date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2019/08/13
| 658
| 2,688
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am presently developing a handbook/manual based on our published methods in a not-open access journal. The content of the manual is different (i.e., format and structure) from the published version and we made a modification, for example, we structured our manual to a "recipe style" so it's easy to use and follow by users. We cited the original paper and we borrowed and cited some of the figures (and some new ones). I am wondering would it be against the journal policy if I do this? Or any advice about how I will handle this. We also plan to publish the manual through an organisation.<issue_comment>username_1: That would depend
* on the particular journal/publisher policy
* the exact ways you intend to reuse the material (figures only? >x% of the paper? only in English?)
* the nature of your new publication (commercial, study material, report, etc)
* whether the author of the new publication was a co-author of the already published one
Some publishers explicitly allow the re-usage of the materials by authors in non-commercial teaching materials, some would require you to request permissions, which might be granted for a price or free of charge.
For example, a screenshot from IEEE "Request Permission" form, which shows you the variables that IEEE, in particular, considers determining the price:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/xXEOp.png)
The other publishers would have similar policies; however, might not have a convenient tool for quick licensing and price estimation, – so you would have to contact them directly.
If you decide to reuse the figures, you certainly have to request permissions from the publisher. You would also have to do so if you decide to borrow large chunks of text from the published papers.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> would it be against the journal policy if I do this?
>
>
>
It is not against journal policy for
>
> a handbook/manual [to be] based on...published methods in a...journal.
>
>
>
Indeed, anyone is free to write a handbook/manual based upon published materials. (Such a handbook/manual should not plagiarise, of course, and the OP has noted that the handbook/manual differs in content, format, structure, and style. Furthermore, the OP notes that the original sources have been cited.) Regarding,
>
> we borrowed and cited some of the figures
>
>
>
You need to check this is permissible, it has been answered elsewhere on this site.
There may be other concerns, but the question doesn't raise them.
**TL;DR**: Write your handbook/manual as-if you didn't write the original sources.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/13
| 469
| 1,857
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am writing a finance paper and I change my data frequency from monthly to daily data,
With monthly data, two decimal places is fine. However, my daily results look strange with two decimal places.
For example, *1.0042* becomes to *1.00;* then I have a tables full with *1.00,* which is not informative for my readers.
Can I increase the number of decimal places for the daily results?
Any examples of this would be appreciated!<issue_comment>username_1: This is an issue of *significant figures*. You say the value of 1.00 is not informative, but trailing zeros after a decimal point do, in fact, carry meaning. Showing a number that's been rounded to 1.00 indicates that the true value is somewhere between 0.995 and 1.004 - we know that the hundredths place rounds to 0. If you show the number as just 1, I can only infer that the true value is somewhere between 0.5 and 1.4. You're losing information, since we know that the tenths place is indeed zero, and that the hundredths place rounds to zero. Keeping the trailing zeros after the decimal point shows the level of precision with which you have measured your values.
You are free to round the numbers to whatever precision is meaningful for your domain, but keep in mind that your representation can reflect the precision of the underlying data - there is indeed a difference between a value of 1 and a value of 1.00.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> I am writing a finance paper ... Can I increase the number of decimal places for the daily results?
>
>
>
If it's done in other papers in your field, then yes. If it's *never* done, then ask a more senior colleague, or an editor / program committee member of the publication you're targeting.
Whatever you decide to do, make your choice explicit and clear; that way nobody will be misled.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/08/13
| 462
| 2,000
|
<issue_start>username_0: So I've just finished my Master's and my advisor has offered me a tentative position to work in his lab. I say tentative because it's dependent on if his project gets funding. He emailed me recently right before his leave that his project has been shortlisted and that they'll hopefully hear back by early Fall and that he'll keep me updated with regards to the position. This was last month and in the meantime i've been doing an internship to keep busy.
Recently however I've been thinking about applying to other jobs and PhD positions to keep my options open. However, I'm not sure if it's appropriate to ask my advisor if I can list him down as one of my reference and I don't want to blow my chances with him either. I drafted an email telling him that as his offer is not yet guaranteed I'm considering applying to various other positions and if he would be able to provide me a letter of recommendation. Yet I made it clear that I would still prefer to work with him. Is this fine? Or should I not ask him at all as he might then see me as a fickle candidate?<issue_comment>username_1: As you seem to have a good relationship with that professor, I think it is wise to ask for his recommendation. In some context, the **absence** of a recommendation from the former advisor could be frown upon.
I think any normal researcher will understand why you are applying to other positions, especially if you mention that his offer is your number 1 choice. In short, yes, ask!
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Do ask for a recommendation. That does not mean, you are not interested in his position, but he knows all too well, that he can't guarantee that. So why shouldn't he recommend you? You are obviously good enough for him to consider hiring you.
On the other hand, it would be odd not to look around for other options. Especially in that situation.
So if he won't recommend you, he will not be a good supervisor, I would think. You can only win.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/08/13
| 2,339
| 8,978
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am trying and failing to find a particular paper. My university's library catalogue, Google Scholar, and Google all came up empty. I even tried the catalogue of the paper's institutional affiliation, but they didn't have it either. It's possible the paper really has been lost forever, but I find this unlikely; it is a significant paper that still gets citations. What other avenues exist for finding this paper?
*Note to readers: this is a frequently-asked question and so we have compiled this "canonical" post to amalgamate some of our best answers on this topic (per [this](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5166) meta discussion). Questions requesting individualized help finding a particular source will be closed as a duplicate of this: we hope these "hints" will be helpful, but tracking down individual papers is not our role.*<issue_comment>username_1: * Search the web for it: open archives, search engine, authors webpages, whatever (you've probably done that already…)
* **Ask the contact author for a copy**, which she'll usually be very happy to provide. I regularly get such requests from other researchers in my field, and it feels very good to know that people are actually interested in your work.
* If the contact author doesn't respond, try the senior author, then other authors.
* Try your **local library**. Look into their database, and also ask the librarian there if the document might be available through loan from other libraries. I've never had much success doing that, but you never know…
* Ask a few **colleagues at different institutions** if they can get it for free (see [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/5206/2700)). If you have friends at large/famous/well-funded US universities (Princeton, Harvard, …), they probably have a more comprehensive access than you.
* If it's a really important paper, **pay for it**!
Whatever happens, make sure you **make a copy for others in your lab/group, and archive it**. When I started my PhD, there was a folder (the heavy paper type, not the computer type) labeled “important but hard to find papers” that the group had accumulated along the years. It was the most treasured object in the whole lab.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Assuming your school participates (and most do), you can get scanned copies of articles through interlibrary loan. You should be able to get access to just about any article ever published in a journal that way.
More generally, talk to your librarian. It's what they're for.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: When looking for a paper I first look on line to see if it is available. If it is available for free I download it, if not I then look in my library's on-line catalog. If it is available on-line, but not in my library's catalog I request an inter-library loan (ILL). I have never been unable to obtain an article via ILL that was available on-line, but if I wasn't able, I would just buy the article. If it is in my library's catalog I go to the library and photocopy it.
If the article is not available on-line, I look in my library's on-line catalog. If it is available in the library catalog, I go to the library and photocopy it. If it is not available in the catalog I file an inter-library loan request. The success rate of these requests is lower than I would like.
If the article is not available on-line, in my library, and ILL failed then things get difficult. The first step is to email the authors. The second step is to talk to the reference librarian and see if you can find a library which is not part of the ILL service which has the paper. If you find one, talk to the librarian about how to obtain it.
My field also has a number of email lists where hard to find paper requests are not uncommon, it might be worth trying these. Similarly, you can ask colleagues directly if they have a copy. It might be worth doing a reverse citation lookup to find colleagues who have cited the paper (most people try and read what they cite).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Some countries have library networks with a common catalogue that you can search to find out which libraries have it. This is what your favorite librarian uses to get the paper for you. However, it could also tell you, which friend or friendly lab you could ask.
* E.g. the [German and Austrian libraries' journal data base](http://dispatch.opac.d-nb.de/DB=1.1/LNG=EN/) will tell you which 6 libraries have the 1930 "Sprawozdania z posiedzeń Towarzystwa Naukowego Warszawskiego" where <NAME> Tarski published the "Untersuchungen über den Aussagenkalkül" and whether it is available via inter-library loan.
* A similar catalogue exists for [books](http://gso.gbv.de/DB=2.1/LNG=EN/)
(feel free to edit and add more such catalogue links)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Why donʼt you contact the library of the institution who published the paper for advice?
Iʼm sure that the library has a copy of it, and they might have translations as well.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: When doing internet searches, consider using all variants of the author's name. In [one specific case someone asked about], I was able to find the paper by excluding the author's given name; this expands the search to include repositories that only track given names by the first initial.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_7: This is a use-case for Sci-Hub, an open collection of papers from various journals. Note that using Sci-Hub to access copyrighted materials which they do not have permission to give you is illegal in certain jurisdictions. Otherwise, it's legal to download.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: Your **university librarians** are MADE for this! Don't feel ashamed to ask -- there are librarians more into archiving and cataloging, and some more into education and service.
Give as much information as you currently have, and they'll find it for you AND/OR show you how to find it yourself in the future (if it's accessible via a resource like some of those mentioned above.)
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_9: I have had some luck on The Internet Archive (<https://archive.org/>). If you're familiar with the *Wayback Machine* (which keeps old web pages), that's one part of the Internet Archive. Another part is a repository of many old books, and some libraries do upload scans of old journals that are out of copyright. I've had roughly a 50-50 hit rate looking for old papers, perhaps a little higher - at least when given several attempted searches in each case, e.g. to allow for issues with different ways of recording journal names and so forth.
[Note that you want the lower of the two search bars -- the top one is for the Wayback Machine. They're clearly labelled but it's easy to miss that you need the lower one. More than once I've caught myself typing a search in the wrong place.]
The quality may be rather mixed, sometimes excellent, sometimes poor -- but you may also get multiple libraries uploading scans of different parts of a journal's run so with a little luck you may have several scans of a given paper to choose from.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: Kindly ask all the authors that recently cited that paper ... at least one of them must have a printed copy or a pdf that can be shared privately with you.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_11: The way that is most likely to succeed is to ask a librarian. This means actually asking a librarian, not just searching a library's online catalog yourself.
But sometimes you can figure things out by looking harder on google yourself. For example, google just one element of the citation information, and find where else it appears, or find other citations that include that phrase.
Here is an example from another question on this site:
>
> I'm trying to find the following paper:
>
>
> <NAME>, “Decomposition of a complete graph into subgraphs isomorphic to a given graph.“ Congressus Numerantium XV (1975), 647-659. MR0396347 (53:214)
>
>
> Also seen cited as:
>
>
> <NAME>, “Decomposition of a complete graph into subgraphs isomorphic to a given graph.“ Utilitas Math, Winnipeg (1976)
>
>
> I cannot find it anywhere, online or offline. How am I supposed to progress here?
>
>
>
And here is my answer (it may be useful to look at all the linked documents in detail):
>
> Based on similar references elsewhere, I think it is in "Proceedings of the Fifth British Combinatorial Conference". <https://lccn.loc.gov/77361732>
>
>
> See reference 4 in <https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02321683/document>
>
>
> or reference 1 in <https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016750600870654X>
>
>
> So now you just have to get this proceedings from a library.
>
>
> I found this by googling "Congressus Numerantium XV" to find out what that was.
>
>
>
Here is the original answer: <https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/185701/>
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/08/13
| 728
| 3,272
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am almost ready to publish my research project. In my project, I used different clipart and created a couple of figures for my participants to view. For example, I created an image of a person walking in a park. In this image, the park consisted of trees, the sun, and grass. These are all separate images I downloaded online. As you can see, I put multiple images together and created my stimuli photos.
Now the biggest challenge for me is that I can't publish these figures in academic journals because I can't receive permission to do so. First, I can't find the original authors of the clipart. Second, most clipart has a "personal use only license". I don't want to violate any copyright. However, I desperately need to publish them with my work because it will provide good visual representation to the reviewers and the audience.
A prof suggested me to ask someone to redraw the figures I created. And put notes like the "this is reproduced version of the original image, the content of the original image is copyright protected". I'm wondering whether this makes sense? I think I do have the copyright of the figures I created, but I don't have the copyright of the images that were used to create the figure.
As you can see, this is a very complicated situation. I really need advice. If you have any other ideas, please let me know. I would really appreciate it. I realized I should have thought more about this when I first created them. I will never do this again.
Thank you in advance.<issue_comment>username_1: Describe them in words instead, along with where and how you found them and the process that you used to generate the composite images. Even if the images themselves are copyright protected, your methodology isn’t. Ultimately, what’s important is reproducibility- you need to include enough detail that someone who reads your paper could attempt to reproduce your study.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: You can describe the images, only in words, as another answer points out. Additionally, you can recreate them with appropriately licensed material. If it is a matter of showing the reader an example of what your subjects were shown, i.e., the contrast, colors, objects; you can then make another variant of this for the publication with an explanation that this is an *example*/recreation of the type of stimulus shown. This is not all that different than using psuedo code vs. actual code in a paper. Your goal is to accurately, clearly, effectively communicate what you did and how you did it, to your audience.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: You can buy commercial images reasonably cheaply. These images are intended to be used in any kind of publication and licensed for such use. For example for £29 I can download 5 images, with a license to print up to 500,000 copies, and license to combine these images.
Of course these images are under copyright, but practically everything is. Important is that you have a license.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: The images you described does not seem too complex. You can either draw similar pictures yourself or ask someone to do it. For a skilled cartoonist it would probably take less time than you spent typing this question.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/14
| 785
| 3,366
|
<issue_start>username_0: Hi I and a Student from <NAME> and I do have 2 Bachelors degrees one with a Class (2nd Class Honors) and another General degree. However I do wish to enroll to a PhD program, possibly in Australia. Is it possible to do so. I have studied mainly in the stream of Cyber Security.
I tried with applying for a few Universities and some hadn't replied as well. However one of my colleagues had received a scholarship for PhD with the same results.
Can anyone explain the feasibility of the things that I have mentioned about?<issue_comment>username_1: You probably have two options for Australia at least. One is more likely than the other:
Apply for an RTP (Research Training Program) formerly known as an APA (Australian Postgraduate Award) which is funded by the Australian federal govt. However, I have only included this as an option for the sake of completeness. These are highly competitive and based on research potential. At this stage of your academic career, assuming you have no publications, this will more than likely boil down to your GPA. I guess you have to be in it to win it though. This requires residency or citizenship.
The other, more likely approach, is to find a potential supervisor with similar research interests who has funding either directly from the university through a named scholarship, or is in receipt of funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC). You can find the names of these researchers directly on the ARC website. Visa requirements here are just that you have the right to pursue tertiary education. It has probably changed since I did it. But, for what it’s worth my visa was subclass 457.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Unfortunately with your record. you have zero chance of getting an international student scholarship from Australia (formerly called "IPRS" and now "Australian Government Research Training Program International Fee Offset Scholarship"). Best to be realistic about this from the get go.
Equally, I cannot think of any academic who would be likley to provide a scholarship based on your record (low second class) and no evidence of research potential. If you have a friend who did so, I think there must have been extraordinary circumstances (e.g. research publications) or else it was a very low tier university.
The only possibility you have is to get funding from Sri Lanka and then try to find a supervisor in Australia who will accept you. This funding needs to have two parts - (1) money to pay the substantial fees that Australia charges overseas students and (2) money to support you living in Australia which is not cheap even living the student life.
The reality is that you are competing with people who have evidence of research capacity. This comes usually through published papers. If you have not done any research that is publishable in the past the options are to work in the literature and produce a review paper on a topic of broad interest. This is a path that I have seen used successfully in the past. Alternatively do you volunteer in a research lab, do you have experience in research procedures that you have developed through spending time in a research lab?
Without some evidence of a capacity for research, it's hard to be at all positive about your chances of achieving your goal.
Sorry to blunt!
Best wishes
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/14
| 514
| 2,104
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've worked for 3 years in the same field which I'm going to apply in. And my boss belongs to the same field too. He completed his M.tech.
I am taking three LOR's. Two from qualified Ph.D professors from my undergrad and one from my boss who works in research but is not a Ph.D.<issue_comment>username_1: When reading a letter, the specific academic qualifications of the writer are not that important, judging their knowledge is. You say he works in research, so presumably he can gauge your technical skills (unlike, say, some administrator that just handles your payroll).
Furthermore, if your boss has enough experience supervising people, he can give a better assessment than someone who only has had one student.
In any case, you already have two letters from experienced professors. A third from a more junior person that has worked closely with you is still valuable, and not everybody has worked with three different professors. So you are fine from two different perspectives. It is up to the reader if they want to ask for them, or read them, or not. My girlfriend, for example, gave both her supervisor and a postdoc for an industry research job, but they only asked the professor and she got hired.
---
One caveat: the recommendation letter culture in academia and industry is very different. Make sure your boss is aware of that. A letter saying:
>
> Eren has worked in my group in COMPANY with the title POSITION between 2015 and 2018.
>
>
>
may be what is expected in industry, but it is a field of red flags in academia because he doesn't have anything nice to say about you.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, you should definitely get a letter from someone who has supervised your work for multiple years. In fact, if you do not get that letter, people will wonder why it is missing.
Admissions is interested in your qualities, not the qualities of your letter writer.
I agree with username_1 that it is important the letter writer knows the letter writing customs of the people reading your letter. These vary some by region.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/08/14
| 1,168
| 5,051
|
<issue_start>username_0: Some time ago, my advisor has put me working together with some group colleagues on a very loosely defined theoretical physics project. From the beginning, I didn't like this too much because I felt that what was planned to be done, I could do by myself, and I felt the other students were added to the project just to help my advisor have less work and distribute responsibility to the other group members. I also felt from the beginning these students were not very friendly and collaborative because they displayed either lack of interest by my project, jealousy, or an attitude of dispute.
