee?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't know anything about your university or its normal practices, so this is only tentative.
If your university has any sort of office for student advocacy, go to them with your concerns. Hidden rules aren't appropriate in any situation, though they may be permitted - unfortunately.
In case there is no such office, go to any professor that you trust and who knows you well, and ask him/her to be your advocate. The dean will certainly offer a bit of time to a professor that they won't to you. You are asking for an exception to the "rules". Make sure that you have a basis for the exception (you have the needed knowledge to proceed) and not just that the rule is unfair if it is hidden.
Unfortunately, you are possibly making people uncomfortable and when that happens they sometimes behave badly. The more confrontational you make it, the worse it may get, so be aware of the risks.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Three suggestions:
* Does your university have a "Dean of Students"? (This is usually a different position than the "Dean".) An ombudsman? A "Student Success Center"?
Probably none of these people could override a faculty member's decision, but they could at least give you a sense of how the university's bureaucracy works and what your options are.
* Are you a strong student overall? Have you exceeded expectations in any of your classes? Otherwise made a positive impression? And have you found a faculty member who is willing to supervise your thesis?
If you have a faculty mentor who supports your case, believes that the prerequisites should be waived, and volunteers to supervise your Final Year Project, then you have much better chances.
* If you are able to negotiate a waiver of the prerequisite requirement, you should make a plan to learn it on your own. For example, depending on circumstances, you might volunteer to take an exam on the subject at the beginning of the next semester.
Good luck.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/07/03
| 755
| 3,170
|
<issue_start>username_0: This might be a strange question, but I was curious how much weight goes into when you took a course. I took some math courses 4-5 years ago and did well in them. Will the fact that I took courses from that long ago carry less weight when applying to grad school?<issue_comment>username_1: Maybe a bit, probably not a lot. But it depends on what you are applying for and to where and what you have been doing since you took those courses.
Generally speaking, admissions doesn't depend on any single thing. Someone, perhaps a committee has to make a judgement about your likelihood of success in a particular degree program. Normally that includes lots of things.
But it would be more of a factor if the degree is highly dependent on the knowledge from those courses and you haven't been doing anything related or similar in the time in between. For some things it is easy to come back up to speed. For other things it is harder.
But the only way to know is to apply and listen to any feedback you get.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: No, it does not matter when you took the course, so long as it is finished by the date required by the admissions policy.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: This varies on a case by case basis: you can imagine that the contents of an electronics or genetics course from 10 years ago may now be stale, but maybe not for a vector calculus course. The admissions committee will the the ultimate judge of that.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: This depends a lot on what you've been doing in the interim. At one extreme, even if you had a solid coursework background, but have not been exercising it, or anything related, for the last decade, and admissions committee will worry that you're not up-to-speed.
At another extreme, if you did well in coursework and have been doing serious stuff subsequently, more-or-less related to your future goals, that's obviously a plus. That is, the "stale coursework" potential problem is *not* a problem for you since you've not only maintained, but improved, your chops meanwhile.
True, it's easier to flash a transcript to "prove" some knowledge or expertise, while professional knowledge or expertise is not universally set up to be "documentable".
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: It will depend on the institution’s policies, as well as the graduate committee in question.
I have been in settings where both *when* and *where* you took a class is factored into things, and sufficiently “stale” classes aren’t weighted particularly highly because the content, while valid, isn’t what would be taught now.
Using the molecular biology example in another answer, the field has moved fast enough that a course taken a decade ago is now actively *obsolete*, while for some other courses, it might not matter (for example, the foundational classes in my field are built on methods that haven’t changed much).
If the committee is using it to decide “Can you take classes in X and succeed?” it likely won’t matter. If they’re using those classes to go “Great, you’re already equipped with classes in X, Y and Z.” then it very much might.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/07/04
| 705
| 2,925
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently got acceptance in an SCI journal, and my professor has told me that he will be a corresponding author (CA) even though I have done almost all the work.
Does not being the corresponding author hurt my chances, as I am looking to start an academic career very soon. Should I ask my professor to be the CA instead?
My professor is a real nice guy and has taught me a lot, but I am concerned in this case. Any suggestions?
Edit: My field is Electrical Engineering and Computer Networks specifically.<issue_comment>username_1: First, take time to read [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/84476/what-is-the-explicit-meaning-of-corresponding-author) to understand what does the Corresponding Author mean for different publishers. The definitions vary, but in principle CA is the author who can be contacted about the paper results after the publication, including the long-term period (10+ years). Perhaps, you are the best person to act as a CA for this paper? Do ask yourself the following questions:
1. How certain is that you will be working in academia in the next 1 year? 3 years? 5 years? 10 years? What about your Professor?
2. If you provide your current contact details (address, email) as a CA, how likely is that your correspondence will reach you at this address in 1 year? 3 years? 5 years? 10 years? What about your Professor?
3. A CA may receive some specific questions about the study, but also broader questions about possible ways how it can be changed, adapted for a new problem, applied to a particular area in another discipline. There may be questions on how the methods used in the study compare to what other groups were doing or are planning to do. Are you fully prepared to answer these questions? What about your Professor?
If based on the answers, you decide that you are the best person to act as a CA, simply initiate a discussion with your Professor, using your answers as key points of your proposal.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: It's the norm. Arguably it should not be the norm (like advisors tacking on to papers where they did zero work). But it is the norm. The idea is grad students are little mayflies and the prof has corporate memory. So roll with it. First author is still more important. Also, make sure you get to publicize the work at conferences, etc.
I like the spirit though. Keep looking out for number one.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: Some journals will allow multiple corresponding authors if you request it of the editor. It might be a decent compromise if your professor is ok with it.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: It is not a problem for your career not to be the corresponding author on this paper, and there is no reason to problematise it. But you should be the first author on the author list, given what you've said about the distribution of work.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2019/07/04
| 1,108
| 4,728
|
<issue_start>username_0: I’m quitting my PhD. The decision has been made. The reasons boil down to diminished interest in the research subject and disappointment with the university’s managerial practices (nothing is done on time or well). A while ago I informed my supervisor about these concerns and gave him the heads up that I may be leaving after a period of self reflection. He found my concerns justified and made reasonable adjustments, what was within his power, but it finally rained down on me that no matter what I won’t pull forward the PhD.
We have an amiable professional relation and I’m sure he may be interested in knowing what went wrong and when. I also want to diminish the blow as I suspect he had put lots of hope on my research, not to mention that I was his first PhD student and my departure will be a hindrance to his tenure. He also has a bit of an ego which I'd rather keep appeased (This is in Europe, in one of the countries with more hierarchy-based academic systems.)
In hindsight, what **concrete information** would an experienced academician expect to get from a PhD who is leaving?<issue_comment>username_1: This is culturally dependent, of course, but almost all of what you say about him is positive. Therefore it might be a good idea to share it. If at some future time you decide to return to academia, perhaps in a different field or university, it would be useful to have left all bridges standing, with good feelings all around. If he is sorry to see you go and wishes you the best in all things, you have set a foundation for your future. You may need it or not.
But, depending on country and field, he may not *expect* anything. In that case, a positive statement, especially if written, can be especially helpful to your future.
It is also possible that if he agrees with you on the impediments in place by the university itself, that he may have, in your statement, some ammunition to try to change them.
---
Had your experience with the advisor been mostly negative, on the other hand, I'd recommend you say nothing. It is a bad idea to leave enemies behind you. Some other folks here leave because of advisor conflicts and even malfeasance. Sometimes silence is the better policy than honesty.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In general, I feel the two items you list already (over-)fulfill what justification you strictly speaking owe an advisor on your way out. You lost interest in your research subject, and you are disappointed with the university's managerial practices. I am not sure there is all that much more to say with regards to the first item, and it's not particularly actionable for the advisor anyway.
For the second item, I am sure he would appreciate some concrete examples of situations that you feel where inadequately handled. At the very least, this gives him ammunition for future discussions around improving managerial processes (*"we already lost je\_b because of situations X, Y, and Z"* is a much easier to make argument towards change than an abstract *"we need to improve some stuff"*).
The only areas where I would tread lightly is problems where he is himself the culprit, or could have reasonably made a difference but didn't. Personally, I would use the common advice from Workplace.SE here on exit interviews - don't use them as a chance to blow off some steam. The chance that you will enact positive change is low, but the probability that you burn some bridges is very high.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: The fact that you're leaving the Ph.D. program altogether is different from switching Ph.D. advisors (or changing universities). I switched Ph.D. advisors and it caused some hard feelings, but I didn't have the concerns you evince (which is commendable). I informed my advisor that I was unable to get sufficient traction in the research topic he proposed and left it at that. He was struggling to get traction in his own research, so I don't think any further feedback would have been helpful.
After a career in academic and corporate research that is approaching 40 years, let me offer my perspective. The academic world is brutal, and I suspect it is about to undergo a serious contraction. Academicians for the most part don't really know very much, and most of them couldn't survive outside the academic environment. Getting out now is better for your future than getting out later, so you've made a smart move. Capture whatever you can from the experience, some of which is useful, and try to preserve some of the attitude that attracted you to academic research to real world problems - they actually offer more opportunities for meaningful work, and ultimately they're more interesting.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/07/04
| 1,442
| 6,082
|
<issue_start>username_0: Today`s publications lack of the possibility to be extended by others after being published. A data base paper could for example benefit when contributors would gain authorship by opening data with a meta description.
Blockchain is a technology which offers the inheritance of documents. Each block can be seen as a single owner.
In case of scientific publications that means:
* Paper x00 is written by x.
* Paper x00 is taken by z and extended to xz0.
* Paper x00 is taken by y and extended to xy0.
* Paper xz0 is liked most by q and extended to xzq. q finds the advanced paper
xz0 better than xy0 or the original x00.
There would be no merge options (xy0 and xz0 are merged to xyz), but fields within science would develop interesting publication trees over time with self pruning capabilities. Most useful contributions will inherit, none useful extensions will "die out". You can still cite other sources.
I worked as an informatician in the barely digitized field of forestry and found myself citing a technology called optimization developed in the 50`s.
Specifically the "Downhill Simplex" method developed by two authors Nelder and Mead.
I also know that only the basic principle of the algorithm is used in today's
libraries. Details have been changed. Multiple thousands of method clones exists published over half a century. The implementation I rely on differs from
the original published one. I always wondered who contributed most over the decades. Might have been a lot of scientists who made advances on the algorithm which others did rely on. But I do now know.
What benefits and what negative effects would such an application have I do not think of? Energy costs could be another issue which I cannot quantify.
To clarify, the benefit I see is the expandable authorship.<issue_comment>username_1: Scientific publishing is certainly experiencing a lot of changes and is looking very different from what is used to, even, let's say, 20 years ago. The increasing role of electronic publications, open-access journals, mere publication capabilities, open preprint services (like arXiv), ability to attach media\data\source code to the publication – all that has revolutionized and will continue to change the way we publish, read and comprehend scientific publications.
Nevertheless, all those advances solved (or attempted to solve) crucial problems in publishing and/or significantly increased the quality of the experience, both for the reader and the author. **The extension/correction of the existing work does not seem to me like one of them.**
Nobody prohibits (and usually it is encouraged) subsequent publications that extend the subject knowledge. That's why we have references at the end of the paper. Nowadays, a lot of publishers offer easy access to referenced material (sometimes, even across the publishers) in a click of a button. In addition to that, there is often also "Citations" section which would show the papers that cite this paper.
Example (just took a random paper from my field, not implying by any means that IEEE does a perfect job):
* [The paper "Error analysis for the truncation of multipole expansion of vector Green's functions" by <NAME> and <NAME> in IEEE MWCL.](https://doi.org/10.1109/7260.933781)
* IEEE provides [references that this paper contains](https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/933781/references) with links to the available full-texts, contexts, and several means of accessing it.
* Also, IEEE provides access to [papers that cite it](https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/933781/citations) both from IEEE and other publishers.
All that ensures the continuity and availability of the research. I certainly do not see the value of creating a new revision of the same paper later to include new contributions from the same or different authors. That would be a new publication.
As for the corrections, with electronic publications, the authors themselves can correct their paper if the publisher policies allow that. Moreover, let's not underestimate the value of the *"Correction to the paper"* publications. While some of them are not so interesting, others might offer valuable content by showing what and why it was wrong in the original paper. Again, with electronic publications, these correction papers can be linked to the original publications.
To sum it up. While blockchain can be useful to create the system you have described, I do not see the need for this system. And this need, in my opinion, should be investigated and analyzed first in great detail. Also, see some of my points on [blockchain usage for avoiding fraud in collected data](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/131802/56594). Here I would repeat the final thought:
>
> I am very interested to see practical uses of blockchain in other areas (let's see where the smart contracts go in 5-10 years). Academia and research process does not scream for blockchain and its usability is totally unclear and hard to implement.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In general, researchers prefer to finish a paper, publish it in its final state, and then be done with it. This avoids [dependency hell](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dependency_hell): in subsequent papers you can write "By Lemma 3.17 of [14], ..." and know that Lemma 3.17 won't change or be renumbered. It also makes it easy to prepare
lists of publications for Department chairs, deans, grant-making agencies, and others.
If someone wants to build on a previous paper (someone else's or their own), they can write a new paper and cite the previous work.