During this time, I have had novel and significant ideas by myself, which are already enough to write a paper with; these people have contributed almost no meaningful insights. Essentially, they worked on the same things I worked on after I had shown them (hence just providing a redundancy check), and are now helping in writing the paper and interpreting what I found out (but I could also do that)...
Furthermore, as this is my project, they are not pushing to advance it that much, and it gets worse because I feel that sometimes, out of jealousy maybe, they even push me down and try to diminish my ideas in front of my advisor without actually providing reasonable arguments for why they don't like some of my approaches... etc...
This is the context, now comes my question.
I managed to really advance this project as I gradually became more and more passionate about it. The paper we are preparing already introduces important and novel results (again, that I alone obtained). But just now I had a eureka moment and improved what we were doing (and writing) once more; with this new result, it becomes much more significant... I'm feeling I can make an important contribution to my field: a new method, with theoretical guarantees, proofs... I did this during the last week and haven't shown them yet. My dilemma is: **should I disclose the new results already and publish those in the paper we are preparing or should I keep this and prepare a new one?**
Again, I've been doing all of this by myself but "officially" we are in this together, which is what is pushing me back to consider these questions. It would make much more sense to add this new result to the present paper and not spread ideas in multiple publications, but even though I am the first author, it feels to me that others are getting credit for work they didn't do/contributed to. These were entirely my ideas. If someday people refer to this result/theorem as the ABCD result, with initials or something, it seems very unfair to me, as I discovered this entirely by myself. I am planning to ask my advisor these questions but I'd like to hear other takes on the problem. If this turns out to be really important, **how can I manage to keep the credit for my method if I disclose it in a paper with other collaborators? Will I be able to also put these results in my Ph.D. thesis and safely be recognized as its single author?**<issue_comment>username_1: >
> how can I...keep the credit for my method if I disclose it in a paper with other collaborators?
>
>
>
You can't: Credit will be shared between all collaborators.\*
>
> Will I be able to also put these results in my Ph.D. thesis and safely
> be recognized as its single author?
>
>
>
Yes.
\*In some sense, you can get credit, since the result appears in your thesis, which suggests that you are primarily responsible for results. But, your published paper is more likely to be considered the primary source of the results. (I suppose you could submit your thesis before publishing the paper, or you could release a preliminary draft of your thesis before publishing, then you could cite your thesis/draft thesis in the published paper, which may give you slightly more public credit.)
>
> should I disclose the new results already and publish those in the paper we are preparing or should I keep this and prepare a new one?
>
>
>
This seems likely to produce opinion-based answers, which are off-topic here.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Articles are only one way of communicating your research. You also have talks/posters at conferences, seminars, and informal discussions. If you are the one who gives the talks and holds the discussions, it will be clear to the community who did the work.
It can happen that one of your collaborators is the better speaker (or writer). This does not necessarily mean that (s)he will steal your credit: rather, there could be a division of labour, with you doing the research and (s)he the communication.
Communicating your results is as important as getting them, and maybe you should be more anxious about spreading the word than about getting credit. In my experience, coauthors can be effective at spreading the word, even if they contributed little to the research. Your coauthors should be your allies for making your work known, whether or not they get undeserved credit in the process.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/08/14
| 711
| 3,001
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am postdoc in computational biology field and writing one grant proposal. One of the section of the application expect applicant to show
>
> how he/she will reach maturity to become an independent researcher?
>
>
>
This further expect me to show 'leadership' quality and should be supported by content from my CV. How shall I write this section?
I found [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/53848/sign-of-researchers-professional-maturity) answer which suggests some points for the developed researcher looking for permanent position. At my current (early career) stage, I do NOT have any of following,
```
Having written and administered a grant proposal
Having been invited to sit on a review panel
Having been an invited speaker
Having organized a conference session
Having published a review paper
```
I have only mentored few students (but don't have any proof). Any suggestion?<issue_comment>username_1: There are plenty of points can be highlighted to justify someone an independent researcher. Here are few may help you:
1. Publications in peer reviewed journals
2. Professional strength (You can highlight that you guided few students, if you are a representative in your department during your PhD etc..)
3. Academic achievements (anything related to your research and academic e.g., awards, scholarships, number of publications etc..)
4. Highlight the projects you are associated with and your potential role during implementation
5. Teachings experience
6. Research experiences
7. Collaborations (you have collaborations with other institutes etc..)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> 'leadership' quality
>
>
>
The achievements and skills that you describe are more capabilities of an independent and respected researcher in your field.
Evidence of leadership usually pertains to roles at different groups.
The more traditional "leadership" activities are usually representative or publicity roles for your department or college. Committees, uni groups, local community groups that reflect your research area and you are able to represent your uni/college.
Representative roles at your professional association, invited government roles, leadership roles at conferences or journals, etc.
This university gives some examples of the expected evidence for each academic level - [James Cook University Academic Promotion Evidence](https://www.jcu.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/122037/Examples-of-Evidence.pdf)
There are "non-traditional" activities that has done well for other professors that I know.
One professor's blog became a world leader in the field with a great list of contributors and research stemming from her blog which supported her academic promotion.
Another professor runs a great Facebook group that has become a defacto society/research group for her small field.
Anything that points to respect and trust from a group seems to be good indicators for leadership.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2019/08/14
| 2,492
| 10,863
|
<issue_start>username_0: Recently, I came across a PhD thesis and an article derived from that PhD thesis and found a serious flaw in them that actually makes their conclusions invalid.
In the first place, I was unsure if I'm right or not, so I contacted the guy that wrote the PhD thesis and subsequent article and described my concerns and I showed my calculations to him and asked if he thinks in fact there is a major problem in his PhD thesis and that article, which is derived from it. He responded back that embarrassingly, in fact I'm right and there is a problem but he can't do anything about it.
I didn't want to force him to do something but I'm just thinking maybe there might be a possibility to publish an erratum for at least that article. It's a major flaw and unfortunately it just invalidates the major conclusions of paper and PhD thesis. Surprisingly, the article is cited for 15 times and nobody found that obvious problem. My question: What's the best way to deal with these kind of situations that even author himself/herself admits that in fact there is a major flaw in his/her thesis or article?<issue_comment>username_1: One possibility is for you to write a paper on your reanalysis. Often this would need to be something more than pointing out the flaw alone, but that may be discipline-dependent. If the flaw you have detected is a key part in your own analysis of your work, including your updated analysis in a larger article (while citing their paper) is a smooth way to point out how you had to change the method.
The second possibility is that many journals (at least in my area) allow for Comments on articles they have published. These are for just this purpose - to point out something 'wrong' about a paper that has been published. If the editors decide to proceed with it, the original authors are usually given an opportunity to craft a Reply piece to agree, disagree, alter, whatnot. Then they are published back-to-back in the journal.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Do not overthink it.
I have had similar experience and authors were reluctant at first (mostly because they have moved to another problem).
It is very dangerous to leave a flaw in the literature. Especially a critical flaw where others may build on it. This will lead to more chaos. I am aware some (well-known) people do not care about their old results being incorrect. But this is not what Academia is about. You should appreciate the peer review and rigorous findings more than anything else. You already have contacted the author, offer him a collaboration (if seems right) on correcting the whole thing in the context of your work.
You usually have spotted the error because your work is related. On that particular connection re-analyze the claim and correct it. Include in your new paper the claim, prove why it is incorrect and prove the new correct result. This actually can be seen as a new contribution to your paper/thesis.
For me, I was very satisfied with the outcome; the first author of the other paper did mentor me for a while after we met at a conference.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Write to the editor of the journal. Offer your explanation and ask for the best way forward.
You might be lucky and be given a chance to write an article with your clarification.
The editor might instead decide to do a correction with varying levels of acknowledgement of you.
>
> article is cited for 15 times and nobody found that obvious problem
>
>
>
The problem is not obvious despite your initial impression. It may be worthwhile dissecting and contemplating the complexity of the blindspot in this area. Was it obvious to you because you come from a different perspective? Have experience from a different discipline? Interrogate why the issue was not obvious to at least 15 publication worthy authors and not to mention a larger number of editors and peer reviewers.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: This is what science *is*. Not everything that gets published is correct or true. Presumably, the literature of science is self correcting. Someone will eventually address and correct it. For example, Descartes' whole physiological framework is just about entirely incorrect. The process of science fixed this, over hundreds of years, and still Descartes publications were an important part of that process.
If the area of research you're referencing is important, the error you hold to be present will misguide the community and harm future research efforts, and *you're a participant in the community with sufficient credibility and standing to correct the issue*, you might consider a letter to the editor or a rapid publication to a high profile journal.
If any of those criteria do not hold, your actions should be tempered. If the publication you believe to be incorrect is on the topic of your personal research, the issue might find its way into the discussion section of one of your near-future publications. If it doesn't reach that level in your personal research portfolio, you might just let it go, and let someone more appropriate address it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I have been in a similar situation, but on the other side. My own MS thesis and an article derived from it contained a major flaw. In short, the thesis was about investigating some static waves in a certain system, but the system itself is unstable in the very same model, with the instability length being comparable to the characteristic wavelength of the static waves in question. The whole investigation did not make any scientific sense at all, because the assumed system could not be physically realized in the first place.
I myself discovered the flaw a few months before submitting my thesis. I discovered the flaw pretty accidentally: I wanted to formally prove that the system is stable, but the result of my calculations showed that the opposite is true. I had never heard from my supervisor, who had given me the problem for my thesis, or from his colleagues that the system may be unstable. Everyone simply did not even think about that possibility.
And then I faced the dilemma as to what to do.
My final choice was to tell no one and to simply get my degree. I was an undergraduate student graduating from a Russian university, and getting my MS degree asap and moving abroad to get a Western PhD degree was my highest priority. If I had raised the issue about the flaw, I would have suffered a major setback in my career. I would have had to start my MS project over, and I am not even sure whether I would have been allowed to do it at all. If I had had a setback in my career, I would not have been able to win a prestigious PhD stipend in a Western country.
I should have checked at the very beginning of my MS project whether the system is stable. I should have, but I did not. Partially it is a fault of my supervisor, who directed my work in a very rigid way, giving me concrete tasks and deadlines. He never told me to check whether the system is stable. The official research plan, which I and he signed, did not contain any mention of a stability analysis. It was my own initiative to try to prove stability, because I felt that this was needed to make my investigation complete. I did not even talk to my supervisor about my idea to perform a stability analysis. After I discovered the flaw, I was sure that if I talked to my supervisor about the flaw, he would say the whole MS project had to be canceled.
After I submitted my thesis, my supervisor insisted that I write and publish an article derived from the thesis. I did not want to do it, but I had to. After all, I needed good recommendation letters from my supervisor, so I had to obey. The article was published in a reputable American journal and was cited ~20 times. Writing that article was the most unpleasant experience in my scientific career.
No one noticed the flaw, so I successfully got my MS degree in Russia, moved abroad, got a Western PhD degree, and some years later published an article explaining the flaw. I explicitly wrote in that article that my previous article and a number of other articles, which I cited, are invalid science. No one published a comment in response. In private conversations, my colleagues confirmed that my conclusion about the flaw is correct.
Why did I wait about six years to tell the scientific community about the flaw? Don't hate the player, hate the game. I simply could not afford a career setback. I needed my MS degree asap. I believe I made a wise choice. I would do exactly the same in the same circumstances. Who wouldn't?
Concerning your question, the principal thing is this: what's in it for you? Does the guy's article make any harm to you or your reputation by, e.g., contradicting your own articles? If it does not, then I want to tell this: there are so many wrong or misleading articles in science, there are so many awful things in science, and the guy's article is a drop in the ocean of all this. Why wouldn't you focus on doing your own great research instead? I guess the guy's article is insignificant anyway and is not even worth considering, just like most articles in science. I guess it is just a mathematical or computational exercise made for the purpose of producing a paper and earning a PhD degree. If my guess is correct, then you do not need to stoop to that level and search for mistakes in insignificant articles, and you do not need to harm the guy's career at its very beginning. I have articles published in Physical Review Letters, even as the first author, but I started my career with a wrong and misleading MS thesis.
Imagine you noticed a mistake in an article published in Indian Journal of Physics, whose impact factor is below 1. Would you care to correct the mistake by publishing a comment? I doubt you would. Not every mistake must be corrected. Some are just not worth spending time and effort correcting them.
My own principles are simple:
1. All physics journals that are "lower" than Physical Review journals are trash bins.
2. If an article does not interfere with my own research, then this article is none of my business.
I hope that my post will help you and others look at the issue from an angle different from the one from which many people see the issue.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: **Surprisingly, the article is cited for 15 times and nobody found that obvious problem.**
Not so surprising, my friend, as many people cite papers and books they have not read well, or read at all.
You can email the author, outlining the problem. They may or may not be receptive to your argument, they may or may not be hostile in their reply (or reply at all), and they may or may not be moved to publish an erratum. But you will have done all that you could.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/08/14
| 514
| 1,972
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am sending an email to two people: Prof FirstName1 LastName1 and Dr FirstName2 LastName2. The former has a PhD and is officially a professor (with tenure, if that matters) with whom I am not intimately familiar. He prefers to go by Prof or Dr LastName (I have no problem with it). The latter I have worked with for a few months now and *strongly* prefers *not* to be called Dr (much less Professor, as he isn't one; he does research and lectures but the institute at which he works does not grant that title). Instead, I call him FirstName2 as he has instructed me to do. The two are of a similar age and experience (as far as I know).
My question is, when emailing them, should I say "Dear Prof LastName1 and FirstName2," or a more formal (but possibly upsetting) "Dear Prof LastName1 and Dr LastName2," or something else altogether? Furthermore, what would be the most polite thing to call each of them in a meeting where both are present? I would like to respect both of their preferences, but not respecting FirstName2's title seems like it could be taken the wrong way (i.e. insulting).
I ended up going with "Dear all," even though there are only two people in the email but I am wondering what the most polite way would have been (for future reference).<issue_comment>username_1: I'd call them by "Prof A and Dr. B" or perhaps "Dr. A and Dr. B", in the extreme "Prof. A and Mr. B". In the letter itself, address the more senior, i.e., formally. Dr. B won't object; while Dr. A might be put off by informality.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: "Dear all" sounds perfectly fine to me, and using plural is an easy way out, especially if not all the recipients have a honorific. "Dear professors/ colleagues/ both" are other options, although in that case one of the recipients would not like the first one. For two recipients only, using both names as @username_1 suggests is fine but I would avoid it for more than two.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/14
| 922
| 4,065
|
<issue_start>username_0: So my PhD supervisor is very senior in the university. This has its advantages but unfortunately this also means he's *very* busy most of the time, especially now that it's summer and he's been away on holiday a few times. By and large this isn't a problem; I'm quite happy to get on with my work without much supervision.
The problem I'm now having is administrative. I have a progress evaluation report due and the deadline is nearing (I've already had the deadline extended once). I've completed my section and am awaiting his comments before I can submit (formal procedure). Further, I may need to be moving to another city in ~4 weeks time to work with a partner organisation for 6 months but I do not yet know for certain and my supervisor keeps putting the issue off (this has been the case for the last 4 months).
It's come to the point where these issues are critical, I fear missing the progress report deadline and I need to know where I'll be living at the end of next month so I can sort accommodation.
I've tried sending a reminder email but have received no response. Also, I walked past my supervisor and greeted him but he seemed not to notice me. To make things worse, I don't have the relationship where I can just turn up to his office without an appointment.
I don't really know who I can speak to about this as I work alongside very few people and I don't know what options are available to me save flooding his inbox with emails.
What can I do to press these matters and how can I do it so as not to become a nuisance to him?<issue_comment>username_1: As confirmed in a comment, the "very senior" supervisor does have a secretary. I suggest explaining the problem, and the reasons for urgency, to the secretary and asking them for help.
The secretary can go to the supervisor's office without an appointment, and is likely to understand that some university paperwork really does have to be done on schedule. Ideally, the secretary will put together a packet with the partially completed report and any other relevant paperwork, such as previous evaluations, that the supervisor has.
I would concentrate on the progress evaluation, because that has to be done, and has already been deferred once.
As far as the travel is concerned, make sure the supervisor, or at least the secretary, understands that you need some notice, and will assume you are not traveling next month unless there is a definite decision that you are traveling.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Would also add organising regular meetings is a good way around this as well. Regular meetings every 2 to 4 weeks are a great way to put a stake in the ground for a busy supervisor.
If a supervisor is busy try to push the appointment earlier rather than stretch the regular appointments out. It will also force you to produce work regularly. Also means that if yoursupervisor didn't make the time to read and comment before the meeting, the meeting can be used for comments and feedback too.
Edited: wording around the timing
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: As others have suggested, you might want to draw this to the attention of his secretary --- they are usually much better at dealing with administrative matters in a timely fashion. Beyond that, I wouldn't be too worried about this situation. If the Graduate Coordinator gets on your back about the lateness of your progress report, you can just inform them that the report was sent to your supervisor for approval on such-and-such a date, and the supervisor has not yet responded. It is out of your hands.
Bear in mind that if the university imposes administrative requirements on you, and you are unable to meet the deadlines of those requirements because, despite your best efforts, *the university's own employee is not doing their own part of the job*, then you are pretty much in the clear. Once you have sent the progress report to your supervisor (and sent a reminder email, and spoken to his secretary), **the ball is in his court**.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/08/14
| 1,067
| 4,444
|
<issue_start>username_0: I will be teaching my first Calculus I class this fall (USA) and 5 percent of the grading is discretionary. Other sections are doing three quizzes over the course of the semester, with each taking about 10 minutes. The quizzes are on limits, derivatives, and integrals, one for each topic.
I don't want to have quizzes or extra homework or make the 5 percent depend on participation or attendance. I was considering making a quiz-style activity that would be less stressful than taking an actual quiz, but I'm having trouble seeing what this would be like. By "quiz-like," I mean that it would be part of the 5 percent for the grade, which is worth more than a homework assignment.
Ideally I'm imagining a situation where two students work together, maybe even at the board, to solve the problems that otherwise would be presented as a quiz. But then there are issues with grading (two students share the grade?), or possibly cheating (looking over to the board of the neighbor group). It would still need to be around 10 minutes.
I'm open to new ideas about what this could be like. I'm not entirely against quizzes, it's just that the workload is heavy in this class and a quiz would be something else that students could obsess over.<issue_comment>username_1: Well, you could divide them into groups/pairs and let them solve it, if you don't want freeloaders making their teammates do all the job, find a way to groups them differently every quiz (but it will not impede lazy people from being lazy). Also, if there is a way to give "parametric" problems to each group to solve (like a polynomial x^n where n is part of their student id or something) that usually makes cheating way harder, or at least, easily detectable.
One other thing you could do is make them solve individually a quick quiz and put them in pairs to "grade"/explain how to solve each question, either grading on the individual answer or the pair one.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: How about a “reverse quiz”?
Say to the students that they each have to write 5 questions spread through the material. They provide the q and a and submit them 2/3 the way through the class.
The last 1/3 of the class you diplay the questions and discuss phrasing, ambiguity etc If the class is large then you pick at random, but I always did this anonymously - the number of students who would shout out “that’s mine” was high :) they liked this activity...
I did this with a simple grading structure : 80% for submission of 5 q and 90 or 100% for 5 perfect q ie no errors: grammar, spelling etc You can carve the marking scheme as you wish...
I found they spent more time working with the material for this than they would do for a standard quiz. It was also good as part of revision work.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: An unfamiliar form is likely to make the students obsess far more than something familiar like another quiz would.
You could have them redo a slight variant of the regular quiz on which they got their lowest score. That would reward studying weak areas. The follow-up quizzes should be different enough that memorizing the answer grid would not help.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: You're describing this in a vacuum, which makes it hard to answer. You need to approach this pedagogically. Why do the quizzes exist? What is their purpose? The answer probably isn't "to provide 5% of the grade"! You can't address what to replace the quizzes until you know the goals you're trying to achieve by the exercise, and you haven't shared that. Therefore, I'm not going to address your question by giving you ideas about how to replace the quizzes, but to try to offer you some tools you can use to help you make that choice.
Are the quizzes an assessment of some course outcome? If so, do you need that assessment to make sure you're doing your job and helping students achieve the desired outcomes, or is there some other assessment already in place.
Are the quizzes there to encourage the students to learn the course material in steps, so as to prevent cramming at the end? If so, you have some room to play.
I'd be very careful about trying a "team" experience. Calc I is often a "service" course. Other departments expect students to come out of it knowing the material. Teamwork is very important to many careers, but I wouldn't think of Calculus as a proper platform to teach it.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/08/15
| 629
| 2,677
|
<issue_start>username_0: One of the tips I learn when writing academic papers is to avoid generalizing, and by that, it means we, as writers, need to understand the difference between fact and opinion and try to express things with different levels of certainty. However, I still find the way to differentiate between fact and opinion quite confusing. It would be great if someone can explain the difference between these two things.<issue_comment>username_1: Generalization should be encouraged to extend scope, thereby making academic papers more widely applicable. Perhaps the OP is actually interested in another question: It is unclear what the OP means by *generalizing*, I don't see a relation with *understand[ing] the difference between fact and opinion and try[ing] to express things with different levels of certainty*. Maybe the OP is interested in
>
> find[ing a] way to differentiate between fact and opinion...It would be great if someone can explain the difference between these two things.
>
>
>
Let's look at the definitions (from Google) of those terms:
```
Fact. A thing that is known or proved to be true, e.g., hedgehogs have fleas.
Opinion. A view or judgement formed about something, not necessarily based on
fact or knowledge, e.g., hedgehogs should drink milk.
```
So, facts are true, whereas the validity of opinions are unknown.
---
The first example is also from Google, the second is a widely believed opinion, which is false.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I think perhaps by generalizing you mean extrapolating, applying the rules governing one truth, to another. It may or may not lead to a second truth, but I think it is worth doing as it can be illuminating.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It is a bit unclear to me how generalization relates to facts and opinions, however I think the core question of combating generalization is a good one.
Sometimes it is helpful to focus on writing concisely to avoid generalizations. For example, if you write “several different procedures were done in this experiment” and then list the procedures, the first part of the sentence is unnecessary and general. Start writing with the nitty-gritty specifics in mind, and then use topic sentences (which may be more general) appropriately.
Every sentence in your paper should add something helpful to it. Even if you are summarizing previous points (like in a conclusion), you want to have a specific purpose in mind so that your reader doesn’t waste time reading the same sentence with different wording.
In short, start by having a clear focus and then broaden (only as needed to help your reader) from there.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/08/15
| 1,153
| 4,757
|
<issue_start>username_0: This question is mainly focused on the field of mathematics, although it might make sense for other areas too.
>
> would setting up a Mathematical Institute of Refereeing be a good idea ?
>
>
>
To explain the idea, I have noted several things that seem to go in the same direction :
* referees today are not paid for their work (at least by good quality journals, I'm not talking about predatory ones), they do it by goodwill to be active members of their communities ;
* discussing a result with a colleague always speeds up one's understanding ;
* in many cases it is difficult to find a referee for a paper, and the process can easily take 9 months just to get a first report ;
* many people experience a draught at some point in their career.
So what about an institute where members have a temporary affiliation (say a 5-year contract, which they can quit at any time) and are tasked to only do refereeing, any involvement in other time-consuming activities (teaching, grant application, but also one's own research) would be banned (and checked regularly by the administrative staff and citizens).
The members would be sworn to secrecy (like a medical one, with cash and jail sentences if found guilty of breach, say during their membership and the 2 years beyond it), which would allow them to discuss papers they are reviewing with other members on-site.
Funding would be provided by a variety of sources (Universities, Private sector...).
And to make sure that there is no change from traditional anonymous refereing, these referees would not mention in their report that there are members, so it would look like it had been done by a standard referee at a university (but much faster).
The idea would be both to speed up the process, and to lower the pressure to publish mediocre papers (i.e. it would be valued more highly by the community to know that someone is a hard-working member of that institute, rather than someone is painstainkingly publishing small papers every couple year which consume refereeing ressources while adding little value to the area).
[**edit:** thank you for the answers and comments, many good points there of course. Clearly not all sub-fields of maths would be covered this way, but I thought it might help in some where this is high traffic. Plus, I thought people towards the end of their career, who have taught for 25/30 years and, in some cases, have also lost a bit the will of finding new stuff all the time, might be interested. (If you don't find it lacking courtesy, I think I'd like perhaps not to accept an answer to let it open-ended.)]<issue_comment>username_1: Two things:
1. The funding isn't as easy as you make it seem. We have a system of publications right now, and you ask for more money to improve it. This money must come from somewhere, and no one will give up his funds willingly.
2. You say that this would lower the pressure to publish, because instead working at this institute is seen as a good, important job. However, can't you say the same about teaching? Teaching is very important because it forms the future generations. So why is it then not that easy today to just focus on teaching for a few years without loosing academic reputation? Why do you think anything would be different here?
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm an assistant professor of mathematics and while I regularly referee papers (in fact, I have a few papers I'm supposed to be refereeing right now), I have to say that joining a Mathematical Institute of Refereeing sounds awful. It's right down there with joining a Mathematical Institute of Departmental Meetings.
Perhaps it's just me, but the aspects of my job that I love the most are being able to teach mathematics to and mentor talented students, working alone or with collaborators on research projects, and writing up / publishing papers. Although I definitely get something out of refereeing papers (and seem to referee ten or so a year), this is mainly something I do in order to be a "good mathematical citizen". That is, I expect that when I submit a paper it will be competently refereed, so it's only fair that I referee the papers of others when I'm qualified and able to do so. There's no way I would give up all of the aspects of my job that I love in order to focus full time on refereeing. (If such a thing were even possible. I'm not sure how my college would react if I told them that I'm going to be refereeing papers full time for a while but will be back in time for the Fall 2024 semester.) At the end of the day I think what it boils down to is this. I also enjoy doing yard work. But I'd never consider quitting research and teaching in order to focus on it full time.
Upvotes: 5
|
2019/08/15
| 752
| 3,396
|
<issue_start>username_0: it's a month from the submission of a manuscript of mine in a "World Scientific" journal, but its status is still "Editor Invited". I just sent the editor-in-chief a note to ask about the situation because the editor assignment process is unusually getting long. The editor-in-chief did not answer my inquiry, so I am about to withdraw the paper. Let's say (s)he doesn't confirm my withdrawal request. Will I be ethically authorized to submit my manuscript somewhere else considering that I will keep the withdrawal email (in case someone claims that I hadn't withdrawn it before new submission)?<issue_comment>username_1: This is actually a really interesting question as I don't think there's a black and white answer to this. Ethically, a "reasonable" attempt must be made to confirm withdrawal of the manuscript. People will draw the line at different points.
I would argue that one attempt at contact is not sufficient to be considered reasonable. If possible, I would contact the editor by phone as well as email. Check to see if there's a withdrawal protocol through your online account or if there are any additional contact details of committee members.
I would only feel comfortable submitting elsewhere if I had made multiple attempts to contact the journal over a period of 4-6 weeks. But that is just my opinion. I'm interested to see what others think...
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Will I be ethically authorized to submit my manuscript somewhere else considering that I will keep the withdrawal email (in case someone claims that I hadn't withdrawn it before new submission)?
>
>
>
No, I think you need to receive the official withdrawal confirmation from the journal, as long as the journal that you have submitted your manuscript is not a predatory journal. I assume it is not predatory cause World Scientific is not that kind of publishers I believe, at least in my own experience with them.
You mentioned that you have contacted the Editor-in-Chief of the journal and he/she did not respond to your inquiry. I think EiC is not the right person to contact in case of withdrawal. I don't have experience with withdrawing a paper in World Scientific, but in my experience with Elsevier, usually this process is handled by associate editor or even administrative section of the journal. If those people also did not respond to your inquiry, I think you need to find a more direct contact way like phone to get in touch with them and see what's the procedure to withdraw the article. If all of these suggestions failed in a timeline of 2 or 3 weeks, I think you need to assume that maybe the journal is indeed a predatory journal.
For the last moment that you want to submit your manuscript somewhere else, please read the current journal's policy and agreement that you agreed upon your submission to find out if you give them your consent to publish your work or not (which I think you did cause otherwise submission to be considered for publication is meaningless...). Cause, if you failed to receive a response from them and if they are indeed a predatory journal, it has a really high chance that at some point in the future, they will publish your work and if you already submitted somewhere else or get accepted in another journal, you may ran into some copyright and dual publication issues with both journals.
Upvotes: -1
|
2019/08/15
| 687
| 3,120
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have just started my first job in a company as an engineer, I was asked to write a brief description of myself which will be sent to all the staffs.
Could you please provide some template? how we can write an interesting autobiography?
edited: Having said that some humor or random facts can be included in this bio.<issue_comment>username_1: This is actually a really interesting question as I don't think there's a black and white answer to this. Ethically, a "reasonable" attempt must be made to confirm withdrawal of the manuscript. People will draw the line at different points.
I would argue that one attempt at contact is not sufficient to be considered reasonable. If possible, I would contact the editor by phone as well as email. Check to see if there's a withdrawal protocol through your online account or if there are any additional contact details of committee members.
I would only feel comfortable submitting elsewhere if I had made multiple attempts to contact the journal over a period of 4-6 weeks. But that is just my opinion. I'm interested to see what others think...
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Will I be ethically authorized to submit my manuscript somewhere else considering that I will keep the withdrawal email (in case someone claims that I hadn't withdrawn it before new submission)?
>
>
>
No, I think you need to receive the official withdrawal confirmation from the journal, as long as the journal that you have submitted your manuscript is not a predatory journal. I assume it is not predatory cause World Scientific is not that kind of publishers I believe, at least in my own experience with them.
You mentioned that you have contacted the Editor-in-Chief of the journal and he/she did not respond to your inquiry. I think EiC is not the right person to contact in case of withdrawal. I don't have experience with withdrawing a paper in World Scientific, but in my experience with Elsevier, usually this process is handled by associate editor or even administrative section of the journal. If those people also did not respond to your inquiry, I think you need to find a more direct contact way like phone to get in touch with them and see what's the procedure to withdraw the article. If all of these suggestions failed in a timeline of 2 or 3 weeks, I think you need to assume that maybe the journal is indeed a predatory journal.
For the last moment that you want to submit your manuscript somewhere else, please read the current journal's policy and agreement that you agreed upon your submission to find out if you give them your consent to publish your work or not (which I think you did cause otherwise submission to be considered for publication is meaningless...). Cause, if you failed to receive a response from them and if they are indeed a predatory journal, it has a really high chance that at some point in the future, they will publish your work and if you already submitted somewhere else or get accepted in another journal, you may ran into some copyright and dual publication issues with both journals.
Upvotes: -1
|
2019/08/16
| 503
| 2,144
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a mathematics undergraduate student from India and am presently in my final year. Being a bit less talkative, I had not had many conversations with my professors even though I had tried to maintain a good score in my subjects and learn them well. However nowadays, when I am trying to apply for my master's I am becoming aware of the need for connections with your professors. However I am not sure how to do this and I have no clue whom to talk to. Isn't it awkward if you just go to a professor's office say Hi and try to start up a conversation?
So can anyone suggest how to do this? Also is one year (or maybe a semester of 4 months as I have to start applying after that) enough to make good connections with professors?
Thanks in advance.<issue_comment>username_1: Start by going to discuss a particular question or topic.
Students who show interest get noticed and it does not have to be about “chatty”...
If you have asked questions about material and subsequently ask for a reference then you tend to be remembered...
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: From my experience, whether you are outgoing or talkative is not that important. Myself and my former PhD supervisor would notice good students based off the academic merit even when they struggled with English as a second language or if they were a bit introverted. It is not necessarily about your ability to become friends but more your ability to produce quality research when you get trained. A good PhD supervisor will be able to recognise that.
That being said, depending on the culture of course, my approach was to first send an email outlining your interests and request either a brief discussion, or a coffee when they get a moment.
I don’t think it is awkward at all to knock on a professors door and say hi and tell them your intentions to become a researcher.
I am not familiar with how it works in India but in Australia, if someone knocked on my door and was interested in doing some research, I’d buy them a coffee and have a chat if I was free. Otherwise, tell them to come back another time.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2019/08/16
| 652
| 2,736
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have to fill in copyright form for my PHD thesis submission.
I have used some of the images already published in my IEEE/IET journal and conference papers.
I signed copyright forms during the publication process of those papers.
Do these figures fall under the copyright act?
Can I confidently say that
>
> My thesis does not contain ANY material of which Copyright belongs to third parties.
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: You will have to read the copyright transfer form that YOU have signed. Sometimes, there are several options on whether you keep the right to reuse your work.
In my personal experience, you often have some limitations on how you can reuse your material. Sometimes, you will have to place a reference on where this paper has been published first.
However, this entirely depends on what you have signed.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: For my thesis (7 years ago), I used many of my own figures from various journals. For each journal, I had to go to their website and fill in a web form (and/or send them an e-mail), asking for permission to use each specific figure. On the web form, there were various options regarding what you wanted to re-use the figure for, one of them was usually thesis/dissertation. The journal reviewed each request. All of mine were approved. They sent me a letter giving me permission to used that specific image in my thesis. I was required to add a note to the bottom of the caption saying something like "Reprinted with permission from [FULL CITATION]. Copyright [PUBLICATION YEAR], [JOURNAL]". This may be similar or completely different depending on where you've published. Check with your journals.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I have now found with IEEE and IET the following.
IEEE and IET allow the reuse of one's images/figures/tables etc. in the thesis without any payment etc.
Just us $\textcopyright 2019 IEEE$ or $\textcopyright 2019 IET$ etc.
Upvotes: 1 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: We can not say for sure without the contract you signed.
But it is possible, that you may not use your own pictures as you want to use them.
You likely want to publish your thesis as `CC-by` so it is better to ask for a written permission to distribute the picture from your publication in any way you want.
Years ago, hardly any journal cared about copyright violations you described.
Tools to monitor the spread of text and images get better.
**Scientists have to expect that journals will demand some day the rights they were given.**
This is one of the major reasons why scientists do the hard work establish real open access platforms like <http://www.arxiv.org/>.
You should be very careful.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/08/16
| 863
| 3,482
|
<issue_start>username_0: I received an offer of admission from one of the Australian Universities in Perth. My supervisor recommended my application for tuition fee waive off scholarship and university has accepted that. I have to manage my cost of living and travel expenditure. I am not sure that I will be able to manage my cost of living and travel expenses by doing part-time work. So I will be highly obliged if you can provide necessary information so that I can take a decision. Thanks...<issue_comment>username_1: It would be impossible...
I’ve lived in Aus as an international student and submitted my PhD 4 weeks ago with a stipend, a top-up scholarship and a fee waiver. Even with that, it was a struggle at the best of times.
The cost of living is extremely high i.e. rent, food etc.
They have strict regulations regarding your work hours during study time which would make living here a struggle.
If you had a stipend, I would say “go for it and don’t look back” and also work part-time to get by. Otherwise, I would say approach with caution.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It is next to impossible.
I cannot say about Perth, but in Sydney you need at least 15,000 AUD per year to cover your living expenses, assuming you share a room. The minimal salary in Australia is roughly 30,000 AUD per year, and as a low-skilled worker you cannot get a salary much higher than this. This means you will have to work at least a half of your time. Then it is unclear how you will be able to focus on your PhD project and become a good scientist.
In Perth, it is likely to be even worse. Perth is more expensive than the other Australian big cities, although salaries may be higher there as well.