Finally, the security features of blockchain aren't really needed: there just aren't a lot of researchers falsely claiming to have contributed to papers. But the [Stacks Project](https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/) is somewhat along the lines you suggest. It is a huge book on algebraic geometry -- with ongoing updates, additions, and improvements, maintained as open-source software might be. It currently stands at 6,600 pages with 351 contributors.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/07/04
| 1,492
| 6,770
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been dealing with an awkward situation regarding evaluation of my submitted paper. The publisher is one of the big well known OA, and the journal is one of their leading journals (in terms of niche visibility and impact factor). We were invited to submit a paper by a colleague who'd be preparing a special issue in that journal.
I have submitted a paper for their evaluation, providing few names of potential reviewers under request by the submission system. I eventually received the evaluation results by three reviewers. Two reviewers suggested structural and grammar adjustments, and one produced overly negative vague remarks *which mostly missed the point of the paper*. The managing editor (not our colleague) rejected the paper but offered the option to Revise & Resubmit.
Fine: we applied changes suggested by reviewers and replied to all comments, in a politely manner. Through the new cover letter we raised concerns regarding the rather aggressive behaviour of a reviewer. After a while we received further comments. The two previous reviewers accepted the paper, and the one negative reviewer *produced further negative vague remarks, unrelated to the previous ones*. In short, this reviewer clearly *ignored the goal and technical background of the paper*. Two additional reviewers were added, who made further questions and structural suggestions. Editor recommended major changes, and gave a deadline of **five days** to respond.
We did respond within five days with the suggestions applied and a cold, technical rebuttal to the one negative reviewer. **Again** we appealed to the editor via submission system claiming a suspected conflict of interests.
After a while the paper was rejected, no specific reason given. We read the comments by the reviewers: the additional ones accepted the paper whilst the one negative reviewer made *further vague, one-line derogatory remarks without any mention to our previous response*.
I wrote to the colleague who had invited us and asked him to take a look into the situation. He said he gave instructions that the paper should be accepted. The managing editor now contacted us suggesting minor changes but now presenting **personal concerns** about our paper followed by general comments which are beside the main scope of the manuscript alongside a long list of cherry-picked typos and grammar suggestions. This person states:
>
> "I suspect that the MS is peppered with more mistakes and great care should be taken to ensure that these are corrected before the MS gets published."
>
>
>
We are given three days to respond.
I have submitted dozens of manuscripts and never went through such an awkward situation. I now strongly suspect that the conflict of interests stems from the managing editor itself, and wouldn't be surprised if the resilient nonsensical reviewer proves a sock-puppet.
I am not sure on what is the best to be done. I suspect the paper will get accepted ultimately, under request of of the inviting colleague.
Regardless of the final decision which is certainly coming, should I later contact the EIC and **report this situation and managing editor**? In case an editor is playing games other authors might be affected.<issue_comment>username_1: You have not identified any conflict of interest in your post. The managing editor can, and should, criticize your work.
It seems that the colleague who invited your paper mislead you by failing to clearly state they were not actually editing the special issue.
The reason you have not encountered this situation before is that most editors are not thorough enough to provide their own advice to the authors. This is unfortunate.
Do not claim someone has a conflict of interest unless you have solid evidence. The evidence needs to show that they have some way of directly benefiting from the rejection of your manuscript. Unsupported claims of conflict of interest hurt your reputation. Your negative reviewer is much more likely to be lazy, rather than a competitor.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Just pull the paper. Should have pulled it earlier. There are a lot of fish in the sea. Don't waste time on this journal. You know how to submit elsewhere.
Don't bother with some complaint on the editor or reviewer. There is nothing special to show rivalry and given anonymity, you can't really discern it even if true.
There are a gazillion of these little tiffs with writers and reviewers. Sometimes just bad papers and author won't realize it. Sometimes academics who like to puff themselves up as gatekeepers. But who cares which. Move on. Their loss. Getting into it further just reduces yourself.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It has been decided that your paper should not be published.
The rigid etiquette of the academic world does not allow anyone to admit this. Papers are meant to be accepted or rejected on their merits.
So reasons have to be given for rejection. From what you say, those "reasons" have evidently been synthesised in order to give an *excuse* for what has already been decided.
Get out. Even if you lose face in front of your co-authors, everyone will have forgotten it all in 12 months' time.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: I have decided to answer my own question, as the conflict has been resolved. Perhaps my line of response will prove helpful to someone else.
In short, I have persisted in defending my technical points (with references and all) and appealed to other journal editors to take a closer look into the situation. The paper was finally accepted, and I have decided **not** to report the handling editor directly.
I am now happy with the outcome, and insisted on having the peer review published alongside my paper. The handling editor awkwardly published merely *part* of the peer review, what added to my impression of a conflict of interests (in the form of a sock-puppet reviewer). This editor claimed that I had not uploaded some responses to the system [?] and that it was then too late to change the online record. *Then* I appealed to the publisher asking to intervene -- but only on the specific issue of making peer review fully available as offered by the journal system vs. editor's response -- and this editor had to abide, yet again.
Now my paper is published alongside complete peer review, making the ludicrous behaviour of one anonymous person public (appropriately aliased as reviewer 2). The publisher is at least mildly aware of awkward behaviour by the handling editor.
I believe this person will at least think twice before playing the same game next time, particularly as I believe this is a professional (paid) editor. This should be enough in this case.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/07/04
| 466
| 2,067
|
<issue_start>username_0: My wife and I are taking the IELTS exam in a few days and this question just occurred to me - When taking the test, do students receive the whole listening/reading/writing package or do they receive individual sections as they finish the previous section?
I ask because during my practice sessions, I realized that I would usually finish the listening and reading sections a few minutes before the time limit. On the other hand, I always finish my essay in the writing section only one or two minutes before the time limit.
Therefore, by the end of the listening/reading sections I usually end up with a combined ~6-minute spare time. I would love to use that extra time to plan and actually write my essay, but that would not work if we can only do one section at a time.
So, how does the exam work? Do students receive all the sections to answer at their own pace Or do they receive individual sections, only receiving the next section after the previous one is finished?<issue_comment>username_1: For a similar exam I was involved in, each section was given with its time controlled so the reading / comprehension section had 40 minutes for example, then the listening section had its time and the final section its time.
Each section was timed individually for that exam, so you could not take spare time from one section to another as being able to add 10 minutes to the listening section defeats part of the purpose of the time limit.
Just to say that you sound as if you have been preparing well and the times are sufficient for each section to be completed, they are not made so that it is impossible to finish "just to see how far you get"...
So if you do finish ahead of time then just relax and don't panic.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The [IELTS test format](https://www.ielts.org/about-the-test/test-format) provides the necessary details. Each section of the exam is timed separately. Normally, all the materials of a previous section are collected before the next one is distributed.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2019/07/04
| 1,196
| 5,042
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been applying to PhD programs for the past 2+ years and keep getting rejected. I have pretty good degrees that I worked hard for from good universities (not the top unis).
For the past year I’ve been doing everything I could think of to improve my CV; working for free as a research assistant at a research institute, publishing, attending seminars and conferences, etc.
I always thought that all applicants were treated equally and were judged only by their grades, personal statement and CV. However, I just got my 15th rejection letter, and the university was “kind” enough to tell me that I was rejected because I didn’t meet their entry requirements, specifically, that the universities where I did my Bsc and MSc don’t have a good enough reputation for my application to be considered.
I have been told by academics in the past that potential PhD candidates aren’t judged using this criterion. So my question is, are Phd applications one of those things where people are told that everyone has an equal opportunity while the reality is wildly different? Because I would like to know if I’m wasting my time applying and putting myself through all this stress unnecessarily.<issue_comment>username_1: Sure, it matters. After all, the other schools did a selection process.
That said, I do think it is very normal for grad schools to reach out to people from various backgrounds. Provided the applicants show top test scores and grades, it's not that hard to get into grad schools. I used to even see a preference for liberal arts school graduates (at an R1 grad program) because the kids hadn't seen as much of the downside of the R1 life, yet.
It does sound strange to be getting rejected by 15 schools. I would suspect low grades and scores--you did not describe them.
Also you don't tell us the field, which makes it hard to interpret. Knowing the country helpful also. Even among schools, there will be different practices. But do you think all fields/countries are same and we can give all encompassing answers?
I think if you didn't get into any first go round, I wouldn't go applying over in subsequent seasons. Move on to real jobs. Don't spend your time fluttering around trying to rack up more bullets for grad school. But put your efforts into a normal career.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> I always thought that all applicants were treated equally and were judged only by their grades, personal statement and CV.
>
>
>
Applicants from different universities are **not** treated equally (at least not by my department's selection committee).
Your grades are looked at as a baseline (to filter out obvious rejections or single out interesting cases), and then a discussion goes on about the rest of it (CV, statements, references and research experience). You are missing two key parts (which you refer to in your comments but not in the question body): reference letters, and publication record. You say that you have read your reference letters: have you read all of them? It could be that you are experiencing selection bias - the referees who are comfortable with you reading their letters are ones who generally like you. In addition, nowadays top schools (in computer science at least) may reject your application if you haven't had at least one decent publication.
>
> I have been told by academics in the past that potential PhD candidates aren’t judged using this criterion.
>
>
>
This must have been a misunderstanding.
The institution the conferred your degree absolutely matters. There is a huge difference between how a top 5% student from a top university and one who hails from a less renowned university is perceived.
This cuts both ways - good universities may produce inadequate graduates, and less reputable ones can produce excellent students. The institution is just a signal of your likelihood to succeed in your PhD.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: You leave out your academic discipline, which may guide towards better answers. Also, the 'gap' between your current and prospective schools. However:
I think you may be overlooking another factor: the authors of your letters of recommendation.
If your grades/scores are sufficiently high, then this is clearly not what is failing you. Now, school reputation *is* a factor (mostly only tacitly, but there may be exceptions), but your letter of recommendation is possibly even more so.
The standing of the author of your letters matters a great deal - so you want a bigwig, if you can. Then, academics have several ways of signalling to their peers if the candidate really has their blessing or not (although, to the untrained eye, all of these letters look pretty glowing). After 15 rejections, should you be looking to another writer? Also, you could consider applying to non-US institutions (again, subject-dependent); the world outside the US offers wonderful institutions, many certainly less hung-up about the prestige of the sending institution. Good luck!
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/07/04
| 2,009
| 6,813
|
<issue_start>username_0: My goal is to find articles related to invasive species management on a monthly basis. I have a list of species for my region (i.e keywords) and a list of journals. Although I enjoy combing through new issues of each journal, I'm wondering if there is a more automated, and less time consuming method.
I've tried using Boolean operators in Google Scholar, but this limits the search to 2019 (not monthly) and isn't journal specific. I have also explored some programs (e.g. Stork), with limited results.
Any insight is greatly appreciated. Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: As far as I know you can only limit Google Scholar searches by year, not by month. This might still be fine for a specific enough search, as you can just tell from a glance what's new or not\*. To keep it specific, you might want to do several search queries for different keywords instead of chaining the keywords together using Boolean operators. What will really help you, however, is to use the **source** qualifier to limit results to a specific journal. You can also search in several specified journals using a query like
>
> "invasive species management" OR "biological invasion" (source:"ecology letters" OR source:"ecological economics")
>
>
>
In case the journals you're interested in have names that overlap with other journals, see [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/102122/17254).
\*If not, you could presumably automate the queries, and compare the results to a cached version from the previous run. Would certainly be more involved than just a search query though.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In case the journals are indexed by [PubMed](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/) ( biomedical literature) and you're not afraid to do a bit of programming, you might want to explore the tools proposed [here](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK25497/). You can even download the full Medline database (see [here](https://www.nlm.nih.gov/databases/download/pubmed_medline.html)) and search through it locally, in case that's more convenient.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: If you know on which website the journal is located:
```
"invasive species management" OR "biological invasion" + site:eprints.gla.ac.uk
```
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/9Qy1t.png)
To get exact result use `+` instead of `OR`: `+ + OR` :
```
"invasive species management" + "biological invasion" + source:"ecology letters"
```
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/b5zvl.png)
---
If you are okay with the programmatic approach, you can use Python and [Google Scholar Organic Results API](https://serpapi.com/google-scholar-organic-results) from SerpApi. [Check out the playground](https://serpapi.com/playground?engine=google_scholar&q=%22invasive+species+management%22+OR+%22biological+invasion%22+source%3A%22ecology+letters%22+OR+source%3A%22ecological+economics%22&hl=en).
It's a paid API with a free plan that bypasses blocks from Google and does all the hard lifting parts so the end-user only needs to think about what data to extract.
SerpApi also supports Ruby, Node.js, Go, PHP, Java, Dotnet, and [Google Spreadsheets](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GB0ulLtKQZg).