Getting a job in Australia is not easy. I've read that according to unemployment statistics, those people who get unemployment benefits spend about half a year on average to find a new job. If you are a foreigner, and if your language skills are far from ideal, you are at a considerable disadvantage in the job market.
On top of that, there may be restrictions on the number of hours you are allowed to work as a student.
However, if your aim is not to become a scientist, but to migrate to Australia, and if you are prepared to face three years of very hard life, it might work for you, but you've got to know what you are doing. If you live in Australia for three years as a PhD student, you may be able to find a legal way to remain in Australia after your PhD program (e.g., by getting a job). Your Australian PhD degree will be a plus. Remember, however, that you cannot become an Australian permanent resident and later get Australian citizenship simply by legally staying in Australia for a certain number of years. I know people who lived in Australia for almost a decade on temporary working visas and were unable to get the status of permanent resident. The common ways of getting that status are to marry a permanent resident or get a long-term working contract whose end date is more that 3 years after the starting date. You have to be a really valuable worker to find an employer who agrees to sign such a long contract with you.
If you want to pursue an academic career, my advice is to find any place in the world where you can get a PhD stipend that will allow you to fully focus on science. If you have a good academic record, this should not be a problem. Many professors have funds on their grants and need good PhD students.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/08/16
| 537
| 2,331
|
<issue_start>username_0: I want to apply for master’s programs, but I need two letters of recommendation. I was never very close with any of my professors, though I did receive good grades in all of my classes.
The professor who probably knows me the best is one of the core faculty at the college. I asked her for advice on how to start with undergraduate research, which wasn’t a requirement, just an interest of mine. I also received an A in her class, and suggested an outing for the class which she then took up.
It’s also been about a year since I graduated.
Would it be appropriate to ask her if she could write a letter of recommendation, perhaps in exchange for some gofer work (filing, watching class while students take tests, running errands)?<issue_comment>username_1: Just ask for the letter. Writing recommendation letters is part of a professor's job. No need to be a gofer, and importantly, offering some sort of service in exchange for a recommendation sets up an unethical situation: recommendation letters should not be paid for in any way.
Assuming your request is granted, it might be helpful to remind her of some of the things you've done related to her course, etc, as you've included here, since professors have many students and may not recall all the details.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: It’s appropriate to ask for a letter, but completely inappropriate to offer a thing of value in exchange. Professors are already paid to do their job, which includes writing letters of recommendation, and it would be unethical for a professor to accept a favor or other thing of value in exchange for agreeing to do what is already a part of their job.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: A much better way to help out this professor is simply to remind them about your interactions ("I took class X and received an A and you gave me excellent advice on how to start my undergraduate research project") so that it's easier for her to recall your background and actually write the letter.
I remember being mildly upset by the fact that I had a letter of rec written by a professor who remembered me by name, yet several years later the letter was accidently given to me, I saw they had written "He received an A in Linear Algebra from me", when it should have been Differential Equations.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/08/17
| 2,534
| 10,696
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am about to defend my thesis. My PhD journey was not a pleasant experience. I worked in an area not within the field of expertise of my advisor. Though she was present to discuss; the conception, implementation and problem solving of the projects were a lonely enterprise. This was disheartening at times, leading to poor productivity during the first two years of my PhD. In addition, my advisor was not prompt in correcting my manuscripts and thesis resulting in poor publication record till date.
As I am about to defend my Phd thesis, I feel resentful about the poor decisions I made by choosing the advisor or by not being more productive or vocal about the need of the manuscripts getting promptly corrected.
I have a postdoc position that I will be beginning from the end of the year. Thanks to lack of connections in my field of research and my poor publication record, I managed to land an okayish postdoc position. I hope to do well and get a better position after.
I don't want to be resentful and feel self loathing. Can I get some advice about how to make the best out of my position forward?<issue_comment>username_1: These "mistakes" are perfectly normal learning experiences for a PhD student. Feeling resent and self-loathing are not normal. I suggest you discuss that with a professional counselor.
It's not your job to tell your supervisor to work faster.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Congratulations on getting a postdoc in what is nowadays a *highly* competitive career choice!
I would encourage you to seek professional help as soon as you can afford it, since that's probably the best way to address this internal conflict of yours. This is particularly hard during a PhD given the 1) low salaries, 2) academic culture (e.g. romanticising the hardships of the PhD life) and 3) the high costs of therapy, but I'd like to believe that this is not a problem with a postdoc salary ;)
If somehow money is still an issue you should see what kind of support network does the university you work for has. Sometimes they have some sort of counselling service which might be useful.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: As user347 said, get some therapy and more formal support. Could it be that your experience was traumatic and you are still quite affected by it? On the severe end of the scale, your negative experience will cloud impact your post doc and your future. It is inappropriate to speculate too much but many people are severely traumatised by their PhD. This article below describes an extreme end of the scale. Landing a post-doc and graduating from your PhD should be a moment of joy and celebration. Try to connect with that somehow in a meaningful and fulfilling way.
<https://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2015/09/29/essay-trauma-associated-graduate-school>
Focus on improving and networking with people who publish extensively. Getting mentored or joining a supportive writing group that enjoy and that you get along with may help develop your confidence and skill in publishing more independently. Yes your publication experience was negative, but hopefully you feel freer to adapt reach out more rather than feeling trapped like you were before.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: A great PhD student is the one who can be a very hard worker and "autonomous". I think the advantage is that you learned how to be very autonomous in your work.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Honestly, the PhD experience is highly inconsistent. A rare few sail through with no major hardships, a larger proportion join an established research group and at least have peers to help them through the challenges in their research. However, even that basic level isn't a given for the modern PhD experience.
First is that within 12 months if you don't know more about your area of research than your supervisor then that is a very bad sign. In theory your supervisor should be at least dedicating enough time to understand your research to just enough detail to offer useful guidance. But the modern academic environment usually has supervisors under such pressure that if they would be lucky to be able to dedicate more time to your research than the time they spend meeting face to face with you.
I feel it is a very valid complaint if your supervisor didn't engage with you and try to help you through your PhD. But the PhD is a test of individual endurance. While doing a PhD you are technically a student, the process is actually more like the transition from student to employee and sadly is typically handled by a sink or swim process. The PhD is often an almost traumatic experience and most people never want to touch the area they did their research in ever again because of it.
After sounding very negative so far I'd like to encourage you. What you have experienced is a good trial by fire for your chosen career. You have learned the lessons the hard way but you have learned them early. Your decisions were likely reasonable given the context at the time. While the path was hard, you have actually managed to finish, that is an amazing achievement. The next time you face this process it will be much easier for you. While you say you are behind on the publication track, until someone has published the same work you have done, you can always go back and publish past work even 10 years after you did it. On that point, for your future career, remember that there isn't anything more important than publishing papers, so always bring your focus back onto that. Also you should be better at spotting the more toxic environments in academic now, definitely follow your gut feel on that as academia can be a meat grinder.
I think the last point I would say, as well as supporting the idea of seeking some professional help, is to remember that most people in the academic world are trying to do their best but often can't because of the pressures of the environment. Get angry at them, be disappointed, but try to retain some forgiveness because they are human too and soon you will be one of them as well.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: A PhD is an individual project, so it's not surprising if you feel you that you have been bearing the weight of it. It's not unusual to have an advisor whose area of expertise does not align 100% with your topic. In my experience, my advisors were helpful because they listened to my ramblings each week and were able to provide advice about general academic topics (i.e. how to prepare and submit papers to journals/conferences, responding to criticism, dealing with administrative issues, etc.) Although they sometimes shared their domain-specific knowledge, I was expected to be reading and understanding the papers relevant to my topic. In the end, I knew more than them about my topic, which is how it should be.
I'd also say that 99.99% of PhD students experience challenges. (I state without any references. Please excuse me.) You could have changed your advisor earlier, but as they say, there's no use crying over spilt milk.
Well done for obtaining a postdoc, because the majority of PhD graduates don't continue in academia.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: TL;DR: **Shit happens.**
Supporting other answers, but from a different perspective:
The task "Complete a PhD" is not just "Make some scientific progress" plus "Write it down". It is also **"Get the whole thing done"**.
The organisational part of the whole thing is important - even **very important**!
That part is exactly about the problems you are worrying about - and you have solved!
* You did not give up even when it was disheartening.
* You managed to continue the work even when you found yourself in a dead end.
* You could stay motivated to finish even when you found the work you spend much time on turned out to be worthless.
* You somehow overcame frustration.
When a company wants to **hire somebody** for an non-academic position, the requirements often contain having a PhD in the relevant topic.
That is not because of the scientific results. Also, it is not about knowing how to write them down in the form required for getting a PhD accepted.
That you finished a PhD means you are able to get large, complex tasks done - on your own.
The only thing about a PhD that is really important may be that it was finished, proving your organisational skills, and the field of knowledge of the PhD topic, proving you can work in that field. That the topic was not in your field of expertise means you completed a harder task. And that you now have a wider field of expertise.
Not the scientific result.
Not how to write it down.
There is one final task: Accepting how you got it done - and moving on.
Your question is about how to accept all the things that could have been better.
That you recognize what went wrong proves that you already learned from it.
How it was done no longer matters.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: **the conception, implementation and problem solving of the projects were a lonely enterprise.** But you made it through. If this is the sort of loneliness you have come to enjoy or thrive on, then academia is for you. There will always be people more senior than you who will abandon you, only to suddenly reappear when you have produced something that can be published in a top journal.
**my advisor was not prompt in correcting my manuscripts** This problem should become less of a concern as you advance through the ranks. As a postdoc, you may again run into this problem of a "supervisor" who is not available until credit is to be shared. This is a matter of luck and (trust me please on this) avoid prospective collaborators like the plague as soon as your gut tells you that they are bad news (the upshot of decades of heartbreak in academia: your gut is *always* right about this; you don't have time to waste on the bad 'uns). When you finally get tenure, you can go ahead and publish by yourself, although it is always better to work together.
Some PhD students and postdocs solve this problem by pressing right ahead and submitting without the "supervisor's blessing". This gets them into trouble. Supervisor Mad! ... Right until the paper is accepted, and the "supervisor" has gained a co-author credit without having done any of the work. That tends to put them in a forgiving mood.
(I remember one horrible academic who had a lot of nasty things to say about his -then former- postdoc... until that PNAS acceptance email came through.)
So: you learned a lot from this. In all likelihood, there is more of the same s\*\*\* ahead, but at least you know you will be able to deal with this.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/08/17
| 3,008
| 13,002
|
<issue_start>username_0: Suppose, you are the head of a lab, and there is a particular undergraduate in your lab that you want them to continue working in your lab while doing their graduate studies in the university you are working.
You know that the student wants to go abroad for their graduate studies, but if they can't, they will stay where they are (in your lab).
And they ask you for a letter of recommendation for their graduate studies.
Why should you write a strong recommendation letter for them, even though you know that it will increase their chances of going to another university for their graduate studies?
Note that, I've read [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/100404/professor-refusing-to-write-recommendation-letter-to-make-student-work-longer) question.<issue_comment>username_1: **Because not doing so is extremely selfish**. I don't own the student, and they should be free to pursue their own career goals. If those goals involve studying elsewhere, that's disappointing, but it's still not mine to sabotage (as not writing a strong recommendation letter would be) the student.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: The PI should write a reference **truly** reflecting the skills of the student.
The reference should not be "dumbed down" or "over egged", both practices are incorrect both ethically and professionally.
If this means the student moves on, then so be it. There will always be other students.
It may also mean that the student comes back in the future or they end up collaborating in the future.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: When I am evaluating a research group leader, one of the most important things I examine is where their former students work. If their former undergraduates have moved to PhD programs at excellent universities, that makes the group leader look like an excellent mentor who teaches their students well. This improves the group leader's reputation and helps them recruit new students.
A savvy letter writer also knows that a letter which literally says "This student has excellent achievements x, y and z." implicitly says "I am a good supervisor for helping the student achieve x, y, and z."
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_4: You are describing one of the many conflicts of interests which can occur in academia.
While in reality, most of the people might be selfish and not professional at this stage, the majority will still be and won't sabotage your future. Worse case they usually don't help you like in the other post you have outlined. I have outlined the possible reasons I have observed why a PI would support you independently of the conflict of interest:
Why? Because it shows that you are a good mentor who can not only support his/her own interests but also of the people around you. It is a sign of both personal and professional growth.
Depending in which country and at which stage of you career as a PI, some people will be interested to know if you have achieved this step personally. One way to show this is that you push these people to continue to work in the academic system and that your mentoring help these people to achieve even greater results.
Alternatively, there is another explanation which occurs in people who are already reached tremendous success. It also personally rewarding in terms of your ego when you see all the people you have mentored working in supporting all the ideas and work you have invested your life in to be carry on in the future. It shows that this topic or area of research is interesting and important. It increases your own importance and relevance for posterity.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Professionalism.
There’s also some measure of self-interest in that a good student moving elsewhere will enhance the reputation of the original group with other researchers and with other students. In particular I note that students talk and if it were broadly known that a PI “torpedoes” good students then the likelihood of recruiting good students would nosedive dramatically.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_6: First of all, people who choose working in science tend to be decent non-selfish people. Those who are selfish or not decent prefer other occupations. Professors will submit good recommendation letters just because it is the right thing to do.
Second, a professor's salary does not depend on whether his student leaves his lab or not. Professors usually have a permanent position and a fixed salary. There is no direct selfish interest for a professor to keep his student in the lab.
Third, connections and collaborations matter a lot in science. It is often to a professor's advantage to let his student go abroad. The professor can, for instance, indicate his former student as a suggested referee for papers submitted from the lab and can also reach other people via his former student. The more talented the former student is, the more beneficial the connection will be.
Fourth, undergraduate students are generally less valuable than they think. Professors generally encourage and praise them, but the reality is that undergraduate students know almost nothing, cannot write good articles, consume a lot of time and energy of their supervisors, make mistakes in research calculations, etc. Many professors see working with undergraduate students as a duty rather than something beneficial.
For the above reasons, almost any professor is highly unlikely to submit a weak recommendation letter if he is able to write a strong one.
If you are worried that this might nevertheless happen, you can make the following steps to reduce the risk:
1. Prepare a draft of the recommendation letter and say something like, "I have prepared a draft, and you can modify it in any way you wish." Professors are generally very busy and have neither time nor energy to carefully write strong recommendation letters, but, given a draft, will usually just make stylistic corrections and sign/send.
2. Carefully choose people whom you ask to write a recommendation letter. If you work in a lab, you may have a few people to choose from. Choose decent people who have neither envy nor strong interest to keep you in the lab. The usual situation is that you have a head of the lab and a mentor, who is subordinate to the head of the lab. Make a wise choice between the two. Consider their human qualities, possible selfish interest, etc. If you make a few different applications, ask different people to write recommendation letters for different applications so that no one will be able to spoil all applications of yours.
3. Promise to collaborate in the future. Tell them that you plan to build a great career and will always be helpful and thankful. Tell them that after you move abroad, they can indicate you as a suggested referee for papers submitted by them. Promise to be a very friendly reviewer. Say and do everything to ensure that people see your departure positively.
4. If the recommendation letter has to be sent by email, consider asking to include you in BCC. Just say that you want to be sure that the letter is sent. It will be hard to refuse such a request, and if it is refused, consider asking another person to write a recommendation letter. Analogously, if the recommendation letter has to or can be sent by ordinary mail, consider asking to give you the signed letter. You can then just put it in an envelope, write the professor's address as the sender's address, and send the letter by mail. If the letter can be sent by fax, just get a signed letter and send it by fax. The idea is that if the professor knows you will see the letter, he is unlikely to deliberately weaken it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: Your peers will read them
-------------------------
The audience for your letters of recommendation are your peers who are leading other labs in your field. If the letters they get from you indicate that you're sabotaging your students (and they'll know, they're as experienced as you or more and they know all of the nuances of this process), well, then you'll gain a reputation in your field for sabotaging your students.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: The way most people are answering is based on ethical reasoning (which I don't disagree with), but some of the OP's follow up comments / questions make me wonder if OP is contemplating whether doing the "nice" thing (which supposedly have negative short-to-medium term consequences) might actually have longer term consequences, or not. I think the answer is: failure to write the LoR in this case is actually a bad idea for the professor.
By refusing to write a LoR, the professor in question believes that they are more likely to keep a potentially useful grad student / employee; writing the LoR makes this less likely. So, doing the thing that helps the student achieve their goals seems to hamper the professor's. However, I'll argue something much different: the pragmatism of niceness (or, at least, perceived niceness), which some of the answers (Zero's; username_6's third point; Lecter's third para; and username_7') have alluded to, but I think is worth stating straight out.
If we re-examine some of the assumptions in the professor's argument (or, at least the one I'm imposing on them), there's the notion that the lack of LoR makes it significantly harder / less likely for the student to move on.
1. Having a LoR from a well known professor with whom you have worked is nice, but not the be-all-and-end-all. In the post linked to by the OP, answerers were arguing the the student in question should go get other LoRs. So, the professor's refusal to write one is not a deal breaker for the student's efforts to move on.
2. Also, the professor has assumed that failing to get a LoR will not impact the effort the student puts into leaving. There are lots of folks (myself included) that would make it a TOP priority to ditch a boss that treats me like that. Lastly, even if the student doesn't leave, the professor has not (apparently) thought about how failing to write a LoR will impact the student's desire to put time and effort into the job.\*
3. Plus, let's be honest; the professor can try to attract another student, right? The loss of this one is probably only a temporary set back in that the professor needs to start the process to get another student.
So, I question how effective this lack of a LoR is for the professor's future benefit (i.e. keeping a well-motivated student to work in the lab). Then there are the potential negative consequences for the professor.
If word gets out about this attempted sabotage, the info would have to get to potential applicants, before they would choose not to apply into this program. But, this can happen; it could negatively impact the climate of rest of the lab (who, if annoyed enough by this or other bad actions, could tell potential new students). Additionally, the professor could develop a bad reputation among colleagues, who will be less likely to send new students to him. (Let alone any other consequences, such as de-prioritizing collaborating with the professor, if the reputation gets worse.)
So, I will say that it is actually in the professor's best interest to write the LoR. The benefits of trying to keep the student are probably less than the professor thinks, and the negative consequences are probably much worse.
\*Just to cut off any arguments about how no-one owes a LoR to anyone else: Wanting someone to stay and work for you, but being unwilling to write a LoR for a similar position is a major red flag to me; it smacks of the employer/professor failing to see the employee/student as anything other than a means to an end for the employer/professor. It would be different if the employer was getting ready to fire the employee, of course.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_9: The student's welfare is the only thing that matters. No mentor should put his or her interest before doing what is best for a student. There is nothing to weigh. First do no harm applies to this situation.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: Because if you did not write the recommendation letter to the student, the student will become **upset** and most probably **you will lose them anyway**.
It is better to help a student, as this is what you should do. Besides, if you did not help them, you will end up losing them anyway, but with **bad-terms**.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: Several reasons (beyond being fair, ethical and/or a nice human being):
* Their reputation (believe it or not, undergraduates also talk between the semesters and there are good chances that your behavior like messing up somebodies career because you consider them your slave discourages future students)
* A good connection to one more team. Much easier to ask for a collaboration with the student as a PhD when you were constructive.
* Maybe the student even comes back for postdoc after learning new techniques somewhere else
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/08/17
| 2,442
| 10,811
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have done research on a topic that is very sensitive in my original country. I want to submit a paper to a (well-rated) Computer Science conferences, but I do not want to use my real name or university at all (neither for submitting nor publishing). Have you ever heard of such thing? How doable is it?<issue_comment>username_1: This is a highly sensitive topic, see [<NAME>](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4453/brian-borchers)' comment:
>
> As a practical matter, even if the publishers of the conference proceeding were willing to keep your identity secret it would probably be relatively easy for officials from your country to determine your identity. It's likely that the publisher will want to avoid having any responsibility for keeping your identity private.
>
>
>
My advice: Talk to people from your university what to do. Ask trusted colleagues (which work on the same topic), university lawyers etc.
This question is too complicated to be handled by you on your own.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You can write any name, and no one will check your ID. The reality is that you can submit a paper to any scientific journal under a fake name, and no one will ever check whether your name is real. Also, I do not remember having to show my ID to any conference organizers.
If you want to be able to later claim the authorship (e.g., after you become a citizen of a different country and totally independent of your country of origin), you have to collect evidence and retain the email box you will use for submission of the paper. You can take a video of the process of submitting the paper by using a program like *Free Screen Video Recorder*.
Consider choosing a name that closely resembles your real name, but is different enough to eliminate the risk of getting into legal trouble in your original country. You know, non-English names can be transliterated to English in different ways, and you can also shorten your first name. For example, if your real name is <NAME>, which is normally transliterated as <NAME>, you can consider writing it as <NAME>adorough. If someone asks you in your original country whether it is you, you can plausibly deny. Later, when you feel safe to claim the authorship, you will be able to simply include the paper in your CV and, if needed, provide explanations and evidence (e.g., the ownership of the email address indicated in the paper, the video of submitting the paper, etc.). Also, if you use just an altered version of your name instead of a totally fake name, you can hardly be accused of misconduct, especially given the circumstances.
If you want to ensure that the publisher won't be able to track down your university and city, you can use a proxy server to submit your paper. Otherwise the publisher may learn your real IP address.
You are not required to write an institutional address. You can just write any street address, thereby claiming to be unemployed by any university. I saw papers with such addresses. Just ensure that the address chosen by you won't cause any suspicions. For example, you can provide a valid street address of a certain apartment complex, but choose an apartment number that does not exist in that complex.
Submit your paper to a conference where you can and will pay the publication charge in cash, or to a journal that does not charge the authors. Otherwise you may be unable to find a way to pay without exposing your real name.
If your research is so sensitive that the authorities in your country of origin will do their best and utmost to find the author, then you should be especially careful and take additional security measures. First, it goes without saying that you should not go to any conference in person with your research. Publish your research in a journal instead. Second, it goes without saying that you should publish your article under a totally fake name, which does not resemble your real name in any way. Third, never store your research data in your country of origin in the unencrypted form. Use a program like *TrueCrypt* to encrypt data. (A comment below suggests that *Veracrypt* is a good choice and better than *TrueCrypt*.) Leave no evidence on your computers in your original country, because they may be searched if police come to you. Fourth, do not submit your paper from your original country using your home Internet connection. If you currently live in your country of origin, you can submit your paper from a public computer in an Internet cafe, additionally using a foreign proxy. Of course, this applies not only to submission of the paper, but also to registering and using the email box, returning proof corrections, and everything related to all this. You have to leave no trace leading to you.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Others have mentioned that in most cases there's no real issue with submitting under a fake identification. As [username_1 points out](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/134817/60119), the technical details of how to handle this are complex and you should certainly seek help with this. But, while it's pretty much impossible for any individual (even security experts) to know everything they need to know about securing themselves against their attackers, you're also going to have learn enough about this yourself that you can spot the kinds of things that can be security issues for you, i.e., you need a good "security mindset."
Here are a few core issues that it's really important to keep in mind when implementing security measures.
1. Security is not an "is" or "isn't" thing: something is not either "secure" or "not secure." It's always a trade-off between the cost to you (most often in terms of convenience for you and others involved) and the cost to the attacker of overcoming those security measures, which is also a measure of the amount of risk you're taking on.
2. The largest component of security is not the technical means (such as particular encryption programs or protocols) but *how these technical means are used*. The best tools in the world provide no additional security at all if they're used poorly. Anybody helping you out with this should show great concern about training you to work in more secure ways.
3. Keep in mind is how security affects disaster recovery. As an extreme example, keeping all your work on a single encrypted drive can result in total loss of the data if the drive fails or you forget the passphrase. Always consider the various scenarios that could result in loss of access (for both you and others) and how these can be mitigated.
For doing this, you can find plenty of good resources outside of academia, as well as within it.
I would suggest starting with reading through the Electronic Frontier Foundation's [Surveillance Self-defense](https://ssd.eff.org) pages, which will give you a better sense of the problems, techniques for dealing with them, and tools that can help with this. In particular, the [Your Security Plan](https://ssd.eff.org/en/module/your-security-plan) page gives an overview of what you need to be considering.
For specific questions and answers about various security tools and measures, the [Information Security Stack Exchange](https://security.stackexchange.com) is very helpful, and you can use the same SE account there that you're already using for this question.
Then see if you can find a professional in the field who can help you out. Especially given that your research sounds as if it may have significant value to the general public, a reporter who deals with stories similar to what you're researching and whose sources require similar kinds of security could be very helpful. I won't give any specific suggestions here, but reading through the news for stories covering topics similar to your research will likely lead to reporters who specialize in your area. Find a reporter or publication that offers higher-security methods of contacting them. (If they publicly and widely announce their [PGP key](https://ssd.eff.org/en/glossary/pgp) fingerprint or [SecureDrop](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SecureDrop) information, that's a good sign that they do this and take it seriously). A good reporter will not only offer the technical means for secure communication, but explain how and why their systems work, and provide training on proper use of these systems.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Others already have mentioned the importance of opsec in this case and I have a very harsh thing to say about that: you will mess it up. I only know from what I read that drug dealers mess up, but I know first hand software pirates do. I was one for twenty years, after all, and while I wasn't high level enough to get arrested but I saw people got busted despite they were super careful.
Maybe you leave one copy of your incriminating data on an USB drive. Maybe you have scribbled some parts of it on a notepad and they can (easily) find out because the pen pressed into sheets below the actual drawing. Given enough resources these days they can read palimpsests, something as simple as this is no problem. Maybe you write in a similar style and you get matched by stylometry. The fundamental problem here is the classic assymetry of security: the defender (you) need to make every single step airtight, the attacker (your original country) only needs to have one lucky break.
You need to weigh the consequences as to what happens to you and potentially your family *when* you are found out. Not if -- when. Because if a country gets pissed at you, they will.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: A small sidenote that hasn't been stressed enough (though username_2's answer alludes to this):
Submitting the paper is one thing, but do keep in mind that unless you can find a coauthor, you'll have to attend the conference in person.
There may be other people from your original country in attendance and some of them might even recognize you. Perhaps they wouldn't report you on their own, but if somebody asks them, all bets are off.
There's also the risk of photographs - people sometimes take pictures of interesting talks or posters and many conferences also keep public galleries from past events on their websites. If your research really is that sensitive and someone suspects that you (or just someone from your country in general) might be the author, they may go looking for these. All it could then take to land you in trouble is one photo showing your face. And what's worse, this could happen years after the fact.
In short, if you do decide to publish your research, it may be better to either choose a journal rather than a conference, or to have someone else present the paper in your stead.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/08/17
| 822
| 3,479
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is it okay to apply to a PhD without knowing precisely what you want to achieve? I heard advisors have projects, so would it be okay to state that you are interested in one of those projects without necessarily being an expert in it?
If so, how much knowledge do you need anyway? and in the statement of purpose letter, how do you state your interest in a specific project efficaciously giving that you are not fully aware of it?
Now you may ask, why would someone be interested in working on a project if he is not fully aware of it, right? But the thing is, some research topics are claimed to be HOT, at least that's the word on the web, some claim that certain topics have great potential in the foreseeable future. So, who does not want to work on something desirable with a future!<issue_comment>username_1: What you describe is often the common case for a PhD. But, in a letter and also in real you should have some related interdisciplinary or methodological background. Starting as a complete novice a PhD is very risky. An expert you have to become during your PhD, no one is one at the beginning, this would be a pointless odyssey. But a background is necessary, otherwise everybody could start a PhD without educational requirements like a bachelor in natural sciences/engineering when looking for a STEM PhD.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You better think 1000 times. I am going through that case and I wasn't enough smart to succeed, I would say. New materials, but no real knowledge about them so far - and I found myself useless without theory but some experiments. Now I am trying to finish my PhD thesis and hope that I can defend it.
If you engage in new field, you shall be truly motivated to work way harder than before.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I would advise against choosing a completely unfamiliar topic for your Ph.D. While the topic might be hot and help you with the job search after graduation, it would also put much more pressure on you. First, the required learning curve would delay your progress and possible publications. Second, you have to work double to get what comes naturally to others. I've seen many Ph.D. students in my department that have a limited grasp on basic concepts and sometimes even reinvent the wheel. Finally, you must really like your Ph.D. topic and eventually live with it until your graduation (and sometimes even through your whole academic and/or professional life). Choosing a topic with which you're unfamiliar could be risky as you might not like it after getting to know it completely.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: I think it is extremely important to differentiate between:
* **Option A:** a desire to work on something [that is claimed to be] desirable in the future;
* **Option B:** choosing to do a Ph.D. in the topic [that is claimed to be] desirable in the future.
There are many ways to proceed with option A, and doing a Ph.D. certainly should not be the one if one does not possess some background.
Therefore, the simple advice would be to gain that experience, confirm your desires, increase your knowledge about the subject, and only then (and only maybe) proceed to option B.
Most of the time, the lack of **any** background and hand-on familiarity with the potential Ph.D. topic signifies that one is not ready to pursue a Ph.D. in it. There is nothing wrong with trying to get that experience and then apply the next year.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/08/17
| 1,268
| 5,218
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am Canadian, and I had a postdoc interview in a Canadian university on-site late May. It was two days long. I gave two presentations and a 6 hour long hands-on lab demonstration. Prof. seemed satisfied with the results and said "thank you for the successful demonstration." During the interview, the professor also explained that she doesn't have a money problem but a people problem, as in finding the right people for the job.
Fast-forward to a month later, no news. So I send a follow up and get this reply "yes, we are positive on you for a position and we are still checking for some internal part for further official process." prof also send some questions about when is the earliest I could start and if I can abide by this and that lab rules, etc...
This was almost two months ago. Still no news. Did I get it, did I not? What's the hold up? I am very confused.
**Update**: I emailed the prof based on comments here and relayed my concerns over the lengthy process with no updates. The professor responded with a "conduct document" that I had to sign, which I did, but it seemed like I was being strung along. I decided to write off the position and continue searching for other jobs. Long story short, I have got the job after all. I am informed that an official job offer is being prepared for me right now. I will likely accept it, as I really like this research group and what they hope to achieve in their field. I would like to thank everyone for their replies. I believe it actually helped. I really think if I didn't follow some of the advice here (particularly about being patient and respectful), I wouldn't have gotten the job.<issue_comment>username_1: The PI told you that you got the job, so you should contact them again. I'd suggest you start being more pressing, something along the lines of "I would like to know when the contract will start, since I have to make arrangements..."
It's quite common for the internal hiring process to take a long time so there's no reason to be alarmed, but you've been quite patient already. In case you have other opportunities available you can mention it, it might speed things up if they worry that they might lose you.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: One possible scenario is that they have a preferred candidate, who has not yet accepted or rejected their offer.
Another possible scenario is that there is an uncertainty about funding. For example, they may be trying to hire you using some complicated scheme in which your position is co-funded by a third body. It takes time to organize such things. Or they may be waiting for an announcement of the outcome of their grant application submitted long ago. They may have decided to hire you anyway, but may not yet know which grant to fund your position from. Or they may have been unable to hire you in the intended way and may be looking for an alternative method to hire you.
It is rather a bad sign that they did not take the initiative to contact you and keep you updated, and such a delay seems to be too long to be caused by any official process unless this process is related to an application for some funding.
If I were you, I would be rather pessimistic and would send a frank email expressing my concern. I would ask them to frankly explain what is going on and to tell me the probability of me getting an official offer. I would also ask them when I should expect to receive an official offer. If I did not receive a convincing and credible response, I would immediately start looking for another position.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> I am in a weird situation that I don't really know what this means.
>
>
>
Weird, perhaps, but not entirely uncommon. Something similar happened to me (for well over 3 months actually).
>
> I had a postdoc interview on-site late May. It was two days long. I gave two presentations and a 6 hour long hands-on lab demonstration. Prof. seemed satisfied with the results and said "thank you for the successful demonstration."
>
>
>
If that was the peak of his/her reaction and engagement following your visit - s/he wasn't very impressed, or had some issues with you, or is kind of a cold fish (the latter is quite possible).
>
> "yes, we are positive on you for a position and we are still checking for some internal part for further official process."
>
>
>
That sounds like "we're trying to get somebody else but we want to keep you on stand-by", honestly.
>
> prof also send some questions about when is the earliest I could start and if I can abide by this and that lab rules, etc...
>
>
>
So, this sounds more positive, but then:
>
> This was almost two months ago. Still no news. Did I get it, did I not?
>
>
>
Looks like you haven't gotten it. But - it's not certain. Sometimes academics, and academic institutions, act weirdly. So, you need to pester the Professor and/or the relevant administrator. Don't worry about the impression of you checking - it's perfectly acceptable. Be polite, of course. Also, when you ask for an update, ask more specific questions, either already on the first email or as a reply to their vague update.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/08/18
| 1,463
| 6,392
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently finished my PhD in Developmental Biology in the US, but I left a couple of experiments completed prior to finishing the paper. (This paper was developed during the course of my PhD and has had numerous changes).
I have since finished my PhD and my supervisor started to take my paper and made decisions on it. He never once asked me for my Drosophila collection, and we never ever discussed the paper and how we could finish it. I became depressed as he treated like I am stupid, even though the paper was almost done and it was worthy of a high-impact journal... He never seemed to trust in my capabilities.
I have since realised that he found a new grad student to finish those experiments (that I could perfectly have done faster and in a much shorter time)... and now (almost a year later) my paper was submitted. Unfortunately, he decided to make the other PhD student the second first co-author of my paper.
I would like to hear some opinions as I don't know what to do.
Is this going to impact my future career?
I also don't understand how someone that knows deep inside that I am the first author of a paper can do this?<issue_comment>username_1: The title and body-text of your question do not match. The former describes the change of authorship as "last minute" whilst the latter says that the paper was developed from your drafts "almost a year later".
Also, could you clarify what you mean by "second first co-author"? Is that a euphemism for "second author"?
Anyhow, there is a big difference between:
1. a complete paper having the authorship order changed unilaterally by the corresponding author at the time of submission (which is what "last minute" would imply); and
2. a draft paper being developed and completed by a new co-author, who is then given precedence over the person who wrote the original draft (which is what the body of your question implies).
If §1 applies, then the person who acted unilaterally acted improperly (even if the authorship order **does** warrant change, the change should be done transparently).
If §2 applies, then, based on the information available, the situation amounts to a **dispute** rather than to misconduct. In **some** circumstances, it may be perfectly reasonable for a person who turned a draft into a complete paper worthy of publication to take precedence over the person who wrote the draft originally. Without knowing the details of the case, it is difficult to say who is in the right.
Your options:
* A) complain to the editor/publisher (be prepared to provide **detailed** evidence to substantiate your argument, such as the drafts **with their original timestamps**) -- possible outcomes include nothing happening (if the editor/publisher disagrees with your claims), change of authorship order, addition or removal of co-authors, or retraction of the paper;
* B) *(may require you to have attempted §C already)* complain to the university's research conduct office or equivalent (as with §A, be prepared to provide detailed evidence) -- possible outcomes as per §A, plus possibility of disciplinary action if the university considers serious misconduct to have taken place;
* C) complain to the corresponding author (you may want suggest that it was oversight rather than out of malice... it is possible that, with the distance of time, your contribution was forgotten unintentionally) -- possible outcomes as per §A, although if any changes are made to the author list, the corresponding author will then have to convince the editor/publisher that the changes should be made (editors do not permit changes without justification, in order to prevent "gift authorship");
* D) engage legal counsel and complain through the courts: IANAL, but a likely argument would be that your **moral rights** (specifically, the "right of paternity": that is, to be recognised as the creator of a work) were not recognised properly (if, moreover, you have **not** assigned copyright to the university, you may be able to sue for copyright infringement).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Assuming that you continue to publish in your field, I predict that this will have only minor and short-term effect. You already have moved on and secured a position from which you can advance.