Code and [example in the online IDE](https://replit.com/@DimitryZub1/how-to-search-in-google-scholar-within-a-particular-confere#main.py) to extract data from all pages:
```
import os, json
from serpapi import GoogleSearch
from urllib.parse import urlsplit, parse_qsl
params = {
# os.getenv(): https://docs.python.org/3/library/os.html#os.getenv
"api_key": os.getenv("API_KEY"), # Your Serpapi API key
"engine": "google_scholar", # search engine
# search query
"q": '"invasive species management" OR "biological invasion" source:"ecology letters" OR source:"ecological economics"',
"hl": "en", # language
# "as_ylo": "2017", # from 2017
# "as_yhi": "2021", # to 2021
"start": "0" # first page
}
search = GoogleSearch(params) # where data extraction happens
organic_results_data = []
papers_is_present = True
while papers_is_present:
results = search.get_dict() # JSON -> Python dictionary
print(f"Currently extracting page №{results.get('serpapi_pagination', {}).get('current')}..")
for result in results["organic_results"]:
position = result["position"]
title = result["title"]
publication_info_summary = result["publication_info"]["summary"]
result_id = result["result_id"]
link = result.get("link")
result_type = result.get("type")
snippet = result.get("snippet")
organic_results_data.append({
"page_number": results.get("serpapi_pagination", {}).get("current"),
"position": position + 1,
"result_type": result_type,
"title": title,
"link": link,
"result_id": result_id,
"publication_info_summary": publication_info_summary,
"snippet": snippet,
})
if "next" in results.get("serpapi_pagination", {}):
search.params_dict.update(dict(parse_qsl(urlsplit(results["serpapi_pagination"]["next"]).query)))
else:
papers_is_present = False
print(json.dumps(organic_results_data, indent=2, ensure_ascii=False))
```
Output:
```
[
{
"page_number": 1,
"position": 1,
"result_type": null,
"title": "Evidence of climatic niche shift during biological invasion",
"link": "https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2007.01060.x",
"result_id": "UXttzv_h5ScJ",
"publication_info_summary": "<NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>‐Schärer… - Ecology …, 2007 - Wiley Online Library",
"snippet": "… Our results report, for the first time, a climatic niche shift during biological invasion, and thus support the hypothesis that species can spread into new habitats never been used before by …"
}, ... other results
{
"page_number": 15,
"position": 10,
"result_type": null,
"title": "Forest-attacking invasive species and infant health: evidence from the invasive emerald ash borer",
"link": "https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800918300314",
"result_id": "yQkNkX9CTXsJ",
"publication_info_summary": "BA Jones - Ecological Economics, 2018 - Elsevier",
"snippet": "… This research could also be admissible evidence into benefit-cost analyses of invasive species management decisions, where the indirect health costs of degradations to environmental …"
}
]
```
>
> Disclaimer, I work for SerpApi.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/07/05
| 411
| 1,750
|
<issue_start>username_0: There are so many ways to compose CVs now. I try to keep my CV updated in `LaTeX`, Markdown/HTML, ASCII, and Word just in case someone needs a specific file format.
If an application doesn't specify a specific CV format (and they tend not to), what is the best format, in terms of style vs. portability vs. consistency, etc., to use for a CV?<issue_comment>username_1: To the extent that they specify a file format, calls for application most often require all documents, including the CV, in pdf format. MS Word docx is less frequent, but possible. I've never seen a call asking for LaTeX, markdown, or html (source) files.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I am not aware of any de-facto standards and I would assume this can vary depending on country as well as which field one is applying within. The most common I have seen when applying is pdf and would be my choice if given the option. Pdf is made to always look the same and would thus seem the best in regards to style (a pdf-file opened on iphone or pc will still look the same so you know what they will see), portability (can be saved with a low filesize and is one, if not the most, common file-type) and consistency (again, will always look the same).
Many will be able to open word-files but there can be inconsistencies with graphical objects when opening in different software (open-, libre- or microsoft office for instance) so pictures could end up moving around etc. Again it would probably be safe to send a word-file if applying for Microsoft but maybe less suitable for an Open-source project, so the fields matter.
For editing I guess it's a matter of more personal choice and the best software is the one you are skilled in using.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/07/05
| 650
| 2,572
|
<issue_start>username_0: A journal I am submitting to requires camera-ready figures. What does this term mean nowadays? Does it imply high resolution? My figures are in png format and have 96 dpi. Enlarging it can produce some jagged edges. Should I update them to eps or pdf format?<issue_comment>username_1: There isn't any real, single standard as to what "camera-ready figures" means. Different journals/publishers may use different publishing processes and workflows, which can result in different requirements for file formats, resolution etc. (Or even color spaces.) However, 96 dpi is indeed quite low. 300 dpi is a more reasonable minimum guideline for raster images - but obviously vector graphics should be preferred whenever possible.
In lieu of a standard, we can look at typical recommendations. A review by <NAME> in Science Editing titled [Handling digital images for publication](https://www.escienceediting.org/journal/view.php?number=15) states that
>
> The most commonly recommended resolution for printing on paper depends on the nature of the images: 1) 300 dpi for color pictures, 2) 300 to 600 dpi for black and white pictures, 3) 600 to 900 dpi for combination art (photo and text), and 4) 900 to 1,200 dpi for line art.
>
>
>
Note that this is the printed dpi, which isn't necessarily the same dpi as seen in the submitted manuscript. The same author also suggests a universal guide to avoid issues with publishers rescaling figures etc.:
>
> It is the opinion of this author that a universal recommendation could help authors prepare their images. The standard figure size of most academic journals is about 86 mm (single column). The standard pixels per inch for line art is 900 to 1,200 ppi. Therefore, an image file of 900 ppi and 4 inches is of sufficient quality for most publications; this means 3,600 pixels in a horizontal line. It is recommended that authors use this number as a universal guide.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Here is a rantswer: In my experience (limited to my field) it means "We're a cheap journal that doesn't care about graphics quality, so we let the authors do all the work even if the figures will be subpar." I have never had one of these journals complain about the quality of my figures.
On the other hand, when checking galley proofs, I have complained a few times that my Tikz figures ended up having the wrong font (because the production team changed the manuscript font but copypasted the figures rather than recompiling them). And, guess what, nothing happened.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/07/05
| 670
| 2,694
|
<issue_start>username_0: How do you search arXiv by sub-subject?
For example, underneath the subject Computer Science, you have the subject 'Artificial Intelligence', and under the subject Quantitative Finance, you have the subject 'Computational Finance'.
How do I search for papers specifically within these subjects? Clicking on the subjects only brings up recent submissions, but I want all of them.<issue_comment>username_1: There isn't any real, single standard as to what "camera-ready figures" means. Different journals/publishers may use different publishing processes and workflows, which can result in different requirements for file formats, resolution etc. (Or even color spaces.) However, 96 dpi is indeed quite low. 300 dpi is a more reasonable minimum guideline for raster images - but obviously vector graphics should be preferred whenever possible.
In lieu of a standard, we can look at typical recommendations. A review by <NAME> in Science Editing titled [Handling digital images for publication](https://www.escienceediting.org/journal/view.php?number=15) states that
>
> The most commonly recommended resolution for printing on paper depends on the nature of the images: 1) 300 dpi for color pictures, 2) 300 to 600 dpi for black and white pictures, 3) 600 to 900 dpi for combination art (photo and text), and 4) 900 to 1,200 dpi for line art.
>
>
>
Note that this is the printed dpi, which isn't necessarily the same dpi as seen in the submitted manuscript. The same author also suggests a universal guide to avoid issues with publishers rescaling figures etc.:
>
> It is the opinion of this author that a universal recommendation could help authors prepare their images. The standard figure size of most academic journals is about 86 mm (single column). The standard pixels per inch for line art is 900 to 1,200 ppi. Therefore, an image file of 900 ppi and 4 inches is of sufficient quality for most publications; this means 3,600 pixels in a horizontal line. It is recommended that authors use this number as a universal guide.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Here is a rantswer: In my experience (limited to my field) it means "We're a cheap journal that doesn't care about graphics quality, so we let the authors do all the work even if the figures will be subpar." I have never had one of these journals complain about the quality of my figures.
On the other hand, when checking galley proofs, I have complained a few times that my Tikz figures ended up having the wrong font (because the production team changed the manuscript font but copypasted the figures rather than recompiling them). And, guess what, nothing happened.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/07/06
| 1,236
| 4,821
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have to give a presentation to a general scientific audience (specifically, an interview talk). As part of the presentation I would like to highlight some of my previous work.
I work in mathematics, where paper authorship is always alphabetical. The standard practice in talks is to replace your own name with an initial. That is, a person with the last name Potter might present their joint work with <NAME> as "the horcrux theorem, due to Granger-P.-Weasley".
Presumably this mathematical convention is not used or even known in the general scientific community.
How do people reference their own work in other fields? How do people reference their own work when talking to people in other fields? To people in a mixed group of many fields?
---
ETA: thanks everyone for your answers!
I’m editing to highlight a point which hasn’t been addressed yet - how does one convey that authorship in mathematics is alphabetical? (My last name begins with R so I’m almost always the last author in any paper of mine.)
I don’t want to change the order of authors in a published paper, but I also don’t want it to seem like I’ve never been a first author.
Is it okay to simply state this verbally? This seems like it could be perceived as somewhat tacky....<issue_comment>username_1: If the list of authors is short, just write all of them:
For example: Lagrange, Cauchy and Carnot, 1800, Journal of Mathematics
You may want to put your own name in bold.
If there are many authors, then a pretty standard way in many disciplines is to write as FirstName et al., see here: <https://www.scribendi.com/advice/how_to_use_et_al.en.html>
But if you are at the middle, you need to choose. Maybe something link: AAA ... YouName et al.,
Or you can still put your name as first and the rest as et al.,
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You're right, the mathematician's way of referencing would come out rather obscure to people from many other fields. If I were to read *Granger-P.-Weasley*, I would interpret P. as the first-name initial of Weasley, and I'd think that you forgot to write the first-name initial of Granger.
In my field, and in several other related fields of physics and engineering, there's no distinction between referencing one own's work or other's people work. So, generally, in the slides, one simply puts a short form of the reference, like (in the slides, I use *et al.* when there are more then two authors)
<NAME> et al., *Metrologia*, **55**, 499, 2018
or
<NAME>. et al., *IEEE Trans. Instrum*. Meas, **64**, 1460, 2015
Notice that even if I'm actually also an author in the second case, I don't break the format.
During the speech, describing what's in the slides, one would simply say things like "in our previous work [...]" or "in 2015 we developed [...]" or similar sentences.
Another way of referencing someone's work, either own's or someone else's, is that of inserting in the slides a picture of the article's title with the journal and list of authors. I've seen this quite frequently, and I used it myself. You need indeed a bit more space for this but, perhaps, for a general audience, this could be the clearest solution (and it wouldn't hide your contribution). An example of this, taken from a set of mine, is shown below:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/MR6RF.png)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: As I understand the question, you are talking to a slide presentation. Any slide will be on screen for a very very few minutes. Nobody, I mean nobody, will read the details of your citation from a slide. Your aim is to leave the audience in no doubt that you are presenting your own work, but nevertheless, not to hide the fact that you were collaborating with other researchers. So you say something like 'as I and my collaborators have shown in our recent paper...'.
The slide can give the full citation, if you really think that is necessary. In practice you don't need to: 'Buggins et al. (2019)' will give anyone who is sufficiently interested all the information they need to track down the relevant paper.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: In conversation, just reference it naturally. If it is a paper that you were prime mover on, call it "my paper". If one, you assisted on, mention that (and probably note what you helped on...they want to know what you did, more than what the paper did).
For slides, just list the footnotes or final references in normalm bibliographic format (i.e. follow the math format of alphaticity, list how the papers were published or planned to be published). But I would maybe do references at the end or just emphasize the actual argument. Not an appearance of a math paper transcribed into PPT.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/07/06
| 1,467
| 6,198
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have always wanted to get a PhD. I'm in my thirties now and have a full time job. I don't necessarily need to get a PhD for my job, though it could open doors to a few research jobs that I can't apply for now. A few friends and colleagues have gotten their PhDs in about 5 years, they tell me that some have even spent 7 or 8 years.
Is it possible to complete a PhD in 3 years? Why or why not?
This would be a post-masters PhD in the US or Canada.<issue_comment>username_1: In theory, yes, it is possible. In practice it depends on many things. Let me try to list a bunch of the variables that have affect the time required.
The minimum requirements that you are likely to find for a doctorate are (a) pass a set of qualifying exams and (b) write a dissertation acceptable to the faculty. There may be a few exceptions but most of the exceptions will add requirements.
To pass the examinations, you normally take certain courses. You may already have the knowledge needed to take the exams from your masters, but many courses are designed specifically to ready you for the exams. If you don't have the knowledge you need to get it (courses or elsewhere) and that takes time.
The examinations normally guarantee that you have a solid but broad knowledge of your field. Research, on the other hand requires deep but narrow knowledge of a small sub-field. The graduate courses are also fairly broad, but also start to take you into the depths of some subfield and many will stress recent advances in some field.
To write a dissertation requires that in a small area of your discipline you become a subject expert - world class. That may require additional course work in the form of seminars with faculty and a few students. If you start out close to the boundary of the known world in the area in which you want to do research then you can move quickly. Otherwise it may take time and study to gain the required focus.
To write a dissertation, requires some knowledge of research process and in some fields that can take time to master. It is less likely to be an issue in mathematics, say, or in some parts of CS. But if you lack the knowledge of how to do the specific sort of research required of you, it will take time to gain it.
To write a dissertation requires a *suitable* problem. That problem can come from you or from a suitable advisor. But if there is no problem *at hand* then it will take time and study just to find a problem. Moreover, the problem has to be *suitable*. If it is too easy to solve or too hard then it isn't suitable. I worked, briefly, on both *too hard* and *too easy* problems in my math degree. But disposing of them and coming to the right problem only took several weeks of study. But it is hard to put a time limit here as research, by definition, is an exploration of the unknown.
To write an acceptable dissertation you have to produce some valuable work at the boundary of knowledge by solving the problem(s) posed. You also have to write it up and make sure there are no gaps that might invalidate the work. This can take time.
You have to make your advisor happy. Sometimes this is easy but sometimes not. Usually, however, there is the question of "How much is enough?" This is a value judgement, of course, and you and your advisor need to come to agreement.
Finally, you need, in most places, to defend your dissertation before a committee or the public and you need to handle a fair amount of paperwork. This can take some time, also, but isn't normally a big issue.
Note that lots of these things take time, but most of them require an amount of time that is hard to estimate and impossible to bound. If you are well prepared for exams and research and you have a suitable advisor and a suitable problem then three years is feasible, provided that the problem itself doesn't have hidden traps that aren't apparent at the start. Again, the existence of those traps is impossible to predict since you are extending the known world.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There are countries where the standard duration of a PhD is 3 years so yes it's possible, but it usually means that the PhD is structured differently and the expectations differ. Even there it's very common that PhD last more than the standard duration: a PhD is research work and even in the best conditions it's often difficult to anticipate how the research is going to pan out. There can be all sorts of unexpected obstacles: somebody might publish some new finding which makes your approach obsolete, insufficient data for an experiment, an initial assumption might not be verified, etc.
So overall it's quite risky to set yourself a hard deadline from the start, as things often take a bit more time than expected. On the other hand, thinking of a serious PhD plan from the start can minimize the risk of delay.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In a US program, it is certainly possible, but it is substantially faster than average. It is easier in some areas (e.g. theory) than others (e.g. systems) where having a few brilliant ideas is sufficient, without the need to build an actual working piece of software. There are two ways I have seen it happen in theory:
1) Be a star: solve a few long standing open problems in your first couple of years, and write them up. This is obviously very hard; if you can pull it off, no need to stick around in the PhD program.
2) Publish a few mediocre papers and decide that research isn't for you. If you have enough material to barely clear the bar for a PhD, you can get out of the PhD program in 3 years, but not with a strong PhD. Usually the people who go this route just take software engineering jobs afterwards: so this isn't the kind of fast PhD you would want if you already have such a job.
Short of being a real star, good PhDs take longer than 3 years.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I did my MS from a public university in US. In my university, since PhDs were government funded, they wanted us to leave early.
So if you did MS from my university, then if you desire to go for PhD further, they’d let you be done in 3 years.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/07/06
| 2,777
| 11,663
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a final year PhD student in materials science. My colleagues publish papers at a rate of 2-3 papers a year. By the end of their PhD, they would have around 8-10 papers (first authors) in their name. While I on the other hand, am struggling.... struggling hard.
How do people produce so many work in such a short time? I take around 3 months trying out some hypothesis and if it does work then I require at least 2 months to produce enough data. So, in all, it takes around 7 months to complete a work for a paper. Then it will get submitted and so on.
While my colleagues start a work and publish it within 7 months. Which means they conceptualize, run simulations, gather data and write a manuscript in 3 months! I am not able to comprehend this.
What am I doing wrong? How can one be so productive? I feel so inadequate and am thinking of quitting academia after my PhD. Probably, I am not fit for academic life. I love doing research, but I have realized late that, just loving research is not enough.
My advisor says my progress is good. But, having looked at my advisor's PhD thesis, she had 5 submitted papers towards the end of her PhD.<issue_comment>username_1: Number of papers is a notoriously poor measure of research output. For example, is one major paper worth less than 2-3 minor papers?
Some people are really productive for various reasons. Sometimes people have been very lucky and their projects have worked out very quickly. Also, everyone develops as a researcher at different rates. As you get more experience you will be able to avoid many time consuming pitfalls and your publication rate (and quality) should increase. So maybe you're behind your peers and maybe you're not, it's impossible for us to say.
If your supervisor says your progress is good then I think you need to accept this at face value. If you're still concerned about it you should have a frank discussion about your concerns with your supervisor and/or another mentor in your field who can give you an unbiased view of your progress and prospects for an academic career.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: For better or worse, number of publications is increasingly seen as a metric for productivity and competence in some fields and countries. Depending on where you are (geographically and discipline-wise) it is more about producing and publishing papers than about having something novel and relevant to show, unfortunately.
As an early career scholar, it is important to find out if you are in one of those places where you should be producing papers instead of producing knowledge. If that is the case, try to learn what are the tricks used by people around you and emulate them. As much as I’d like to tell you to not do that, it may be the only way to stay in the game in the long run. How can you produce good and relevant research if you have been forced out of academia by the “publish or perish” system?
If it is the case that you are in one of those environments/disciplines where publication counts are inflated, you need to play along if you want to stay in the game. You need to strike a balance between doing the really interesting high quality stuff and doing the cookie-cutter low-hanging-fruit run-of-the-mill papers that increase your publication count.
Some people who publish a lot are truly doing cutting-edge research and publishing a lot due to that. Not everyone is that lucky or that good. If you look closely, many of those publishing a lot are compromising in terms of quality and impact. They may have their own tricks, perhaps involving dubious practices like fishing for significance, for example, or perhaps they are just really good at slicing the sausage really thin and turning one good study into a dozen papers. If your discipline in your country is one of those that only care for quantity (some places reward mediocrity in large numbers over geniality), you will only harm your career prospects by going against that system. Learn from how your peers do it, at least for the moment, so that you can get tenure. Once your place within academia is secured, then you can worry about the rest.
Lastly, once you have your research group and your collaboration networks, then you can further inflate your publication counts by co-authoring with your colleagues, PhD students, and post-docs, but that is something further down the road for you.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I also work in a field where 8 to 10 first-authored papers are not unheard of for PhD students. This can be intimidating for early-phase students, as it feels like (and, objectively, often is the case) that the first paper is 2 years in the making. This makes it hard to imagine how one would end up with close to a double-digit number of papers by the end of a PhD.
However, one important observation is that paper production is not nearly the linear process you describe - students writing 10 papers in their PhD almost certainly don't generate a completely new hypothesis, generate completely new data, and write everything from scratch for every paper. Instead, they are probably working on an interesting *family* of related hypotheses, for which they collect a wide range of related data, about which they then write multiple related papers. Note that oftentimes the "costs" (in terms of time and effort) for collecting more related data is rather small in comparison of the fixed costs for starting to generate data at all (e.g., if you have all the measurement infrastructure in place, collecting data on some more types of subjects is much smaller than starting from scratch with a completely different setup). This model means that ultimately the student probably takes longer to produce the *first* paper, but is paid off when latter papers can re-use much of what has already been done. Most of my students publish little in the first years of their PhD, but get a seeming burst of outside-visible productivity after around the half-time point in their PhD. A nice side effect of this model is that one ends up with a clearer "story" for the PhD dissertation than if one just writes X completely independent papers.
Another question, of course, is how many of these 8 to 10 papers are actually full-blown original research papers. Again, speaking from my field, a subset of papers of PhD students are typically either more expository work (say, articles in scientific magazines which do not have the same level of expectation regarding novelty) or work-in-progress reports of some sort (e.g., published in academic workshops).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: It's about problem selection. Doing laser studies of air sensitive compounds with a non-commercial laser, involves many ways the experiment can be derailed. Doing oxide phase diagrams is like taking candy from a baby. I'm not arguing which is better or worse for society or which is more fun. (Although I have an opinion.) But if you decide to do one of these butt hard topics and don't at least know the disadvantage, you are not a careful thinker.
-Cynical view but with insight.
P.s. And yes, real analysis, caveat-lovers, there could be other reasons (lack of effort, lack of skill, poor writing ability, etc.) But I want to emphasize the key issue for a researcher...there are always more things possible to try than time. You should have an independent assessment of that as a researcher. Yes, even with a very hierarchical advisor. It is easy to be passive aggressive and spend time on what you believe in and not what you don't. Your time on this earth is limited. Use it strategically.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: **Re: Struggling hard..**
You're not alone. I am in the same situation. But it shouldn't disappoint you and you should never look down at yourself and your research. If you like your field of research, then that's the important thing, you will definitely reach a point that you have many publications.
**Re: How do people produce so many work in such a short time?**
In my experience, there are different reasons:
1. They are continuing a research and they take different approaches to
solve it.
2. The papers are not sent to quality journals.
3. They are based in a strong team that helps them.
4. They are familiar with the tips and tricks of publishing in a
specific journal.
**Re: Publishing in short time**
Unfortunately sometimes people are not very honest, so simply don't listen to them. Like so many things in life, stick to your idea and don't criticize yourself by comparing yourself with what other people claim.
Also, when you want to publish, you can check the editorial process time; it can save you a lot of time (you can check my response here: [How to find Elsevier journal-specific average publishing time](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/119426/how-to-find-elsevier-journal-specific-average-publishing-time/131444#131444)).
Also make sure that you're sending your paper to the right journal. You can do this by reading the abstracts and conclusions in some of the articles in that journal.
**Re: What am I doing wrong?**
You are doing nothing wrong; like me, you are in a learning process. Publishing papers requires its own skills and we are both learning it. Nowadays there are some online courses that can teach you the skills. I haven't checked them myself, but we can get some ideas from them (e.g. <https://www.udemy.com/publishing-in-impact-factor-journals-tips-and-tricks/>)
**Re: My adviser says my progress is good**
My two journal papers during my PhD was rejected and I was so disappointed. But same as you, my supervisor liked my research and contribution. Since it wasn't mandatory for me to publish journal papers to get my PhD and I just had to submit my thesis for external examiners to review and comment, my supervisor asked me to focus only on my thesis. Now the thesis is finished, I have time to learn how to publish.
Besides, I personally don't agree with 'Publish or Perish' idea. I didn't publish anything, but I managed to demonstrate that I like doing research and I have other skills. With that, I didn't get an academic job (with no publications), but I manged to stay at university for a part-time research assistant job, so I can have some time to learn and publish.
**Last humble advice:**
I'm reaching out to people and I talk about my research field and I'm asking if I can contribute in their articles; it will give me a chance to learn how to publish and also have my name as co-author.
I hope it helps and I wish you all the best.
Just don't give up :)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I completely agree with all the other answers, but one thing I would like to add is to start to publish your paper in a more narrow domain in your field, although it may not have as impact as other papers that are applicable to a wider domains, It will make *some* impact, and best of all, boost your confidence to take up writing better papers.
I am in a similar situation, although I am not a PhD, but a researcher in an industry, recently I published a paper limited to a very small domain in my field of work, it was just appreciated by a small group of people whom I know, but that was sufficient for me to get started.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Have you spoken to your PhD supervisor and colleagues about this?
Maybe you need to help co-author and get regular mentorship and structure to help you get some papers out?
Sometimes contacting editors with publication ideas from your current work can be helpful. Editors are usually helpful and provide some practical and useful advice.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/07/06
| 871
| 3,375
|
<issue_start>username_0: I aced my undergrad studies and got the best offer I could ever dream of for grad school.
And three \*\*\*\* might have ruined it.
They ran into me and asked for help with "studying". Turns out it was blatant cheating and I helped them anyway. I had my doubts, but my compassion instinct took ever.
I'm looking forward pursuing an academic career, and I don't think this event was good at all. It's nowhere near loving my sleep over this issue, but I want to keep my academic integrity and cover my ass.
Now, if the punishment for cheating was just a failed exam, I would've denounced without hesitation. But in my country, you can get banned for exams and higher education for 5 years. I think it's enough to destroy someone's life. At the same time, they (the 3 \*\*\*\*) put mine on the line so they could pass some exam. (If they get caught and I somehow get involved, I can get banned for 5 years too. Everything I worked for 3 years, gone in an instant)
I'm about to send the email to the equivalent of the Dean, but I just can't know for sure if I'll stay safe. I know him kinda personally and have friends that are friends with him, but still, I'm scared and I fucked up.
What should I do?
Edit:
Here's a rundown of the events
* I ate at school self, not my usual spot
* The 3 \*\*\*\* ran into me. They asked me to help them with studying and I accepted. I had doubts that it was a cheating scheme but paid no mind to it.
* A few hours later, they send me a photo, there were some questions and I assumed it was an exam from previous years. I asked them when was the exam and they said "now lol". Doubts that it was a cheating scheme were almost confirmed. I answered these questions and sent the answers anyway because I was pressured from holding an unwritten contract and instinctual compassion
* They sent another photo, I saw the date of the exam and it was the day all of these events happened. I stopped communications.
* And here we are now. I helped them cheat and I want to pursue an academic career. This is like a big stain I'd like to clean.<issue_comment>username_1: Aiding people to cheat is the same as cheating in many institutions which is why is it usually part of the policy at the respective institution...
Do consider that you may well face consequences for your part in this situation.
What the consequences will be is something your institution will decide - we cannot guess...
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Talk to someone you can trust.
The rules in your place seem to be very severe. Therefore, I advice you not only to listen to people in this forum, but to consult someone who knows the rules in your country. In my other answer, I recommended ombudswomen/ombudsmen or the student union. As in your country, you can be banned from higher education for 5 years, I would advise you to talk to a lawyer. Let them advise you.
In most places, the best way would be to "confess". However, if in your place it is possible to get punished for five years for what you did (which is in my eyes no misdeed at all, as you did not know you helped cheaters) there may be more messed up rules/strange things going on. So please, for your own sake, consult a lawyer (or similar), good luck!
(And yes, of course consult the institution rules and try to find out if similar cases happend before.)