Don't assume that your doctoral work will be the *best* work you will ever do. It is only the first. Your later work will determine your career far more than the specific authorship of this paper.
But you have a warning that you need to consider and negotiate authorship in future work, especially collaborative work. I also assume you will have more control in the future, though some PIs also play tricky games. Watch out for that and protect yourself as needed.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Let's focus on the "Is this going to affect my future career?" question, and set aside any issues of whether having your authorship changed from first to co- is fair or not.
This probably is **not** going to affect your career significantly. In the fields in biology that I'm familiar with, the difference in prestige between a first authorship and a co-first authorship is not huge. That's not to say there's no difference; if everything else is exactly equal, a first authorship is preferable. But a search committee will almost certainly still consider a co-first-authorship to be "your work", which is what matters most to them.
(The slight loss in prestige between sole and co- first authorship may be partially balanced by the suggestion that you are a good team member and collaborator, too, so it's not all negative.)
What I've seen done, and what I've done myself, is for letters of recommendation to try to disambiguate co-first authorships. I'll write something like "In this work, two people worked extensively on the paper and justified co-authorship, but person X conceived and planned these parts that are relevant to your department" -- In other words, explain to the search committee why this co-authorship should count as a first authorship as far as they are concerned.
In the list of things search committees weigh, an enthusiastic reference letter from a former supervisor carries much, much more weight than does the tiny difference between sole and co- first authorship, so keeping your former supervisor happy with you is, pragmatically, a smart move.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/18
| 1,590
| 6,905
|
<issue_start>username_0: Last semester, I was doing well (A+) in three of the five courses I was taking, but had a problems with two others:
1. For one course, the professor supplied a long list of study materials of several thousand of pages. And, the lecture material was way too extensive for a four-month semester. I downloaded lecture materials from other universities to cut the load and still found it very extensive. Then, from the end of April, 2019, my brain was signalling an SOS. Finally, I failed in the theory part of this course, and as a result failed in the course.
2. For another course, I obtained A+ in labs, and projects. But, I found the time inadequate to prepare for the theory test.
These two courses increased my stress level, and that stress level caused an anxiety attack in the first week of May, 2019. As result I failed in four courses.
Later I found that **successful** students were actually massively cheating in those two courses.
1. For Course 1, they were actually not following materials supplied by the professor at all. they have developed a massive database of all old questions.
2. For Course 2, they uploaded all the assembly language programs to the server before the lab sessions. Also, they have developed a massive database of all old questions.
---
I have two questions regarding this:
1. Is my experience very common or normal?
2. Is it a **must** to collect old resources from previous students to be a successful student?<issue_comment>username_1: No. It is not normal for students to use a student-collected database of old questions. I know this is done at some universities, but personally I have never seen one.
The proper thing is for faculty to supply sufficient quality and quantity of study material that students will not benefit from these databases of old questions. Faculty also should not reuse test questions which might be in a student-collected database, but not in the study materials.
When faculty reuse tests and keep the content "secret," then student-collected databases create unfair advantages for certain student groups. These groups often exclude minority students. This is an unacceptable practice.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In some areas it is not uncommon for students to have collected old assignments/exams. What is highly regrettable is that this information is sometimes accessible only to some at the expenses of others. Unfortunately plagiarism of this kind is difficult to detect by its nature so difficult to deter.
It should not be required for you to do this and in fact it *seems* some courses are poorly structured. If you can substantiate the allegations in your post, you *might* consider a formal complaint (although it’s not clear what can be done to prevent access to such “secret” resources short of delete this data bank.)
You will not get much traction with the stress issue unless you were in a position significantly different from most other students, *i.e.* unless your workload was significantly different from other students. If this is the case the first question to ask is why was your workload so different? Unfortunately some courses/programs seem to have impossible expectations and make it some kind of badge of honour to test the breaking points of students.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Whether students having access to old exams or not is cheating, depends on a few things. If the instructor knows that it is common then s/he will probably act with that knowledge and not overly use old exam questions. In such a case, it would even be valuable for the professor to make an exam bank available to everyone. See [this recent question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/134061/75368) for more perspective on this particular part of the issue here.
But there is more involved.
Every situation is different. When I was a student it was common for fraternities in the US to collect old exam questions. None of the three top math students at the college I attended were members and so didn't have access to these, nor other similar resources. But we all did (better than) fine and all ended up with PhDs. While the exam banks may have helped a few avoid failure, it had no real effect on things when looked at from a wider perspective.
Also at that time it was believed (possibly apocryphal) that at a certain very top graduate school in the US, no student would consider taking a course for credit unless they had already audited it once. I don't know if that was true, but it points to the pressure to succeed that students often face.
Next, I believe that no course that you ever take will ever be able to tell you *everything* about that subject. It will only be a surface skim that covers the important points and techniques that enable you to go further. Moreover, it represents, even in traditional subjects, only a snapshot in time of the thinking in that field. History moves on. Mathematics moves on. Hopefully a course will give you the tools to move on with your chosen field. But it is unlikely to be a lot more than that.
For the above reason, I have saved nearly all of my notebooks from courses I then considered important. I wrote on paper (not very good paper, actually/sadly) and took care of them, so I still have access to notes from math courses I took more than 50 years ago. I have a copy of a paper I wrote in secondary school (around 1960) and consulted it recently for another project. I have a deeper understanding of all that now than I did then.
The reason for saying the above is to comment on your professor's giving you such a "load" of supplementary material. You should ask about it, but I suggest that s/he is helping you build an archive that will be useful to you over your professional career, not just resources to pass that particular course. I once took a writing course from one of my "great" professors. He would seldom talk about writing (though he made us do a lot of it), but would spend lecture time recommending books to read. In a week, he would recommend 30 or more books. Who could keep up with that? And no, we didn't need to read them to pass. We needed to write and write and write.
Finally, though I may supplement this after some reflection, every student is different. You may or may not need to have access to a gigantic exam file, but I doubt that you will provided that (a) you are serious about your subject and (b) you practice with the knowledge you are gaining by doing exercises and getting feedback. Doing more than the minimum number of exercises, in fact.
That said, it is useful, and the prof should support it, if you are able to see one or two old exams, just so that you have an idea of the *kind of question* that the professor uses, if not any actual upcoming questions. In some places that would be against the stated rules, unfortunately.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/08/18
| 570
| 2,408
|
<issue_start>username_0: if it is the same data, but you put it in another style for your PhD thesis and created a new figure - does it still counts like "figure from publication "\*\*\*" ?<issue_comment>username_1: There might be two parts to this question here, so I will answer them separately.
**Is it plagiarism if I do not cite my own published results?**
**Answer:** Yes, that's called self-plagiarism. It does not matter if the results you want to cite where published by yourself or another person. It must be cited. Even if you have the same data and plot it differently, it is essentially not a new source. Since you usually have more data accessible from your own publications, you might come into temptation to use an altered figure from a previous publication. These must also be cited as part of the published paper. Better safe than sorry, just cite it if it can be attributed to a previous piece of research.
**Do I have the right to reprint figures from a publication in my thesis?**
**Answer:** Well, that depends on which licensing agreement your published paper falls under. For example, the very popular open access CC-BY license allows you to retain the rights to your images and to reprint them. However, attribution (i.e. via citation) must still be specified.
If you do not own the rights to reprint the pictures as they are, you can always redraw a figure (as suggested by <NAME> in the comments) and correctly cite the source as "Redrawn from Author et al. [54]" or similar.
**TL;DR** Yes, if you rearrange data from an old publication in a new form you still have to cite the old publication.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: The copyright attaches to the "presentation" of the data, not the data itself. If you want to replace (say) barplots from your first publication with the violin plots you used in the rest of your projects, go for it! The publisher doesn't need to be involved.
However, you should still cite the original paper by including something like "data from XYZ et al. (2015)" or "redrawn from [1]" in the caption. This ensures that the reader knows where the original data comes from and avoids implying that those results were somehow confirmed--exactly--by a second set of experiments. More practically, it also means your examiners won't ask for as many changes since the data have already been vetted by the papers' reviewers.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/08/18
| 796
| 3,460
|
<issue_start>username_0: I just graduated from my university, and I have a paper to submit to a conference. I was filling out the information to submit my work to them, but I am not sure what to put as my organization. Since I have now graduated from the university, can I still use their name to publish my work? If the answer is no, is there any solution to get my work published?<issue_comment>username_1: The affiliation can be the one that you are currently with (eg a company/new university), or the old one if you’re still looking around for a job. What’s important is that
a. You offer an email address that will be active for a reasonable amount of time.
b. That you mention that most of the work was done when you were in your former university.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: To broaden the answer a little. I am not aware of any university that requires approval prior to publication, but some organizations (e.g., US government labs) have policies regarding what work can be published and the steps the authors need to take regarding dissemination of the work. If your prior university/organization had such a policy, you should still follow them.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: The affiliation to your name on a publication should reflect where most of the work was done and where most of the funding came from.
**Scenario 1**
You just graduated and you want to publish your results in a paper. The manuscript will be written after graduation, but essentially all the results come from pre-graduation work. The affiliation is clearly the university where you graduated.
**Scenario 2**
You just graduated and continue researching on the topic. The new paper is an extension of your previous work, but all the work has been done by you after graduation. The affiliation is clearly **not** the university where you graduated. All the previous work should be cited accordingly. You can submit a paper independently, but it will be easier with a university affiliation. Talk to your former supervisor for advice.
**Scenario 3 (in between 1 and 2)**
You just graduated and you did some new research after graduation. However, a non-neglible part of the manuscript is from before graduation. **In this case, you should talk to your former supervisor and ask for their opinion.** In my opinion, they will be more than happy to have the paper submitted under their affiliation.
This answer is an extension of what <NAME> said in the comments.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: One option would be to get a visitor or guest affiliation with your old university. These are usually easy to get, and my experience has been you just need to fill a form out with basic contact details. This let's you still put your old University as your affliaition. Usually you will also get to keep your old email address for another year which can be helpful as people don't always update their address books straight away.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Both choices here could prove to be seriously wrong. If you use the affiliation, you could be seen as misrepresenting yourself and the institution. If you don't use it, you could be seen as failing to give credit where it is due (especially if you received funding or other support to perform the work that you are now publishing). So, the only correct course of action is to ask your former supervisor (or other appropriate contact) at the university, what you should do.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/19
| 1,041
| 4,697
|
<issue_start>username_0: I had a paper accepted at a conference and want to extend it with some new material based on the comments and submit it to a journal.
One of the co-authors was added to the conference paper because he was the head of the group where I was working. His contribution were textual suggestions to the manuscript. We have since split ways and he has no influence whatsoever in the extension. Again, he had little influence in the conference version and I added him mostly to avoid conflict, since these days people expect co-authorship based on their position.
Since he did not contribute neither to the conference version nor to the journal extension (and he has no position of authority over me anymore), I do not want to add him to the list of authors in the extended journal version. How acceptable/unacceptable is this?<issue_comment>username_1: Publish it under your name and those who provide actual assistance.
If that head has no input to this further paper and you are not part of that team or lab then they do not belong as an author.
This does not prevent you referencing the previous paper.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: In all journals (CS/AI) I’ve worked with you need all authors of the conference paper(s) on which the journal version is based on to agree on the author list in the journal version. Some editors will just not allow a paper to be accepted before explicit consent has been obtained.
It is also unfair to an extent towards this professor. Think about this professor’s perspective: they may believe their contribution was much greater than just some textual edits, and once they realize that you submitted a version without their knowledge or consent, they’ll just email the editor and the paper will not go through to publication before it’s all sorted out.
I suggest you email the professor, tell them your plan, and whether they’d like to still be written as a coauthor. Most people would get the hint. Even if they’d still want to be included then there’s not much you can do about it: you should have established authorship in the conference version.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: This is an interesting question which has two aspects that I would like to address
1. You awarded your old PI an authorship when it was not deserved.
While I understand your reasons for doing this, you should avoid doing this in the future.
Instead you should always have a meeting with your coworkers where you discuss who should be first author, second author, etc. and who should contribute what.
Ideally, the ordering of the authors should be settled well before first draft appears. If someone make a smaller or larger contribution than expected, then the ordering can be renegotiated.
This is though to pull off especially when the distribution of power is uneven, but try to take the lead: "I have this idea which I would like to develop into a paper. I think you are ideally suited to complete this important task. Do you have the time to make this contribution to a joint paper during the next two months?"
2. It appears that you neglected to invite your old PI to contribute to the extended paper.
Again, while I can understand your reasons for doing this, a third party might view things differently.
It is possible to argue that you have tried to deny your old PI credit for your past work.
This is less of an issue if the new paper not only cites the old paper but make a new and very significant contribution.
Moreover, if your old PI has declined to collaborate citing, say, time constraints, then this issue evaporates completely.
Now in your current position I would cite the old paper and ensure that the new paper makes a new and very substantial contribution. I would only award authorship according to the criteria suggested by the ICMJE:
"Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND Final approval of the version to be published; AND Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
All those designated as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, and all who meet the four criteria should be identified as authors. Those who do not meet all four criteria should be acknowledged."
Visit the ICMJE [website](http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html) for additional information.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/08/19
| 804
| 3,281
|
<issue_start>username_0: At least in the field of biology, some academic journals have added a separate summary paragraph (for example: "Significance Statement" (in Journal of Neuroscience), or "Significance" (in PNAS), or "In Brief" (in Current Biology)) in recent years. Why do the publishers think an abstract is not enough?<issue_comment>username_1: A summary paragraph (without highlighting it by a section title) at the end of an article, especially letters without distincts sections, is very common if not necessary in most STEM journals.
Abstract and summary are different things. Abstract is an overview of content without references and limited, the summary often a conclusion of the results with outlook and references.
So one reason could be they want to stress the summary paragraph more again and therefore make a own section. It surely is of value. Especially for longer articles. Papers are not read in a linear fashion from beginning to end. Different readers with different background read papers in a very different way.
A significance statement is normally given in the cover letter or submission system of the journal, it doesn't belong into the summary, the significance of your research you should outline in the introduction, not at the end of the article.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: They serve slightly different purposes.
Specifically, the abstract is what you'd tell your coworkers; the significance statement is more like something you'd tell your mom.
The abstract is meant to quickly summarize *this particular paper*. A good abstract will provide a little bit of context or background, lest readers wonder why you're studying gene X or brain area Y, but the bulk of the abstract is approach and results. "Here, we show...." The significance statement is meant to put your work in a broader context and explain/justify why your article is worth publishing. (I suspect these are also helpful in attracting media attention, if that is of interest).
For example, suppose your paper investigates an antibiotic resistance gene. The abstract might look somethng like [this one](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19506028) from MacMahon et al. (2009):
>
> The ardA gene, found in many prokaryotes including important
> pathogenic species, allows associated mobile genetic elements to evade
> the ubiquitous Type I DNA restriction systems and thereby assist the
> spread of resistance genes in bacterial populations. As such, ardA
> contributes to a major healthcare problem. We have solved the
> structure of the ArdA protein from the conjugative transposon Tn916
> and find that it has a novel extremely elongated curved cylindrical
> structure with defined helical grooves....
>
>
>
This *briefly* hits on the context, but doesn't really delve into it. A significance statement would talk more about this healthcare problem (e.g., X patients have multidrug resistant infections) and how this paper helps solve it (target for co-treatments or whatever?).
Edit: take a look at the *PLoS Computational Biology* [guidelines](https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/s/submission-guidelines#loc-author-summary) and examples (linked therein) that @cheersmate found for some more direct comparisons.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2019/08/19
| 541
| 2,491
|
<issue_start>username_0: In the past I have seen students eager to get a recommendation from a proffesor from the upper management like the dean of the faculty. Especially for academic endevours such as grad. school applications. Or similarly a letter from the superindendant of the highschool for undergraduate applications. Would it be relevant that the LoR writer is in the upper management of the university or would the writer be recognized by their academic standing and nothing else. Please note that I am asking this question for student level research oriented applications.<issue_comment>username_1: I would rather get a letter from a professor, even a *lowly assistant professor*, who knows you well and can attest to your ability and potential, than I would from a higher level person who may have little experience in what your research area entails. The purpose of such letters is to give the reader an assessment of your likelihood of success. If it can't do that then it will be discounted, no matter the position of the writer.
However, in case the letter is just a general statement of your character and (easily found) accomplishments, then the dean's or superintendent's letter might be useful.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It generally doesn't matter very much with the exception that letters from your assistant professors or postdocs don't mean as much as those of seasoned professors. In general, what letter readers are looking for is someone who (i) has first-hand and extensive knowledge of the applicant's abilities, and (ii) the experience to put their knowledge of the applicant into context so that they can provide a *relative* assessment compared to typical students applying for similar positions.
Point (i) above implies that a letter from someone who did not teach the applicant in some way or other (or had other first-hand experiences with them) is not a suitable letter writer. Since deans and superintendents often do not teach or directly supervise students, they are typically not able to comment on the actual qualification of a candidate. Point (ii) above implies that full professors and deans are not substantially different in their abilities to judge because they will both have seen many examples of letters, how they should read, and what they should cover.
In other words: Find someone with many years of work experience, but ignore the administrative title they have -- it doesn't matter much to the letter reader.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/08/19
| 374
| 1,579
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently enrolled in a PhD program in the US. Before picking up my master's degree, I'll be applying to a different PhD program that's more suited to my interests. I will be able to get two letters of recommendations from my undergraduate university and one letter of recommendation from my current graduate institution. Does this combination seem all right? If possible, I can get a second letter from my current graduate intuition as well, but I suspect that letter won't be very strong due to my not having done a lot of work with that faculty member.