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/07/06
| 1,272
| 5,548
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a masters degree student trying to figure out how publications and co-authorship work. I know that the school/PI retains legal ownership of any monetary profits that may result from the work, so please don't mention this in your response as it is **irrelevant** to what I'm asking. I WANT TO BE PUBLISHED AND DO NOT CARE ABOUT MONEY. I just want to ensure that I get academic credit/recognition this time since some of my work was previously passed off as another student's work in a different lab. I'm concerned because the new PI and another professor working on the project seem to want me to do all the grunt work/data collection, but according to the previous student that worked on the project, they prefer to keep the analysis to themselves even though I'm willing [to try] to learn how to do this myself... **What protections do student have against others taking credit for their work, not giving them even partial credit/co-author status, and/or allowing another student to take credit who didn't help? Should I mail copies of my data to myself and retain a sealed copy? How do/did (when you were a grad student) you guys protect yourselves? Please list some measures/methods you use to prove that work you did was done by you as opposed to someone else in the lab.** As things stand now, it seems like my PI, in theory, could hand over my work to another student who he likes more, who's viewed as younger/more promising, or who has a rich/important Daddy. Not saying he'd do this, but hey, its happened to me before, so yeah - **just looking for some solid concrete measures I can implement to protect myself**. I don't feel comfortable discusses this with my PI for reasons that should be obvious to anyone with a modicum of common sense, so please don't refer me to my PI. If you can't/don't want to help, fine, but please don't down vote me as somebody else may have some insight that would help me. Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: In my experience, the best way to ensure that you get appropriate credit for your work is to work with trustworthy people.
Now, whether somebody is trustworthy is not always easy to determine (especially for a new graduate student), and there are also both genuine mistakes and genuine differences of opinion and criteria that often occur.
Nevertheless, there's a good heuristic that can help you test the waters early. You can lay claim to your work by finding opportunities to share early results. If you're in a software-related area, you can keep your projects on GitHub, where there's a nice public record of everything. If you're in a more experimental area or if sharing on GitHub doesn't work, then there should be opportunities with student conferences, internal group meetings, etc., to present work, even in early stages. These often exist explicitly for students to get feedback on work that's not yet ready for a proper publication, so the stakes are low. And even if it's an internal presentation rather than to the general scientific public, that will still greatly expand the group of people who know what you've done and what sort of value you're contributing.
If you get encouragement and opportunities, that's a good sign; if you get ongoing evasions and push-back, that's a bad sign.
Bottom line: the best way to ensure you get credit for publishing is to start "trial publishing" as soon as you've got interesting work to share, and see if you're in a supportive culture or a controlling one.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There are likely to be policies protecting trainees at your institution, and you should review those - including process for lodging complaints about scientific misconduct (which could apply to some of the behaviours you are worried about).
You should also review policies about handling of data (of the sort your work with) to be sure that taking raw data off-campus is allowed (in a medical center, for example, this could be grounds for dismissal even of a Professor); honestly, some of your ideas for self-preservation seem bizarre.
Constant worry about being scooped will not serve you well in an academic career; there are no guarantees but if you demonstrate integrity and earn the respect of others, you will be in a much better place to address unfair treatment if it occurs.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: First of all I just want to note that your school very likely retains legal ownership of any monetary profits that may result from your work.
As for students plagiarizing, it happens but I wouldn't worry about unless it happens and you need to deal with it. I've never dealt with a plagiarizer who was smart enough to continue fooling people once they were investigated. The main problems arise where they are two sides to the story, i.e. not overt plagiarism, but where both of you worked on the results. Then most of your ideas for how to protect yourself won't work anyway since there will be conflicting evidence to create doubt.
As for faculty stealing the credit, this is basically hopeless. The advisor indeed has the power to do everything you fear they might do, and you have no power to stop them. You are there to be taught by them as a subordinate. They are both your supervisor and evaluator. You need them to be on your side, where they think you are an asset and want you to succeed and get credit you deserve. Research is very much a social-network-based system so you need them for a lot more than just a fair supervisor. As others said, choose carefully.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/07/07
| 2,130
| 8,981
|
<issue_start>username_0: 3-4 months ago I found a big mistake in a theorem's proof of a paper that had just been published (stats/cs community). I immediately notified the authors, who claimed to be aware of the mistake but admitted not knowing how to fix it.
This week I noticed that the authors didn't notify the community of the mistake (no updates on their arxiv paper, nothing on the author's websites, etc), even though the paper got a good visibility and already has quite a few citations. I went to check whether the mistake breaks the theorem, and found out that:
1 - the theorem statement is incorrect
2 - however, the statement holds under reasonable assumptions, but the proof requires a different technique (I have a full proof for that)
How should I proceed in this case? This theorem specifically is the main result of the paper, so I wouldn't be comfortable just sending them the corrected proof+statement and not getting properly recognized (e.g. only an acknowledgement). Should I write a short report on post it on arxiv? Send the proof under the requirement that I be added as a co-author? What is the praxis in this case?
EDIT:
Thanks for all the replies so far. I've contacted my advisor and have finished writing a short report (~4 pages) on the matter. I'm yet to decide whether I should contact the authors before posting the report, and whether a merger would be a good idea -- as some people said, it is a huge red flag that they admitted to be aware of the mistake and never took action, so I am not certain that I would like to be associated with the authors in a collaboration level.
1) The paper has already been published in a conference and its journal proceedings. I've contacted the authors after acceptance but before the proceedings were published, and they took no action.
2) The paper proposes a new algorithm B and states that it has the same running time as algorithm A, a classic method in the field, while having smaller memory cost and being easy to implement. The main theorem roughly states that T(B) = O(T(A)), which is wrong as for some inputs T(B) = infinity. The technical mistake is subtle and involves upper-bounding an infinite series, which in reality can diverge to infinity. I've ran the algorithm on a simple instance where it does not halt nor makes any progress.
3) It can be shown that, for some input distributions, T(B) = O(T(A)). The technical argument is a bit different from what they initially presented. Unfortunately, I think that for these distributions it can be shown that A has an even smaller memory cost than B, but I am not sure.<issue_comment>username_1: Edited: OP mentioned that the paper has been published in conference (not just on ArXiv as was implied by phrasing).
This can be tricky.
The main thing is that you get due credit, **and that the scientific community is aware of the mistake**.
If the mistake is in a key theorem that is the basis for the entire paper, then the authors should retract the paper. As unpleasant as this may be, it is the only ethical and fair thing to do. If the authors aren't doing this of their own volition, then you should (I would argue that you are in fact ethically obliged to do so!):
1. Make 100% sure that you are right in your claim. It's not entirely clear whether the theorem is "dead in the water" i.e. the claim is demonstrably false (via a counterexample that you've constructed), or that the claim *might* be true, but their proof is wrong, and you couldn't have come up with a proof either. If you have a counterexample, then you've really managed to kill the paper.
Otherwise it's still an open problem (not a bad thing, just a different scenario).
2. Consulting with your advisor/senior member of the community, contact the conference program chairs to inform them of the mistake. You should let them know where the paper is wrong; you can also mention that you have a correction that you're keeping to yourself, but you are not obliged to provide it. A paper with a wrong proof should never appear in any conference.
This paper should not be published. If it was published in a high-profile ML conference (ICML/NeurIPS/COLT etc.), then the organizers can be trusted to take it from there.
You must understand though that if you go and report this to the organizers without the authors being on board, then this may result in some unpleasant interactions with them in the future (to be fair, the authors brought this upon themselves by not owning up, but still - people have egos and pride).
Next up, The ideal scenario is that you email the authors, the authors agree to working with you, adopt your proof technique and add you as a coauthor (assuming you’ve corrected an important theorem).
This is assuming that the authors are being reasonable and don’t have a fragile ego.
To make that happen you’ll need to phrase the email carefully “I think that I can show that Theorem 1 holds under some minor assumptions, can you take a look at my proof? I’d love to collaborate with you on a future version of the paper” or something like that.
If that doesn’t happen (radio silence after you email them or worse: them saying they had already thought of this idea or some other nonsense), you need to get your credit somehow (e.g. by getting a supervisor/mentor to intervene). You could concurrently start writing your own version and upload to ArXiv (so it’s publicly timestamped), referencing the original.
Most cases I’ve seen followed a merger of authors but there are some distasteful instances, be prepared and be pleasant and you’ll be fine!
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I have not been in such situation. However, I do not see what is the problem for you to write a paper complementing or correcting the previous paper? Isn't this how science works?
In my opinion, it is very toxic culture in academia to consider such thing as inappropriate. Those previous auathors are humans. Assuming good faith, that was what they knew and what was to the best of their knowledge, and to the best of the reviewers' knowledge, at the time of their publication. You got something, great, you have the right to get the credit for it. I feel it is unfair that you inform the authors offline. You should write it, and publish it too.
Also, we should not forget that you might be wrong too! I do not mean to offend anyone. But if we remember that we are all humans and have limitations in our knowledge about exploring this world, we would take these issues in a more relaxed way.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: If you think that you have found the proof of a paper, or you can (with evidence) notify the community of the wrong/improper/incomplete proof, you can itself publish it as a research article.
For example, look at the following comment (to be) published in IEEE Trans. on Wireless Communication: Comments on “Coverage Analysis of Multiuser Visible Light Communication Networks”
Linke can be found [here](https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/8728191)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: (From comments from the OP)
>
> In a very high level, the theorem is on the running time of an algorithm, and I found one instance where the algorithm does not halt. Under mild assumptions on the input it can be shown that the asymptotic running time is the same as what they originally claimed.
>
>
>
As someone who works on statistical algorithms, it's my opinion that you found an **error** in their paper, but I have trouble believing this is the entirety of their paper; I've never read a paper that just proves "Such and such algorithm is O(nk)" *and that's it*. But I could be mistaken; perhaps this paper was supposed to provide a proof that a well known heurestic algorithm actually had strong theoretical backing?
Anyways, if this false claim was not the entirety of their work, I would guess that their paper is not so broken that it should be retracted, especially since it sounds like you've come up with a set of conditions for which the statement will hold true. But it is worth noting the mistake and correcting it within the academic literature. As such, I would guess that it is very reasonable to write a follow up paper to the journal that essentially says something like the following:
>
> In the paper *Previous Work*, it was stated that the algorithm would display quadratic convergence under conditions X. We demonstrate that, in fact, the algorithm can fail to converge under X and Z, and provide the necessary conditions X and Y for which the quadratic convergence rate is recovered.
>
>
>
If the authors of *Previous Work* did not help you write up this new paper, there is no need to share authorship with them, although it was very polite of you it point it out to them.
In fact, as a very relevant example, the very famous 1977 EM algorithm paper had an issue in its convergence proof, which was corrected in 1983 by a different author.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/07/07
| 286
| 1,347
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am reviewing a software library tool at the moment.
During the review, I found some minor bugs while running their examples. However, it seems like nobody else has these bugs (at least I cant find them on the Github issue page). Otherwise, the library seems to be great. Should I recommend an accept pointing to these bugs or post the issues on Github (which could technically reveal my identity though, which would be against the blind review process).<issue_comment>username_1: You should submit the bugs with your review, not through Github.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If those bugs and bug-fixes are critical to your review, you should submit it with it and don't make a pull request from your official GitHub account. You still have an option of creating a one-time account and point to those issues/submit pull request fixing them in GitHub – that will not reveal your identity.
If your review does not really need those bugs to be mentioned (they are tangent to the subject of the review and don't influence the evaluation much), you can omit them from the review and post them officially through GitHub. That still has some possibility of identity reveal if the bugs are very special, and there are very few (say, 2) reviewers that participate in the peer-review process.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/07/07
| 3,467
| 14,847
|
<issue_start>username_0: I notice that past a certain age (sometimes as early as 50), some professors tend to be significantly less productive, to the point that they essentially do not publish or have graduate students and only teach classes (as that is really the only 'required' activity of a professor).
I've also noticed in some rarer cases of professor 'dropping off the grid' right after they get tenure. And this is reflected in them being an associate professor indefinitely.
Are there any consequences to this? Is their pay reduced if they are clearly not doing any research? Or are these professors effectively retired but still receiving all the monetary and social benefits of their job without having to conduct any of the required work?<issue_comment>username_1: I’d say that these cases are rather uncommon. There can be several explanations to what you observe
1. Senior faculty tend to take on more managerial roles (department heads, vice deans, research directors etc)
2. They may also be teaching more, or taking the large annoying classes no one wants.
3. They serve as journal editors or conference chairs.
From what I can tell, in the rare cases where professors do very little, department heads usually have a way to convince them to be more active. Even if you can’t be fired, your department head/school dean can still make your life miserable if you’re being uncooperative. For example, increasing your teaching load, messing with office/research facilities.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: In the department I did grad school in, there was not a single professor that matched the description you mentioned (out of 30+). All were still taking grad students and publishing. Of course, I'm not saying inactivity never occurrs but I wonder if it is rare. At least at R1 private schools.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: This depends on a lot of things, including how you define *productive*. I think you mean "produces publications", but there are other definitions. In particular, some professor who hasn't done a lot of recent research, but is otherwise well known, might, on the basis of letters of recommendation, send a lot of undergraduates to great doctoral programs. That would be highly valued in some institutions, especially small ones. In some other places, grants received, measured in dollars/euros/krona/yen/..., is the main measure of productivity.
While there are many (many) exceptions to the following, in general, assuming this is the US, an Assistant Professor who isn't productive won't get tenure and will likely not advance in an academic career. A tenured Associate Professor won't be advanced to Full Professor and will receive only minimal raises over the remaining career. S/he might be a bit ostracized by colleagues, but that depends on other aspects of "productivity". A Full Professor will probably only get minimal raises, but might be able to use such things as textbook revenues or consulting to supplement a relatively poor salary.
My experience was mostly in Professional, not R1, universities. Where I worked we had a sensible system in which a Professor (even a Full Professor) was evaluated each year. The professor was allowed to set the terms of the evaluation, within limits. The stated "things of value" were Research, Teaching, and Service. Different universities will value these differently at different times and an individual can also value them differently as their career progresses.
But the process might work like this: The professor writes an annual dossier in which s/he comments on contributions to the main criteria, and others if desired. This dossier is a few pages and lists papers and conference talks, grants, professional contributions (conference chair...). It discusses contributions to teaching, such as courses developed or improved. It also discusses, as appropriate, service to the university, its students, and the general community. The dossier can also include a suggested plan for the coming year mentioning each category.
Then, after the dossier is submitted, someone, such as the Dean, reviews the dossier and comments on it. Some of the comments are laudatory and others point out places where the "contributions" are less valuable as seen by the university at that moment. The reviewer will also suggest a plan for improvement, if necessary, that becomes an expectation for the following year. For a tenured professor, the job itself isn't in jeopardy, but the level of compensation normally is. But the university also sets ranges of possible changes in compensation and the bottom is normally greater than zero. Actual reductions in salary would be rare, and possibly illegal. But inflation catches up pretty quickly if your salary is stagnant.
I consider this to be a reasonable evaluation plan. In an R1 university using such a plan, research would be the category most valued and most weighted by the reviewer who looks at the dossier. In a teaching university or college, Research would be expected, but at a lower level and teaching and service to students (especially) would be more highly valued.
But the beauty of the system is that an individual initiates the evaluation and can establish their own "most valued" contribution and, while it can't ignore the value system of the university, need not adhere to it absolutely. For a university, even an R1 university, it isn't necessary that *everyone* treat research as the most important thing at every point of the career. There are other things of value and other sorts of valued contributions. <NAME>, for example, may not have done a lot of research in later years, but was highly valued by Cornell and others. It is enough, for the university, that all of its goals are met and that overall, there is a good balance (as defined by the university) between the valued elements.
In fact, it is possible that a Dean in trying to optimize something like research contribution at a micro level, actually sub-optimizes it at a macro level, creating an unhappy and unproductive environment.
Of course, some people get lazy as they grow older. But if you have a valued position at any kind of university it is probably true that your personal goals align pretty well with those of the university. You do what you love to do and it is just about what the university wants to see done. So there is a lot of personal drive, even inertia, to keep doing that. If you've been doing research since forever it is likely that you love it and want to continue doing it. For many people, it is harder to get them to stop than it is to get them to do more.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: A lot will depend on the culture of the department and the university. I would say that even at most R1 departments, if a professor whose research is trailing off makes major contributions in other ways, such as being an excellent and hard-working teacher or doing a lot of quality service for the department or university, then people tend to look the other way and there won't be any consequences.
On the other hand, if a professor generally slacks off, there might be consequences. Sometimes there are post-tenure reviews but even these can be shrugged off I suppose. Reducing raises to zero or near zero has an effect over time. Teaching schedules can be made highly annoying and the most undesirable classes can be assigned. But I think the biggest consequence would simply be that the people around him/her would lose their respect. It's not pleasant to show up somewhere several times a week for years and have the people you interact with think you shouldn't be there.
Believe it or not, there are some R1 departments that don't care about research productivity. I was at one once, and I remember hearing one of the senior professors (who was actually one of the more productive ones) counseling us junior people on how nice being at the department was. You just had to get a grant, then you'd get tenure, then you could take it easy forever. Many people in the department took that philosophy and there were quite a few people who hadn't published anything in years. I have to say they didn't seem to be enjoying themselves.. for the type of person who has the drive to get tenure at an R1 to begin with it's not natural or healthy to stagnate afterwards.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: It is a common misconception that professors with tenure "can't be fired". They cannot just be "let go" but the American Association of University Professors recognizes three reasons why a professor, even with tenure, can be fired:
1. Moral turpitude ("messing around" with an undergraduate student certainly. A grad student less certainly. Bringing the college into disrepute certainly).
2. Financial exigency: the college can no longer afford to pay the professor. Here, the college must show that they have already taken all possible steps to reduce costs or increase income, such as firing un-tenured faculty before firing any tenured faculty. In particular, the college cannot fire tenured faculty, replacing them with untenured faculty with lower salaries.
3. Incompetence. This can include failure to do research if the faculty members contract specified research as part of the job.
The difference between "tenured" and "untenured" is that an untenured faculty member can be just dismissed or "let go" for any reason or without giving a reason. Dismissing a tenured faculty member must be done "for cause" and almost certainly the college will have to defend that "cause" in a law suit!
(I was once "dismissed" because I (at the time chair of the college chapter of AAUP) had strongly protested a new policy the college president was implementing. I had the AAUP intervene (a single letter to the board of trustees) and the result was that the college president resigned and I became chair of the Math department! I was also at a college (not the same one) where no student had majored in physics in the last 10 years.(!!Yes, really!) The entire physics department was abolished with the few tenured physics professors moved to the Math department.)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: The consequences depend very much on the country and the institutions.
In the US, professors are usually not paid by the University for the summer term (unless they teach summer courses). Unless they have a grant that can provide some income, they take a *de facto* pay cut for not being active - or at least not having a grant. (The salaries can be spread over 12months to keep benefits).
In Mexico part of the income is directly tied to research so those doing teaching-only duties are on much reduced income compared to those who are research active.
In Canada it doesn’t make a direct difference although course assignments, teaching relief, salary increments are often tied to research productivity.
Most systems find a way to recognized directly or indirectly research activity.
It is possible to have a comfortable but boring lifestyle in the US or Canadian system if you are not research active, although many who are tired of chasing grants often prefer to contribute in non-research ways: through curriculum development, teaching, administrative and committee duties. The more burdensome of such contributions are often recognized by granting a leave of absence or some such arrangement to the person transitioning from administrative back to teaching or research.
It is possible to completely game the system and really do the minimum once you get tenured, but this would be unlikely to produce collegial relations with others. Of course some (few) feel entitled to do just that: hopefully they have an interesting hobby else their life must be lonely.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: Responding a bit tangentially: in terms of the risks one takes in playing the academic game, in trying to do "research" (whether in science or humanities or...), the idea of "tenure" (in my opinion) is that people should get a large reward for their person risk.
In particular, if people will not at all be rewarded for speculative investigations (failed or successful), not be able to make a living, then this discourages even the fairly altruistic from doing anything other than the most short-term practical.
So, quite seriously, I think "tenure" is the reward for risking oneself. To say "oh, you've pooped out..." is not appropriate, I quite seriously think (even while I'm not necessarily a fan of people who *have* pooped out), because that judgement is that *even* after you've risked a lot, and succeeded, you're *still* not secure. That changes the calculation of risk... in a way that would demolish academic stuff apart from "vocational training".
In any case, yes, this is a thing people should think about, for cultural reasons.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: I've seen the following four approaches to the problem of unproductive (in research) tenured faculty.
1. Give them lousy (or non-existent) raises every year.
2. Two such professors were excellent teachers, and the department chair (presumably with the dean's approval) made a deal with them, that if they teach 50% more courses than usual, then no research would be expected from them and they would get the same percentage raise as the average of other tenured faculty in their department.
3. The dean asked the department chair for a list of such professors, and all of them who were old enough to be eligible for early retirement got a letter from the dean suggesting that they retire immediately and offering a financial incentive for them to do so. (The reaction was mixed. Some recipients of the dean's letter were outraged at being considered deadwood. Some happily took the deal.)
4. The department chair, seeking a way to get some productivity from one such professor (who wasn't doing well in research or teaching) decided to appoint him associate chair, i.e., let him contribute to the department administratively. (This did not work out well.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: >
> "I notice that past a certain age (sometimes as early as 50), some
> professors tend to be significantly less productive, to the point that
> they essentially do not publish or have graduate students and only
> teach classes (as that is really the only 'required' activity of a
> professor)."
>
>
>
I think you may have it the wrong way round there. At least in some cases, teaching and administrative duties are accumulated to the point that you no longer have time and energy to remain research active. This is especially true if your research does not require substantial grants to hire research assistants.
There are no consequences to this (as you are pulling your weight) except lack of job satisfaction and prospects for promotion.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/07/07
| 1,026
| 4,253
|
<issue_start>username_0: UPDATE: My program is Computer Science and Engineering.
**I chose the current advisor for mainly three reasons:**
1. I'm interested in a general research area, and he's in a group doing the stuffs.
2. He has good publications in top conferences and journals in recent years.
3. Applying for other graduate schools is exhaustive, and I didn't search for other programs.
**Here are some reasons which make me consider changing an advisor:**
1. I have no regular individual meeting with him. In the first semester, I had no idea about what I should do to find a research topic. Then in the second semester, I only talked with the post-doc in our lab, who graduated with a thesis in another area very different from the general topic in our lab.
2. In group meeting, we present our works to him and he gives some advice (for me, you don't understand the paper you need to redo it; for others, this paper was not published in a good conference/journal...). I think he doesn't try to understand some meeting contents, because he's even not focusing on the it, doing something else. Once he left early because he thought the presentation was not interesting.
3. I wrote weekly report, and he forwards it to the post-doc for how I'm doing.
4. We are not doing the research that attracts me. And no one in our group knows how to do it.
**But I still have considerations to change advisor:**
1. I have few options in choosing a new advisor in a related research area.
2. I don't have a target group I want to move to.
*Could you give some suggestions on how I could handle this situation?*<issue_comment>username_1: There are some students who don't need a lot of direction and can find and analyze their own research problems. There are others (many others) who need more direction and even suggestions about problems. Likewise there are advisors who want to give a lot of direction, sometimes too much. And their others who don't, or who prefer to work only with their most advanced students. It can be a problem if there is a mismatch.
The two ways of curing the mismatch are begging for help and hoping that the advisor responds positively, and finding a different advisor who is more helpful at the point at which you currently are.
Perhaps your advisor depends a lot on those senior students and postdocs to give direction to the newer members of the "team". If you can find and exploit that help there, you can probably be successful. Otherwise you should consider your options for another advisor.
Don't spend a lot of time hoping it will get better. If you, or someone, takes some action that seems to be moving in a positive direction then you may be able to see what happens. But if nothing does, protect your options and your future.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It is not uncommon for advisors at R1 schools (especially in experimental sciences) to really serve as funders, recruiters, and very absent managers. But not "advisors". You should look to yourself and see if you can just figure things out and run an experimental campaign. In many cases, the answer is yes. But some students are weaker.
What I am saying is try to be a little contrarian and just ask yourself "do I even need an advisor" or is a lab bench and an expense account to buy reagents and equipment enough. Particularly if I can use my own initiative to get help from other grad students, postdocs, out of group members or out of group professors when I have a very particular blocking point.
I mean, yeah maybe it sucks that you don't get this wonderful apprenticeship. But honestly, that is a huge myth (in my experience and my friends). But the real world is fine. Do your own thing. Heck, I honestly wouldn't want the old man to have messed with my plans. Just get out of the way and let me do things my way.
Edit:
"4. We are not doing the research that attracts me. And no one in our group knows how to do it."
Now this is a problem. Don't do his program. Do your own. Believe me, you will probably get attention when you just blow him off. You think I'm joking, but I mean it. Throw a little pepper in the stew. See what happens. Make him have to come here for advice about how to handle the situation. ;-)
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/07/07
| 1,012
| 4,258
|
<issue_start>username_0: I teach secondary history classes. My principal is pushing for all teachers to introduce students to a annotation system which should be the same in all classes. But the system doesn't seem appropriate for my student's needs, e.g. here are some of the 20+ items:
* Underline key words.
* Put a question mark next to questions you have.
* Put a star next to important items.
* Put an exclamation mark next to things you felt were interesting.
* Write the infinity symbol next to a "connection" you made.
* Etc.
The items don't help students to focus on achieving their goal at hand. The annotations might help students to closely read a text, but don't product meaningful notes that students can refer to for other purposes.
My students need to use annotations in two contexts, which I think also resemble the reason-for-annotating text in college:
* To annotate a text, identifying items relevant to a given prompt, in preparation for writing a short essay.
* To annotate a text, identifying items relevant to their own thesis statement (or possibly requiring them to reevaluate their thesis statement), for a research project.
I tried arguing for a simpler system that addressed these needs, but my suggestion was dropped, because the principal was using a method from a "credible" source, one downloaded from Pinterest. My principal might be swayed if I presented some "standard" method used in academia (i.e. something with a name).
Just as there is formal "Cornell Notes", which was even created by a Cornell professor, is there a named, standard system for annotating in academia?<issue_comment>username_1: There are some students who don't need a lot of direction and can find and analyze their own research problems. There are others (many others) who need more direction and even suggestions about problems. Likewise there are advisors who want to give a lot of direction, sometimes too much. And their others who don't, or who prefer to work only with their most advanced students. It can be a problem if there is a mismatch.
The two ways of curing the mismatch are begging for help and hoping that the advisor responds positively, and finding a different advisor who is more helpful at the point at which you currently are.
Perhaps your advisor depends a lot on those senior students and postdocs to give direction to the newer members of the "team". If you can find and exploit that help there, you can probably be successful. Otherwise you should consider your options for another advisor.
Don't spend a lot of time hoping it will get better. If you, or someone, takes some action that seems to be moving in a positive direction then you may be able to see what happens. But if nothing does, protect your options and your future.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It is not uncommon for advisors at R1 schools (especially in experimental sciences) to really serve as funders, recruiters, and very absent managers. But not "advisors". You should look to yourself and see if you can just figure things out and run an experimental campaign. In many cases, the answer is yes. But some students are weaker.