Does this combination look all right?<issue_comment>username_1: Totally normal combo.
Also, don't send them letters they don't ask for. Some universities only look at the asked-for documents, nothing extra, to make sure all applicants are on even footing in the process. There's a chance they will have to toss one of the recs in the bin and it might not be the extra that you want tossed.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: (Again, for the U.S., especially in mathematics, my field...) Generally, the more recent the basis for letters, the better, by far. For that matter, having 2/3 of your letters be pre-graduate program might make admissions committees wonder what happened in your graduate work.
If you can get an absolutely stellar letter from undergrad, that might be helpful, but also really try to find two *solid* letters from your graduate program, attesting to your capacity for graduate work, rather than just saying you aced undergrad material.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2019/08/19
| 635
| 2,697
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a rising senior and will be applying to PhD programs this fall. I'm wrapping up a research project I was doing this summer at another school (basically an REU-like program) and the school is at the top of my field. I learned so much this summer and was able to accomplish a lot with my project. I was mentored by staff scientists and basically worked with them the entire summer. The PI of the lab is very hands off and hard to pin down. I met with him once in the beginning of the summer and have a meeting with him this week as I finish up. I was planning on asking him to write me a letter of rec then. The staff scientists said that what will probably end up happening is they write it and he'll sign it/co-sign it, but I need to ask him myself. I'm just a bit nervous/paranoid he'll say no so if anyone has any advice/words of encouragement, I'd appreciate it.
I understand that letters should come from people who know you well and I plan on my other two to be from professors that I am close with at my school. Given that I attend a school where there are limited research opportunities, I consider it to be integral that I get a letter out of this experience that speaks to my capabilities as a researcher. Based on the advice from the career office at this visiting school and other lab members, the letter should be coming from the PI/professor. The scientists I work with will contribute to a strong recommendation - they themselves acknowledge that it just wouldn't be as valuable coming from them. I guess my nervousness has to do more with the fact that here with big labs and big name PI's everyone says this situation/procedure is the norm and coming from a smaller school I'm not as used to it.<issue_comment>username_1: Totally normal combo.
Also, don't send them letters they don't ask for. Some universities only look at the asked-for documents, nothing extra, to make sure all applicants are on even footing in the process. There's a chance they will have to toss one of the recs in the bin and it might not be the extra that you want tossed.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: (Again, for the U.S., especially in mathematics, my field...) Generally, the more recent the basis for letters, the better, by far. For that matter, having 2/3 of your letters be pre-graduate program might make admissions committees wonder what happened in your graduate work.
If you can get an absolutely stellar letter from undergrad, that might be helpful, but also really try to find two *solid* letters from your graduate program, attesting to your capacity for graduate work, rather than just saying you aced undergrad material.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2019/08/19
| 4,704
| 19,173
|
<issue_start>username_0: Most students encounter a life-changing decision during their undergraduate years. That is either to choose a high-paying career, yet such that they might not be passionate about or a career they like but is unlikely to be high-paying.
It is not unusual to find career advice popping in various internet circles that fixate on the importance of passion. The general rhetoric is "If you have a "sufficient" passion for X, you are guaranteed a "good" career in X and hence a good life."
Now, on some levels, the advice makes sense. Students are usually willing to sacrifice guaranteed-to-pay-well professions in hopes to excel in their own professions fueled by passion.
Now my question is, What is the sufficiency precisely in this context?
To be more precise, say I think I feel passionate for mathematics. Maybe because I am good at it. Maybe because I contemplate on it in my free time. Now when it comes to the actual profession, the "apparent" passion fades away and I am left regretting pursuing the field (something that is not unusual to see with Ph.D. students).
Or say, I feel I like physics and mathematics but I also get easily swayed away by high paying professions like data science.
How can I come to "know" whether I truly have a passion for mathematics or whether I was merely deluded into thinking that because I was made to feel that I am good at mathematics by the relevant education system?<issue_comment>username_1: I'm going to just guess that if you are asking the question, then you don't have it. Yet. Or at least, not a lot of it. Yet. But there is time to develop it and, at your age, my suggestion is that you don't worry too much about it. Yet. And you look around at the possibilities.
A wasted life is one in which you can't really do what you really want to do. Too many people have that forced on them by circumstances, but if you can manage it, spend some time to see what develops.
And also expect that at different times in your life you will have passion for different things, some quite distinct from the others. If you can manage to follow those passions then you can have a rich and rewarding life. And you don't get a do-over.
You will know it when you experience it. But first, experience a lot of things.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: If you were *really* passionate about something, you'd know because you'd want to do it in exclusion of all else. You think about that thing even if you're bathing, eating, etc.
Having said that I can understand what you're asking because if we define passion this way, precious few people would be passionate about anything that they can actually make a living from. That includes academics - e.g. [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/39017/should-i-quit-my-phd-workload-self-esteem-and-social-life)
>
> I just want to get married, and have weekends and evenings off, and chill out and play board games, and have nice conversations with friends, and have time to exercise and eat good food, and partake in hobbies, and read books and play computer games and watch movies and write a novel or two.
>
>
>
And from there it's just a short way to "I just want to get married and have my entire week off ..."
So now what? I suggest:
1. Can you imagine yourself doing it as a career? You don't have to like it more than board games, conversations with friends, etc, but you should like it enough that you can do it for upwards of 40+ hours a week. On the other hand if it starts getting painful to go to work every day, it's not a good idea to do it.
2. Are you good at it? If you are, then you can get results even if you aren't passionate (by above definition) about it.
It may not be a popular position, but you can certainly base your career around things that you aren't passionate about (by above definition). For example, my mother became a doctor because that's traditionally what all good students at her high school did. She didn't particularly like it any more than other careers, but she studied it, did well at it, became a trained doctor, became a specialist, and eventually managed her own department. She would often complain about her work at the dinner table, and talk about e.g. how she would rather teach language at a local high school, but by all metrics she still had a successful career.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I suppose the point of this answer is to reject the notion that having a passion for area X is any sort of prerequisite for working in area X and having a successful career. I should make clear that I'm an assistant professor of mathematics at Oberlin College, a small liberal arts college in northeastern Ohio. My job affords me a balance between teaching and research that I love and wouldn't give up for the world. Whether this counts as success is obviously a matter of opinion.
Throughout college (and grad school) I met math majors that knew they wanted to study math for the rest of their lives from the age of 12 or 13. Myself, I became a math major because my engineering pre-major advisor thought that taking two math classes in the spring of my freshman year was a bit much and thus I registered for five math classes to spite her. I had many interests as an undergraduate (mostly in history, foreign languages and literature), and feel that I probably could have gone on to a successful career in any number of them that I would have ultimately found rewarding.
Now there's no way to get around the fact that to succeed in grad school you're going to have to work very hard. In fact you'll probably work so hard that you'll convince yourself that it's a blessing you're even being paid because you'd gladly do this work for free.
I guess my point is that if you really enjoy a field and have a talent for it then you shouldn't discount going on to grad school for it. Even if your passion for the subject doesn't coincide with the romantic notions of some of your classmates. At the end of the day hard work is likely the stronger predicter of success in any event.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> Most students encounter a life-changing decision during their undergraduate years. That is either to choose a high-paying career, yet such that they might not be passionate about or a career they like but is unlikely to be high paying.
>
>
>
This is false, on many levels:
* Students face the choice of what to do after having finished their studies. You don't choose your entire career at once (although certain choices obviously draw you away from certain career paths).
* Passion is not something binary (have it / don't have it), nor even a spectrum (have zero, little, lots, maximum passion). People have mixed and ambivalent feelings about their pursuits.
* In a sense, you can usually not really develop passion for something you will do later in life - in your actual career - when it's not what you do during your studies. As a student, you study, you don't practice. (Exception: Some degrees have a practical experience phase.)
>
> Now my question is, What is the sufficiency precisely in this context? ...I think I feel passionate for mathematics.
>
>
>
That's rather general and abstract. It may be enough to consider an M.Sc. (if that's customary in your country; in some countries, those are discouraged as opposed to direct Ph.D. tracks) - you'll spend 2-3 years on getting deeper into one particular subject and experiencing research in math. Actually, that's not a very representative experience of what research is like *later*, but it should be enough to help you decide if you're really into it.
Alternatively - try to think of something you would like to use math *for*, or apply math *in*. If there is something like that - consider looking for relevant work in that field. That might arouse your "passion" either for more applied, industrial work or for more academically-oriented research work.
>
> How can I come to "know" whether I truly have a passion for mathematics or whether I was merely deluded into thinking that because I was made to feel that I am good at mathematics by the relevant education system?
>
>
>
You're assuming these two options are distinct. Have you considered they might overlap, or be one and the same? At any rate, my suggestions above are what I'd do to be able to better know.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: It sounds like you might have a passion for maths, but are in the wrong environment to allow it to blossom; you're in the right field, but working on the wrong problems.
Consider another passion of yours, and work toward a field where maths and it intersect. You've found the tool you like, now you need to find a project that resonates with you, where you can apply that tool.
This is also a good formula for job security. It's easy to get surpassed in your field by AI, or someone younger, more passionate, with more time on their hands if the field is homogeneous. By crossing two disciplines, you're likely to get much higher job satisfaction, and better job security.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: >
> How can I come to "know" whether I truly have a passion for mathematics?
>
>
>
If you are considering an academic career, this is the wrong question to ask. Academic careers do not require passion. They require work. If you can put in the required work, you might succeed. If you do not put in the work, you won't. That work might require appearing to have passion for something sometimes, but the actual feeling is irrelevant. There are many passionate students out there who try to get an academic job and fail because they do not have the required achievements.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: As people have answered before, think about what drives your mind.
* What keeps you awake (except emotional/mental/physical issues)?
* What fuels your curiosity?
* What gets you in the zone and makes you forget your surroundings?
* What gives you a feeling of accomplishment?
* What gives you "energy"? How do you want to contribute to society and to the progress of mankind?
* Are you willing to put in the work without muttering?
Most likely you're able to answer these questions with multiple topics and subjects. That's why you have to consider your financial goals:
* Do you aim for a certain lifestyle?
* Do you have to provide?
* Are you in Debt?
* Shall it just pay the bills?
* Does my current employment-/financial-status allow me to follow the passion?
Then pick the "passion" that's in accordance with your financial goals and circumstances.You could accuse me of being a "sellout" but let's face it: this is an economic world - nothing won't last if it isn't at least covering expenses. Yes, A.I. could be making many jobs obsolete within the next few decades. So,choose wisely. But I think with mathematics you're on the right path. You could use your expertise for data-analysis, machine-Learning in medicine e.g..
Edit: I just realized that with certain internet-technologies (e.g. social media, youtube, e-course-platforms, diy-onlineshops, blogs...) you could monetize your passion that has no "formal" carreer. In my field, CS and Software, you could sell a self-written software that solves a particular problem.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: I think most of the good answers explain what it is to have passion, and how you "already know" if you do have one. I'll give you a bad answer, in the sense that does not directly answer the question.
I think most people have passions. But, they are called different names, depending on what they are, and why we have them. If you have a passion for math, or for electronics, than your passion can be harnessed by the society and people will respect you for that. If you're passionate about alcohol, not so much, but even then, you could become a wine taster if you go the right way about exploiting your "strength".
It is true, your passions might keep up all night, but it's so common that passions get hijacked by the very people paid to nurture them. For example, I love to create and invent stuff, I love to solve problems that seem unapproachable, I love to calculate, and I enjoy even writing the stuff down to explain to posterity what the hell I was doing. Yet, the people I work for, need me only to write long and tedious technical reports no one ever reads, about mundane research that everyone does, they need me to organize meetings and participate in committees, things that tire and disgust me, to the point I'm questioning my passion and career choices (as if I ever had those). Yet, during my vacations, I end up working on my creative stuff that might never get published, because that's the only thing I ever cared about.
Sometimes it's hard to know if you have a passion, or not. I personally don't believe people can ever be passionate about math, physics, history, robotics or whatever. Those fields are artificial, and I doubt someone was ever born with a passion for those. But, as you get exposed to these fields during your education, or self-education, you might find in the structure of one of those fields something appealing to you, some place where you get the freedom to unleash your true self. That is where your passion lie. But, it matters a lot in what way were you exposed to that field. If you are exposed to a field the way a student is, through tests and long, boring, tedious, soul crushing lectures, or the way a researcher is (or should be), through real life problems that are worth tackling.
I honestly can't say I had a passion for my field. I think I was good at it as a student because I was an overachiever, and I was interested in overachieving. When I actually started research in graduate school, it was a shock. I had to discover stuff. I had to do, not to "know" things. My stellar course work, my straight A's, meant nothing compared to the difficulty of doing actual science. It was hard and seemed not worth it at all. I almost gave up. About three years in, things seemed to connect. I started to understand what I was doing, my first paper got published, and it felt like I was good at something once more.
Two postdocs later, I realized I was doing the same type of work over and over, and didn't feel I was going anywhere, so I started thinking about quitting again. So I quit. Then I came back on a permanent position, in an awful place, true, but with a much clear idea of who I was and what I wanted to do with the rest of my life.
In a nutshell, I realized I would only care about something I created. No matter how many small problems invented by other people I solved, I always came back to my own. This is why I hated my postdoc jobs. I was doing other people's research, while my own ideas were put off indefinitely. In the name of a career and status among my peers, I was living a miserable life.
I'm not saying your passion should be research, banking, music, or your children. All I'm saying, it has to be something that truly represents you. And you will know when you will prefer to do the thing you are passionate about, in spite of the availability of cheap distractions like TV or movies, in spite of what your friends and family tell you, and despite losing your social status, or having a smaller salary.
In my opinion, the main problem with finding a passion is that the passion is hidden within yourself. Most people search for it outside. They go to art classes, they volunteer, they study in universities, go to seminars and get internships. If they are lucky, their true calling will surface during any of those activities. In most cases it never does, or goes unnoticed in the daily humdrum.
Sometimes, you can get "inspired" and you think you have found your passion because someone else who is passionate has told you about their own passion. I think it is the most common way people become passionate about things. I also think that even if you don't find your own passion that way, the "inspiration" would move you closer to it. Just listen to inspirational talks given by people who truly achieved things in their lives (I recommend the one by <NAME> on youtube, because it's so hilarious). Or read the writings of Nicola Tesla. To a normal guy, they sound like madmen. In a way they are, because passion is madness. The more passionate you are, the bigger sacrifices you will be willing to make.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: It seems the question is broad enough to be considered not necessarily related only to academia, therefore I feel I can submit my 2 somewhat anecdotal cents.
This will be somewhat long, but I think the background is relevant to the conclusion.
First, it should be noted that passion for anything is not necessarily a lifelong thing. Even if you consider you have passion for X now, it in no way guarantees you will have passion for X in 20 years time. And, at the same time it might turn into something different.
Point in case. I was fascinated and passionate about most things computer-related since about age of 5 (at a time when mobile phones didn't exist, PCs had just arrived and laptops were the size of a hefty briefcase).
I learned quite a lot about them and made my profession intimately connected with computers from the very start.
Then at around if 35, I understood that I am not really interested in things related to computers anymore. A somewhat disappointing thing at a time when it becomes cumbersome to switch to something entirely new.
Fortunately, after realising it, I found out (in a new job) that what I really enjoyed was not so much computers themselves, but learning things. And applying my learned solutions to problems relevant to other people.
In this case, since I have somewhat extensive IT knowledge, I am still working with computers, but I have rediscovered my passion for them from an entirely different perspective -- I enjoy creating as efficient IT/human solutions to various everyday problems and projects as I can.
That seems to give me a feeling of meaningfulness I find very comforting. In fact, I believe at least some psychologists consider the feeling of having a meaningful life one of the most important things a person should have.
Therefore, based on what I have experienced, I would advise:
1) try to understand what motivates you. It is probably a more general thing than "being passionate about maths". Do you enjoy learning new things? This sounds probably useful for an academic career. If not, what do you enjoy and how does it relate to your options of future jobs?
2) It seems that people enjoy doing things they find meaningful. And one of the most meaningful options is doing something useful for other people.
3) There is a perception that academics are the kind of people who are so deeply interested in some transcendent things in their field of study that they don't care about my previous point. If you do have ardent passion for something you might not care whether anyone gives a fig about it. However, then the question whether you are passionate enough would probably not even occur to you.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/19
| 553
| 2,223
|
<issue_start>username_0: If somebody gets a law/engineering degree or something similar with academic fraud surely they could be sued for malpractice? Maybe another examples is/are doctors.
Are there any examples of this ever? If somebody got a Computer Science degree (via academic fraud) and then marketed it couldn't they be sued for marketing something they didn't earn?<issue_comment>username_1: In the United States and many other countries, engineering and medicine have revocable licenses to practice with an exam as well as the degree requirement. The same is true of other professions such as law and the CPA designation. It is presumably difficult-to-impossible to pass the examinations without the knowledge required for the degree.
Practicing such a licensed profession without the requisite license is a criminal offense, at least usually, but it is the absence of the license rather than the academic fraud that's illegal.
Generally what happens to (unlicensed) people who claim degrees they do not have is they get fired for lying on resumes. I suppose if one held oneself out to the public as having a certain degree and charged for practicing the skill implied by the degree, one could be charged with fraud. In fact, what likely happens is a civil suit for non-performance.
On the other hand [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Abagnale) did get imprisoned for fraud, although I believe it was the bank fraud, financial fraud, and forgery that nailed him and not academic misconduct, even though he both claimed a non-existent Harvard degree and impersonated a physician.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Denmark has an explicit law against scientific fraud and bad practices. I do not know if anyone has been sentenced to anything based on it. You can read the law here: <https://www.retsinformation.dk/Forms/R0710.aspx?id=188780>
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I have seen examples about teaching. Court can find someone guilty of malpractice if it decides that the professor is being intentionally unfair with assignments or grading. Academical bullying is also a thing.