What I am saying is try to be a little contrarian and just ask yourself "do I even need an advisor" or is a lab bench and an expense account to buy reagents and equipment enough. Particularly if I can use my own initiative to get help from other grad students, postdocs, out of group members or out of group professors when I have a very particular blocking point.
I mean, yeah maybe it sucks that you don't get this wonderful apprenticeship. But honestly, that is a huge myth (in my experience and my friends). But the real world is fine. Do your own thing. Heck, I honestly wouldn't want the old man to have messed with my plans. Just get out of the way and let me do things my way.
Edit:
"4. We are not doing the research that attracts me. And no one in our group knows how to do it."
Now this is a problem. Don't do his program. Do your own. Believe me, you will probably get attention when you just blow him off. You think I'm joking, but I mean it. Throw a little pepper in the stew. See what happens. Make him have to come here for advice about how to handle the situation. ;-)
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/07/07
| 3,310
| 13,455
|
<issue_start>username_0: As a Ph.D. student from a (pretty rich!) European research group, I'm about to attend a conference in New Zealand. The second leg of a potential flight takes 16 hours to reach the destination, and it seems to be the hell of discomfort to spend all that time on an economy seat (I once had a 10-hour-flight experience, and I was in trouble because of my relatively long legs despite time-to-time walks in the plane's aisle). The cost of a business seat is around 4 times the cost of an economy one, something around 3500 Euros. Thus, I'm just wondering how reasonable the request to have such a seat is.
PS. I do know that a first-hand approach is actually asking my supervisor what he thinks about it. But I'd rather not ask such a question if it would sound silly and unreasonable.
Any experiences and thoughts (particularly from those who had already been involved in any side of such a situation) are welcome!<issue_comment>username_1: Congrats on being in a rich research group, it can only help! :)
A workaround could be to ask your supervisor how much budget there is for your travel/accommodation expenses for the whole PhD.
Depending on their answer and your evaluation of potential future travels, you can see yourself if the request is reasonable or not.
In the same kind of idea, you could try to find out whether it's common for professors in your research group to travel on business class: if nobody does or only the most senior researchers, chances are that it's not a reasonable request.
PS: if you manage to convince your supervisor don't tell your fellow PhD students at the conference or they're going to hate you ;)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In Canada it is illegal to get anything but economy fare (including trains) and charge this to any one of the national tri-Council grants (there are exceptions if there is no other availability but this is rarely the case.)
The best you can do is buy an upgradable economy fare and hope for the best, or pay for an exit-row seat.
Overall your request will be perceived not only unreasonable but also *blatantly* unreasonable, unless you have special conditions or a rich sponsor.
I can say more. Some years ago a candidate for a position where I work insisted on getting a business-class ticket for the interview and he was just removed from the shortlist.
Edit: is this a direct flight? This wiki list of long flights <https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longest_flights> does not include European-Asian city pairs.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I worked in the scientific instruments business at VP level for 20yrs and went to many conferences where everyone from PhD students to Nobel Prizewinners were there. I can tell you without hesitation that almost NOBODY goes business class unless they are the invited Nobel keynote speaker. Please don't even ask your supervisor as you risk being branded negatively for the rest of your time there. Instead, plan the flight times to minimise cost and maximise the time you have up front of the conference to recover from the flight and get your bearings, including an extra night in the hotel as a previous contributor suggested. On the way home, don't extend your stay on the back end as there is no "compus mentus" justification and anyway if you have worked the conference fully you will want to get the hell away by then! Book a return flight for the time you would be most likely naturally asleep to maximise your chances of being unconscious. Good luck and keep a clear record of your expenses and the reason for them as someone could put you on the spot at any time. Bear in mind that research funding often comes from charities etc. so assuming you are 'rich' and acting like it is both immoral and consequently very unpopular.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: You can always ask your supervisor, but it's probably not their decision. In practice, supervisors usually have constraints on how they can use "their" funding - their department usually manages the funding on behalf of the funding body, and the supervisor can only do things that the funder and the department will allow. It's very unusual for funders to be willing to fund business-class flights in my experience, and often the university or department itself may also have a policy that prohibits it.
Whether or not your supervisor will perceive a request for a business-class flight from you as being unreasonable depends on the way in which you make the request and their personality, but regardless of their opinion of your request, I would have thought that the request itself is unlikely to be successful. Your best bet is probably to go with whatever flight they offer, and personally pay for cheap upgrades like more leg room, an exit row seat, etc.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Yes, the request would be unreasonable.\* But let’s try to look at this from a different angle: think about how very fortunate you are to be doing your PhD at a “pretty rich” European research group, and to have an opportunity to travel to a beautiful place like New Zealand. The fact that under such happy circumstances you are focusing on the discomfort of travel, describing it with words like “hell”, seems like a missed opportunity to me. Why not use the occasion instead to remind yourself of how lucky you are, and how good your professional life is compared to that of pretty much... everyone else?
I’ve been on many long flights and have been doing academia-related travel for many years now, in all but a few occasions on economy class. I still find travel a magical experience, and whenever I board a plane to go somewhere far away I always find myself thinking about how lucky I am to have these sorts of opportunities. It can be a bit uncomfortable of course, but honestly I think that is a completely negligible part of the experience. So maybe you can find a way to adjust your point of view and look at your situation with a similarly positive mindset? Just a thought. Hope you enjoy New Zealand in any case!
---
\*Since you mention that you have long legs, you may be medically justified in asking your research group to pay a modest fee to upgrade your ticket to economy plus, so that you can get to sit in an exit row or other location with more legroom. At least that would be a reasonable thing to ask your supervisor about. But business class? No, it’s not a good idea to bring it up...
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: You say that you were "in trouble". Do you mean that you experienced, or feared, some diagnosable medical condition?
If so, you might consider visiting a doctor. If you get a doctor's note saying "Roboticist is at elevated risk for XYZ, and I recommend that s/he fly premium economy or business if at all possible", then you might be allowed to book premium economy seats.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: In my (also European) country, business class travel for PhD students is just as unheard of as for the other countries that we have answers for. More precisely: reimbursement for that is unheard of.
And even in the rare cases here where the PhD student has their own budget for travel, the usual outcome is that they keep the costs as low as possible in order to use the saved money to attend one more conference. So you need to be aware that that "normal" is what you'd likely be judged against.
---
That being said, I do see a number of measures you could take to alleviate the problems you describe with a previous long distance flight.
* Aisle and exit row seats have been mentioned already. But even if you are in a middle seat it is fine if you get out to **walk around** for half an hour every 1 1/2 hrs or so.
* Talk to a doctor has been mentioned in another answer. I'd recommend that as well, but less with the aim of getting an attestation for going business class but rather to find out what medical risks you run and possibilities to mitigate them exist - or even whether your personal risk when flying is high so you should avoid flying.
* You could also book shorter flights with more stopovers. Where I am, it is possible to combine some holidays (usually up to 3 or 5 working days) with a business trip and still get full reimbursement. Thus, you could even combine short flights with an additional day to see some places on the way *and* get your legs back to normal shape. You'd have to pay for the accomodation during your holiday yourself, of course.
However, multiple shorter flights may be available at a lower total price: in that case no question whatsover would arise about reimbursement of the flight.
* (I did have a bit of a discussion once with administration when I wanted to leave on a Fri direction America to have a full day to get rid of jet lag with my presentation being on the first full day of the conference on Monday. Prof said this is totally reasonable and that was that. I'd doubly argue this when going east as like many people I find jet lag much worse when going east vs. going west and insist that such an acclimatization and preparation day is work and not holidays.)
* I've been lucky in choosing flights with less popular flight time/weekday and/or route. Again, you can often recognize them by still having cheaper tickets available comparably late. I've had long distance flights where I could lie down across a complete 4-seat row.
* In any case, it doesn't hurt to ask when boarding whether you can be reseated to some place with more space if one should be free.
* Of course, you may also make sure you do the online check in as early as possible to secure a suitable seat and/or go for the additional fee for the exit row yourself if administration won't reimburse it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: During my post-doc I sometimes travelled from my university in Europe to the USA in business class. *But* I only did this if the fare difference was small ( < 20% on top of premium economy ticket price, which I was allowed due to my height) *and* if I had a meeting or work-related activity within 6 hours of landing.
I would never, ever, dream of asking for a business class ticket simply because I have a long flight. It's important to remember that your flight ticket is being paid for with someone else's money. Be that the taxpayer (on many grants / projects) or a private foundation (such as the Wellcome trust in the UK). I think we have a duty to spend that money wisely, and it's hard to morally justify that a business class ticket which is four times more than the economy ticket is worthwhile.
(edit) It's also worth looking up if your department / university has a policy for this. Mine, a prestigious university with [IMO] more money than sense, says: No business class tickets unless you pay the fare difference yourself. This seems to be pretty common.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: Some personal anecdote, since the OP asks for experience and thoughts.
I once travelled from Europe to Australia with a stopover in Qatar. So the Qatar-Australia leg was pretty long. As it happens, the major Arabian Carriers (Qatar Airways, Emirates, Etihad) fly the Airbus A-380, which is a twin-aisle, double decker plane.
As the A-380 has two decks, it features two staircases connecting the lower with the upper deck. During my very-long flights, I occasionally walked back to the aft staircase. Since the stairs are closed during the flight, there was nothing really going on there, except passengers accessing the toilets. This left plenty of space to hang out.
So, I could stretch my legs and do some gymnastics.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/7leV5.png)
I honestly have no idea if other wide-body (single-deck) jets would allow you to do the same, but judging from the layout of the A-330, which notes "Gallery/Storage" in the region connecting the two aisles at the very back of the plane, I suspect a passenger doing gymnastics there, would impede the flight attendants.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/VHD3v.png)
So, in summary: try to get a flight on an A-380 for the longer leg of your flight.
Image credit: [Wikimedia Commons](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Aircraft_seating_diagrams)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: In many cases it's possible to find someone who could go to the conference instead of you, especially if you raise the point well in advance. You could even arrange for someone else to present your paper, if that's the purpose of the trip. I bet there are people in your group who wouldn't mind a 16-hour flight on an economy ticket if they get the opportunity to attend the conference.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: I personally think the request would be unreasonable. Look at it this way -- your desired airfare can fly *four* students to the conference.
I think the real options for you are to a) back out of the conference, if you find the idea of coach travel to NZ to be something you really can't do (and explain it to your group that way -- I think people would understand it quite well. Apologize, saying you thought you would be able to tolerate the trip when you agreed to go, but now you realize it's just something you won't be able to do); b) offer to foot the increase on your own dime, if a mechanism can be found to help you do that; c) grin and bear it.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/07/08
| 506
| 2,041
|
<issue_start>username_0: First of all, I studied in Japan. After I complete all graduate courses. There will be 3 years to submit my thesis. During this time, I drop school and work in a company. So my professor removed all my information from the lab (%100) like I was not there, even Alumni name list. I would like to ask is it common for other schools.<issue_comment>username_1: Consider your relationship with the professor at the time that you left. There are at least two cases I can think of where a professor may remove your information from the lab page.
* You didn't finish, and you are no longer part of the lab (not quite alumni). It's not clear if you will finish. A lot of unfinished students can make a bad reputation for the prof.
* The professor does not want you to represent the lab.
As you probably know, Asian culture is a lot about 'saving face'. The professor may feel disrespected by you taking a job before finishing the thesis. Or possibly even taking the 'wrong' job.
One place that the professor is very, very unlikely to remove your name is the lab publications list. Work on publication, and use that as your work reference rather than the lab webpage.
If possible, try to discuss your research with the professor.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It's normal to remove old student content from the group page. Get your own page if you want.
I'm not as used to seeing ABD or "got masters and quit" students removed from alumni list. Most professors want to emphasize how many students they have helped and take credit even for those who did not finish. However, it's still a very minor thing, and "his dojo" and not your concern.
Really, I think worrying about stuff like group inclusion when you are gone is a little "off". I mean you left the nest...you shouldn't even be snooping that page...or at least act like you are above it. ;-) Keep your eye on the current job who is paying you. And just submit the thesis and fight to get your union card...don't let it get away. Priorities...
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/07/08
| 1,587
| 7,103
|
<issue_start>username_0: My paper is about a specific application of blockchain. I've developed a basic prototype for it and so far, I've described it in detail, and put screencaps of the interface for it. Should I also include actual code of relating to different parts of the application?<issue_comment>username_1: Depends on the field and journal - check other papers in the same journal on how they do it. In my field (Bioinformatics) we usually do not put code into the paper but provide the full source code via the department web-page and/or git.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: As mentioned in the answer by username_1, it is going to depend heavily on your field and journal. But to expand on things, here are a couple thoughts about including code directly in the content of the paper:
* Programming language: You're code is going to be in just one of the many available programming languages out there. That might limit its usefulness or make it more difficult for people that are not familiar with that language.
* Line lengths: Often it is hard to write readable code that fits into the line length of a single printed page. You have to resort to things like shorter, potentially less useful variable names, splitting lines, etc. Also, different journals might use different fonts that change how many characters fit on a line, so you might have to spend a lot of time just reformatting the code for different submissions. It's worse if it has to be in a single column of a two-column layout.
* Conciseness: there might be a lot of things that people don't need to see to understand the actual application of your paper, like initializing variables, unrolling loops, etc. This is just wasted space that may count toward word limits.
* Future-proofness: Ideally, you don't want any part of the main content of your paper to become obsolete in the future. Technology changes, standards change, etc. Eventually your code could become unrunnable. It's probably impossible to avoid altogether, but including it in the main body of the paper just makes it more prominent if it does happen.
With that, here are some alternatives, some of which have already been mentioned in other answers/comments:
* Pseudocode: basically the same as including code, but negates/offsets most or all of the negatives outlined above.
* Supplementary info (SI): Many journals username_3w the inclusion of supplementary material. You could potentially include your code here. This has the advantage that no matter what, there will always be an archival record of your code associated with your paper that you don't have to spend time managing.
* External repositories (e.g., Github): This makes you responsible for ensuring the code continues to be available for readers, and also depends on the service's continued existence, but has the upside that you can fix mistakes, add features, etc.
There's nothing stopping you from including all three options. Pseudocode provides permanency for describing an algorithm, supplementary info provides a combination of permanency and utility for an example implementation, and an external repository provides utility and future-proofness for actual mainstream use.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Your topic sounds like the paper would benefit from having the core algorithms as code in the paper, but you should probably use pseudo code with explicit declarations and everything.
Read a few other papers and look at the corresponding LaTeX packages, to get a rough impression how a good pseudo code listing should look like.
Do NOT:
```
int random_element(std::vector mylist) {
std::random\_shuffle(mylist.begin(), mylist.end());
return mylist.at(0);
}
```
Do:
```
Input: A non-empty list of integers "mylist", a "shuffle" function that
creates a random permutation of a list
Output: A random element of the list
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
shuffled_list ← shuffle(mylist)
result ← shuffled_list[0]
return result
```
Your reader should not need to understand the details of your programming language and many of them are implementation specific and have nothing to do with the algorithm itself. Your reader needs to understand the abstract method and is in general not interested in if you use smart pointers and other technical details.
The same applies for your screencaps. Are you sure, they are needed for the paper? Keep it at a minimum, if you're not explicitely writing about user interface guidelines. There are many ways to implement an UI for a specific application and when describing the method, it does not matter how you arranged the buttons.
Such things may be put into supplementary material, for example by putting your code online for others to read and try (possibly with a documentation including the screencaps and compiled binaries with the UI for easy testing).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: As others have written, code belongs in a public repo. I have one addition to make:
The only time I have ever seen code in a paper was in a paper presenting a new simulation tool. To demonstrate the ease of use and flexibility the short code snippets producing the plots were part of the figures (see [here](https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/neuro.11.005.2008/full)).
In a similar way, if you e.g. want to showcase a particularly nice or convenient API, it might be appropriate to have (minimal!) code snippet in the paper.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I agree with @username_2.
The idea of an article is to communicate ideas, and listing code in an article is fine as far as it makes the article more readable and the code itself presents necessary clarification. To do so, the code should be clear and self-contained. That is all function names or variables do not need references to other code files that are not presented in the article.
This practice can be easily replaced by pseudo code instead or diagrams, and I would only put code in a paper if the paper describes how to use the code itself. For instance presenting how to use/call classes of a package I have developed. The reason is for avoiding putting code is that, which programming language I am going to use, the reader might not be familiar with it, and if things can not be communicated with pseudo-code or diagrams, then the code itself might not be clearer, since pseudo-code is developed in the first place to abstract the idea of code listing.
To summarize, use instead pesudo-code or diagram, and only list code to explain how to use a software package that the paper describes.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: There are some papers in the machine learning field where an algorithm is complex, and a certain language (i.e. Python) is ubiquitous. For these papers, they usually first include a pseudocode description of the algorithm in the main paper, and add a minimal implementation in an appendix. You will have to decide if you believe that your idea is truly clearer to a majority of your readers if written as a code snippet.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/07/08
| 395
| 1,723
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've got an interview for a Ph.D. position and I need to give a ten-minute presentation for my recent research. I have completed two projects and right now I am doing another research which has a close correlation to the advertised position. These three projects have no correlation. I would like to present the last project I am working on, but unfortunately, I have a few results to exhibit. So I do not know how to present an unfinished project. Should I follow the outline like background, purpose, methods, and results? And any tips or advice for the interview?<issue_comment>username_1: Ten minutes is like "no time at all". You can do very little. However, it is likely that the hiring committee is *much* more interested in what you will do in the future, related to their general concerns, than what you have done in the past.
So, I'd suggest you mention, briefly, the past results but stress the work in progress *and the possible benefits* if it pays off. The committee can explore your past work in publications, of course, but the work in progress and *contemplated*, needs to come from you. Look to the future, not the past.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: "What you're thinking you're becoming." Be confident and honest.
Present the current project you are working on and be upfront, transparent, and honest; mention how you just started on the current project and present it in a way that shows your planning and execution plan: how you start it, how you research for it, how you implement it, and how you execute it. Use this as an opportunity to paint a good picture for them to see how your work flow is. Showing them insight to how you set goals will help.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/07/08
| 558
| 2,345
|
<issue_start>username_0: If there is a tree of papers on or involving *X*, all of which give a brief introduction to *X* and I need a citation for my use of *X*, do I need to give the root of the tree as a citation of *X* or can I cite any of the nodes in the tree that explain *X* for my use of it?
Concretely I need to cite why using point wise mutual information can be used to improve co-occurence matrix based word embeddings. I do not really know where PPMI was first used for this purpose, but I have stepped down towards the root for a few papers now. Do I need to find the paper that first used PPMI for this or can I cite any of the ones I already found?<issue_comment>username_1: I (as a mathematician) would use one of three options:
* *cite the most recent paper*. This is what I do when I only need a reference to the topic and no particular result in detail; ideally, the most recent paper is a survey (or sometimes I pick the most recent survey), this way I can skip a lot of references in my own article saying, "see [xyz], and the references therein." This somehow implies that the contribution of my paper is related, but it is nowhere necessary to know the exact details of the results of that source.
* *cite the original source*. This is rare in my case, because over the years people have added so much knowledge that citing the original works seems to be a bit out of date. I only do this when I really want to stress that this origin is important for my work in particular. As I said, this rarely happens. I am pretty sure that many people who cite the *original source* have never read the original source and just cite it "because you cite it."
* *cite some other paper(s)* "from the tree" (as you call it). This is what I usually need and do, mainly because I need to refer to several different details from different sources. Then I have a reason for referring to an "inner node in the reference tree" (neither root nor leave), and I would *only* do that if I can give a reason, either only to myself, or even write in my own paper *why* I pick this particular reference.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Try to choose the most precise reference. If there is truly no difference between sources and you could cite any number of references, try to find a good review paper to cite.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/07/08
| 2,273
| 9,701
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a math professor at an R1 university. I have taken up a new graduate student (my n'th for n<=10), who is mathematically quite strong, but whose writing skills are a couple notches below what I have had to deal with so far.
We have a new result, which he currently is writing up. He is relatively new to English, and his native language is much unlike English. Though one can understand what he says in a conversation, writing a paper is a real struggle.
Most research students that I have worked with start with poor mathematical English skills. Their first drafts have several major problems, and require many rounds of thorough revision. However, there is always at least something which is right from the start. In contrast, this student's drafts appear nearly unsalvageable: they have hardly a sentence in common with any proper exposition. I have lost the track of revision number, but it is likely to be in double digits now.
The student is working hard, and the draft is showing some signs of improvement. However, I cannot shake the feeling that there should be more that I can do than provide extensive feedback. I am also worried that if this continues for another few months, the student can get much discouraged.
I believe that a part of the problem is the sudden jump in writing difficulty. The mathematical content of the paper-in-writing is more complex than it is typical for a first paper of students that I have supervised so far. This makes the writing task harder. I wish only that the student could practice on a simpler, shorter paper first, to provide a smoother transition from writing homework exercises.
I am looking for suggestions. Note that I would like to avoid writing the paper myself (which would be far less work for me than this), for I want the student to learn how to write himself.
What I have done so far:
* extensive comments on drafts, with some verbal explanations
* suggested some mathematical readings which I know are well-written (to learn by example)
* provided general encouragement<issue_comment>username_1: As a partial answer, perhaps your university has a writing Center you could refer the student to for help. For example the University of Wisconsin-Madison has a [writing center](https://writing.wisc.edu/) and Texas Tech even has a [graduate writing center](http://www.depts.ttu.edu/gradschool/gswc.php).
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Have them write up mathematically simpler things first, to reduce the English complications.
Giving fairly-formal oral presentations, on relatively simpler things, can also "expose" in real time issues with formation of sentences.
I do also encourage my students, native English speakers or not, to write as-simple-as-possible sentences, thinking in terms of subject-verb-object, rather than lengthy compound-complex sentences. (Many textbooks and papers are bad models in this regard.)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Ideally, the student needs a tutor, preferably someone trained in ESL (English as a Second Language) and also familiar with the student's native language.
Ideally, but probably impossible to find, is someone conversant in mathematics.
The student probably needs a crutch, but also a plan to be able to throw away the crutch before he graduates.
This isn't, of course, a zero cost solution, but it might be worth it if the student truly has promise to contribute.
Of course, writing in the student's native language is another possibility, but it would, then, be hard for you to evaluate it. A colleague with the required language and math skills might be able to do that. This might be preferred if the student intends to return to his native land eventually.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: You could rewrite the paper with the student. This will expose the student to their mistakes (which they'll hopefully identify themselves in the future) and to good writing (which they'll hopefully strive towards in the future). Unfortunately, it is a highly labour intensive approach. As an alternative, one of your better students could rewrite the paper with the student (possibly in exchange for co-authorship, which seems reasonable, given they'll be rewriting the paper).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: My wife, who was a writing coach for scientists, once had great success with a native speaker of Japanese whose written English was poor. She suggested he write the first few drafts in his native language, so that he could be sure he had the main ideas right. Then he translated his own work into English as best as he could, ready for revision.
Another possible strategy with a similar goal (getting the structure and basic ideas right first) might be for you to sketch a first rough draft, with the theorems in place and some of the expository scaffolding. Then the student could work on fleshing out the proofs and adding details - to be revised, of course.
(I wish I could check that second strategy out with my wife.)
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_6: Have them take a look at this online course by [Berkeley](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_California,_Berkeley): *[Academic and Business Writing](https://www.edx.org/course/academic-and-business-writing-2)*
edX may very well have exactly what they need if this isn't quite it. It's remarkable how much information and graded instruction is absolutely free or low cost on this platform by Harvard and MIT.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Here practice makes mastery. Let your student be exposed to a lot of articles similar to those he has to write, and ask him to try to copy their style.
Also, review his writing with him and point out different ways to express his ideas that fit better in your context
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: I'm not offering a full answer, but your question really moved me. I am a non-native English speaker, who studied at LSE (a while ago now), and did well. However, a few of my classmates, also not first-language speakers, did find it heavy going - all were bright enough to take content IN, but getting it OUT was an issue. I saw their frustration and often embarrassment, which is exacerbated by the fact that they were top performers at their home universities. I offer this - which is fairly non-academic advice, I'm sorry - if you want to really help, encourage your student to use English more in their day-to-day life, and to get themselves into all-English settings. One of the challenges with big, high-profile universities (esp. in the States) is that there are such large foreign communities that, as a student from, say, China (I'm not) - I would be able to basically remain in a Chinese-speaking bubble. This is, of course, wonderful in many ways, but it also means that I never cross the bridge (only done by being immersed in a linguistic environment, which is rather uncomfortable for a while) to the land where I now feel the new language is also a part of me. Once once this transition is made, I can deal much more comfortably with such abstract topics as you suggest.
Your student needs the playful interaction of everyday messiness, not because they need to use nuance and idiom in the paper, but because their English-worldscape sounds, to me, still quite small. It's an issue of confidence, not perfection.
Now, it does not sound like you have the time and resources to do this, and besides, ordering their nonacademic life is quite outside your ambit. So I don't think this can be of much help; but I do think that, in an ideal world, this is where the answer lies.
Finally, this is not meant to be pro-English. In fact, native English speakers have it worse, because you get by in so many places in the world using only English, it's rare to find an academic also able to ply their trade in another language. Moreover, and as academic you be most likely only ever targeting English journals.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_9: **TL;DR**
Suggest him to write a blog or more simple content, like technical reports.
---
As you said:
>
> I believe that a part of the problem is the sudden jump in writing difficulty.
>
>
>
This is a big challenge. Writing regularly on a blog will help him to gain experience and writing skills. He might start trying to explain his work for a non-math audience, and then try to go deeper and details and complexity, as the paper requires.
You can also ask him to summarize his weekly work/research in a report (article-like or free form), just for getting used to different writing styles and contexts.
For now, if there is no hurry with that paper he can keep iterating or if the paper is unsalvageable, you can kindly suggest him a different paper structure to start from or divide it into more manageable parts for him.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_10: Recommend the student to take an advanced English grammar and vocabulary course, at CEFR C1 or C2 level. My English is fine but if I were tasked with writing a scientific paper in German, I would probably make grammar and prose errors averaging more than one per sentence, unless I spent a huge amount of time double checking everything. A CEFR C2 course is aimed at reaching a level of fluency in writing comparable to a native speaker. They might need to take a C1 course and pass the C1 exam before entering C2, but C2 would be really good to have. The university probably offers such courses.
This will be much easier if you are located in an area where English is the primary language of communication, but even elsewhere many big cities will have CEFR C2 English language courses, and otherwise student can take such a course online.
Upvotes: 2
|