In such event one can potentialy sue for damages and malpractice.
Upvotes: -1
|
2019/08/20
| 355
| 1,637
|
<issue_start>username_0: Recently, I quitted my current research group and I will start to work with someone else. I was in my former research group for almost three years and during these three years I wrote more 200,000 lines of codes by myself alone. These codes rest in my former advisor group repository in Github, but I have copies of them locally in my computer. I know and I understand totally that I'm not allowed to use those codes without my former adviser agreement and also he is not allowed to do so without my agreement. Recently, he removed and revoked my access to the codes that are written by myself during these three years. As I said, I don't want to use them without his agreement, but I'm wondering why he restricted my access to something that completely is written by me and from scratch. I have the local backups but it just makes me upset and I'm wondering if he is allowed to remove my access or not?<issue_comment>username_1: Any supervisor (including the OP's former supervisor) is free to block access to their resources, even when those resources include code written by the person being block (including former students).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Although the question is answered, I would like to add something more.
The fact that you are being blocked from the github may be more than just the former supervisors right, but also your access to ongoing development. They may be simply removing you from a repository that they plan to continue to work on and develop, in which case you should not have access to ongoing work in a lab you are no longer part of.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/20
| 531
| 1,930
|
<issue_start>username_0: I (first author) received a decision on a manuscript recently (minor revision). All my co-authors were cc'ed in the decision email and some of them replied to the decision email saying "congratulations" to me while cc'ing the other co-authors.
One of them accidentally cc'ed the Editor-in-Chief (EiC) of the journal!!! Actually, his reply was to the EiC of the journal with me in the cc. I think this horrible as formally the paper is still pending minor revision before publication.
How should I react? Should I just ignore this or send an email to the EiC apologizing for the misdirected email of this co-author? I do not want to overreact but this got me anxious as I have been eager for this paper to get accepted.<issue_comment>username_1: I think you can safely ignore it. I don't see how or why the editor would suddenly disfavor your paper because of something like this. They seem to think your paper is worthy of publication and they want to publish such papers, not get upset about small communication glitches.
And, of course, people often get cc'd on emails they shouldn't see, causing minor embarrassment. And I think that it is only that here: minor embarrassment.
Let it go. Someone got a chuckle out of it perhaps, but there isn't any reason for them to take out the big hammer.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> I think this [is] horrible as formally the paper is still pending minor revision before publication.
>
>
>
It's not horrible, just a harmless glitch.
>
> How should I react?
>
>
>
["Have you considered... Masterly Inactivity?"](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESIJ_C9mUBI)
>
> I do not want to overreact
>
>
>
Good, because emailing the editor-in-chief would be an over-reaction...
PS - More generally - don't get so stressed out! You'll experience much worse gaffes in life to be worried and anxious about :-)
Upvotes: 5
|
2019/08/20
| 1,760
| 7,110
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an international student looking to apply for a PhD in mathematics in mainly the USA. My current university uses a 10 point scale for GPA but most of the universities I've seen, in the US seem to use a 4 point scale, and they rarely provide a conversion scale to convert a 10 point GPA to a 4 point one.
Some people suggest dividing my current GPA by 10/4=2.5 to get my 4 scale GPA but as my masters' GPA is 7.6/10 (not great, I know) this formula makes it 7.6/2.5= 3.04 and so just barely above the minimum required for the most places. And according to it, I can never get into a PhD program.
As disheartening as it is, IMO this does not seem to be a correct way to interpret an international GPA. After all, the universities abroad don't know how were the classes taught, their contents and how difficult/easy it was to get good grades is in different unis.
At my university, it is really difficult to get good grade. One can get one of the following grades, A, B, C, or a D and it is incredibly difficult to get an A, most of the times only one or two people would get it, and so slim chances of getting most of As. My transcripts are filled with mostly Bs, (and I know I worked really hard for them), a few As and Cs and unfortunately one D (worst decision ever to take that class, it's not related to what I want to study in grad school, the instructor gave one grade to each of the students who took the class). Also, my last two years of coursework was very heavy (at least for me), we'll have 5-6 courses (all math) each semester, and I struggled a lot with my time management throughout this. Combine it with some anxiety and overthinking issues, and you have a bad GPA as a result.
So, my questions are-
1) How do grad schools in the US interpret international GPAs?
2) Would it be okay to address the reasons for my low GPA in SOP)personal statement briefly, like in a line or two? If so, how should I subtly go about doing it? I don't want to make an excuse and of course, don't want to blame others.
3) Should I just give up on applying for PhDs then and focus more on the masters program, say in some Canadian universities?
(I should mention that in the name of 'research experience' I only have a bunch of reading projects/ independent studies and a Masters' thesis. My university didn't offer courses and a supervisor directly in my area of interest and so I don't have much background in it and that's why I don't feel confident to directly apply for a PhD elsewhere like in Europe or Canada)<issue_comment>username_1: I think that any simple formula for conversion is naive. Larger grad schools in the US are pretty sophisticated in knowing the nuances of grading schemes in most places around the world. There are no simple formulas. In some places a 2.5 out of 4 would be an excellent GPA and in other places it would be terrible. But if your own university considers your GPA/performance to be low, then the places you apply to will likely recognize that after doing a somewhat more sophisticated translation.
Therefore if you think your GPA is low in your own place, then you should deal with it. One place, as you suggest, is in your SOP, but an even better place is to have a letter of recommendation (or several) speak to your strengths.
Grad schools are looking for evidence of success in your field and potential to grow and succeed. Your overall GPA is just one measure. Most grad schools will take a broader view, provided that you can find a way to provide that evidence.
But if you don't apply to a doctoral program, then you are guaranteed not to be admitted.
But you can, perhaps, talk to a friendly professor, preferably one who has studied abroad and get their advice.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Foreign grades are notoriously hard to interpret. I would strong discourage applying some random conversion factor. A much more useful metric for interpretating your GPA, is at what percentile of your student population (at your home instiution) this places you. This will allow the selection commitee to gauge were you stand with respect to your peers.
Your University's student adminstration should probably be able to provide you with this information.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Do not attempt to “convert” the grade.
One thing that can help is applying to schools where someone on the faculty is familiar with your country’s education system (not just what GPA means, but also what are the top schools, etc.). This could be because they were educated there or worked there, but also sometime people from the same region know the schools throughout the region as well. It’s common to get input from faculty who have that knowledge when evaluating files.
Similarly if you apply to schools that have recent grad students who went to your school they can compare you to those students.
Another thing is that hopefully your letter writers will put your grades into context.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> 1) How do grad schools in the US interpret international GPAs?
>
>
>
Exactly the same way we interpret domestic GPAs! We rely on our previous experience with applicants from your institution and our (Google-enhanced) knowledge of the content and rigor of your degree program. After all, there's no universal interpretation of grades even within a particular country.
And as others have already said, your GPA is only one component of your application, and not necessarily even the most important.
>
> 2) Would it be okay to address the reasons for my low GPA in SOP)personal statement briefly, like in a line or two? If so, how should I subtly go about doing it? I don't want to make an excuse and of course, don't want to blame others.
>
>
>
You're assuming your GPA is low enough to require explaining, but that assumption is based on a naive numerical conversion, which really isn't appropriate. Whether your grades are actually "low" is a good question for the people who will write you letters, who presumably have some experience with the type of PhD programs you're applying to. (Otherwise, how would they know what they're recommending you for?) In particular: Would your GPA prevent you from getting a PhD at your *current* institution?
However, I *do* think you need to explain your lack of formal research experience ("My university didn't offer courses and a supervisor directly in my area of interest"), both as justification for your current research record and as motivation for pursuing a PhD elsewhere.
>
> 3) Should I just give up on applying for PhDs then and focus more on the masters program, say in some Canadian universities?
>
>
>
**No!** Never throw away opportunities until you're sure you don't have them! If you know you want a PhD, and you believe you are qualified for a PhD, and enough people are willing to write you strong recommendation letters for PhD programs, then you should apply to PhD programs! But if you're still worried about your chances of admission, you should *also* apply to some masters programs as backup.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/08/20
| 400
| 1,723
|
<issue_start>username_0: Consider the four cadres: assistant professor, associate professor, professor and above.
Are there any universities or other institutes across world in academia that removes from office permanently, any person, possessing anyone of the four cadres because of her less or no publishing activity?
I am just asking about existence of organizations with such rules.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, of course. At least in the United States, assistant professors generally do not have "tenure", and they will be evaluated at the end of the tenure period (typically 6 years). If they do not pass this evaluation, their position is terminated and they lose their job. That happens all the time -- most departments at R1 universities will have a case in the last 20 years where this happened.
Once you have tenure, things become more complicated. There is the concept of a "post-tenure review" at most universities, which is triggered when a tenured professor is not productive for several years (as well as for other reasons, such as misconduct). It does happen that people lose their jobs if they do not pass such reviews, though admittedly this method is rarely applied: In most cases, the person in question just gets poor job evaluations, doesn't get a pay raise, is not further promoted, and gets assigned higher teaching and/or administrative duties than everyone else.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In the UK, places won't have "rules" as such about papers, but contracts do specify that people must meet "reasonable performance expectations". Universities can and do use this to get rid of even quite senior people (Full professors) who are not publishing/bringing in grants.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/20
| 529
| 2,268
|
<issue_start>username_0: So first let me introduce myself. I am planning to apply for masters in mathematics in this year. I am student of bsc. 3rd year of Mathematics. Although my initial interest was to study about algebraic number theory, to know about algebraic number theory deeply, i think one should know about commutative algebra also. So I started a readership on commutative algebra under a professor. But as the time passed I also stared to grow liking for commutative algebra. And now I want to explore more commutative algebra before diving deep into algebric number theory, so here comes the problem.
In the Sop while applying to foreign is it okay to write about having multiple subject of interest as one is prerequisite of other. Or should I specify one of them. I really want to study algaebric number theory but I also want to know more about commutative algebra.
Any help will be appreciated. Thanks in advance.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, of course. At least in the United States, assistant professors generally do not have "tenure", and they will be evaluated at the end of the tenure period (typically 6 years). If they do not pass this evaluation, their position is terminated and they lose their job. That happens all the time -- most departments at R1 universities will have a case in the last 20 years where this happened.
Once you have tenure, things become more complicated. There is the concept of a "post-tenure review" at most universities, which is triggered when a tenured professor is not productive for several years (as well as for other reasons, such as misconduct). It does happen that people lose their jobs if they do not pass such reviews, though admittedly this method is rarely applied: In most cases, the person in question just gets poor job evaluations, doesn't get a pay raise, is not further promoted, and gets assigned higher teaching and/or administrative duties than everyone else.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In the UK, places won't have "rules" as such about papers, but contracts do specify that people must meet "reasonable performance expectations". Universities can and do use this to get rid of even quite senior people (Full professors) who are not publishing/bringing in grants.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/21
| 587
| 2,454
|
<issue_start>username_0: My title is pretty self-explanatory, but I was wondering how it looks to mention specific researchers to work with in graduate school via my personal statement/s. I'm applying to PhD programs in neurobiology (neurological disease/therapeutics research).
I know the general consensus is "yes, mention researchers you would want to work with," but I'm worried that this may pigeonhole my application or limit it in certain ways. For example, if a new PI is not listed on the page but does research I like, and I don't list him, I lose that opportunity. Similarly, I'm worried that if I list, say 4 PIs to work with, and none of them care to have me work in their labs, I may get denied all together from the school's program (when I could have gotten accepted if I listed other PIs that may have wanted me).
Also to note, at each graduate school I'm applying to, I have made sure that there are at least 4 labs I would want to work in throughout completing my PhD thesis.
This is a minor nuance in my application's personal statements, but I would appreciate any insight. Thank you very much!<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, of course. At least in the United States, assistant professors generally do not have "tenure", and they will be evaluated at the end of the tenure period (typically 6 years). If they do not pass this evaluation, their position is terminated and they lose their job. That happens all the time -- most departments at R1 universities will have a case in the last 20 years where this happened.
Once you have tenure, things become more complicated. There is the concept of a "post-tenure review" at most universities, which is triggered when a tenured professor is not productive for several years (as well as for other reasons, such as misconduct). It does happen that people lose their jobs if they do not pass such reviews, though admittedly this method is rarely applied: In most cases, the person in question just gets poor job evaluations, doesn't get a pay raise, is not further promoted, and gets assigned higher teaching and/or administrative duties than everyone else.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In the UK, places won't have "rules" as such about papers, but contracts do specify that people must meet "reasonable performance expectations". Universities can and do use this to get rid of even quite senior people (Full professors) who are not publishing/bringing in grants.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/21
| 596
| 2,297
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm planning to do a Doctoral program in computer science. However, there are Two degrees:
1. Doctor of computer science (DCS Doctoral degree)
2. Doctor of philosophy in (PhD) computer science
I am a working professional and I'm planning to do one of these degrees mainly for career advancement. I'll be continuing in industries and not interested in the teaching profession. It is common to see industries specifying PhD as a mandatory requirement for some jobs; however, I have not seen the same thing for DCS degree.
Therefore, I would like to know which one of them is widely accepted by industries?
Thanks,
Raj<issue_comment>username_1: >
> [[a] DCS is not considered equivalent to a Ph.D](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_of_Computer_Science)
>
>
>
So, a job posting seeking a candidate with a PhD in computer science is only seeking (2), candidates with only (1) should not apply.
>
> will the company treat both the doctoral programs equally or does one have edge over the other?
>
>
>
PhD has the edge over DCS.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Let me give some perspective. At one time (prior to 2003), the NSF (in the US) considered a wide variety of doctorates to be [*Research Doctorates*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_doctoral_degrees_in_the_US) and therefore equivalent to the PhD. That changed in 2003 and many of those are no longer considered at the same level.
Moreover, for purposes of obtaining NSF grant funding, they are equivalent to the Masters degree. This is a big deal for an academic.
However in industry, each company will make its own rules for people who want to do industrial research. I know of at least one company where this would be a problem for someone holding a not-PhD doctorate. But for others it wouldn't matter.
Part of the subtlety here is that most of those other doctorates are "applied" doctorates rather than "theoretical" ones. For many companies, good application knowledge is actually preferred.
I'd advise you to look around a bit at companies you might want to work for, and even your current employer, for guidance. And for maximum flexibility, get a degree, like a PhD, that is considered to be a *Research Doctorate*. Follow the link above for more information.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/08/21
| 358
| 1,327
|
<issue_start>username_0: I contacted the EIC before submission to inquire if they would accept a paper of 15 pages and he advised that the paper topic and length is not appropriate. The paper actually falls into the scope of the journal and sent him another email message explaining that but did not reply. Shall I submit.<issue_comment>username_1: You get told that the paper topic and length is not appropriate, so have you made suitable changes to the paper?
If you have then submit.
If you have not then don't submit. If you ignore that and submit anyway, then expect it to be rejected.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> the [editor in chief] advised that *the paper topic and length is not appropriate* (emphasis added)
>
>
>
But, you contest,
>
> The paper actually falls into the scope of the journal
>
>
>
I believe you are wrong: The editor in chief is in a better position to judge whether your paper is in scope. You should consider their decision final.
>
> [I] sent him another email message explaining that [his decision was wrong] but did [he] not reply.
>
>
>
The editor in chief has made their position clear, I am not surprised they did not respond.
>
> Shall I submit.
>
>
>
No, **you shouldn't submit**, you've been advised that **your paper is not in scope**.
Upvotes: 4
|
2019/08/21
| 4,547
| 19,061
|
<issue_start>username_0: A student has failed a course I just taught. Grades were announced yesterday. This student sent me a very long heartbreaking email about how this means she will be kicked out of her program, how she tried very hard, and how she wants me to reconsider her final grade.
I'm relatively new at being a university instructor; this isn't the first course I've taught at a university, nor is it the first time I've had a student fail a course. But this is the first time I've had a student beg and plead with me, and I'm not sure how to respond.
I genuinely feel bad for her, as she tried hard and came frequently to my office hours, but I ultimately believe that she did not demonstrate on the final exam that she had a good enough handle on the course material to pass.
What should I say to politely tell her that she will still fail, without sounding insensitive?
**Edit**: Some more relevant information, since some have asked. The course in question is a calculus course for an Engineering program. The student has previously failed and retaken courses, but she is not permitted to have any more failing grades if she wants to remain in the Engineering program. Failing this course is essentially her last `strike'. She will still be allowed to study at the university, but in a different program.
**Edit 2**: Thanks for all the responses. I wasn't looking for moral justification for failing her or looking for alternative solutions to the situation. I was simply looking for advice on how to respond in a professional manner. And I certainly got that advice from some of the responses.
In the end, I essentially responded with a concise email stating essentially that, while I sympathize with her situation, there was nothing I could do in good conscience to modify her grade at this time, and that I did not believe she demonstrated sufficient mastery of the material to warrant a grade of 50% on the exam. Then I closed with "I wish you the best of luck in your future studies. Sincerely, [me]"
It still doesn't make me feel any better about failing her. :(
(I also will add that this my first time teaching this particular course, and I have certainly learned *my own* lessons for next time. In particular regarding common misconceptions in the material and what to focus on in the lectures. This will hopefully mitigate the chance of a future student failing in a similar way.)
**Edit 3**: A few comments have suggested that I might reconsider the student's exam grade. To be clear, this student had about a 50% average in the course going into the final and would have therefore needed at least a 50% on the final exam to pass the course. However, the student only received about 35% on the final (while the average for the class on the final was 73%). I could not, in good conscience, bump the score so significantly to warrant giving out a passing grade in this case.
It was clear to me that the student had failed. I was only asking for advice on how to respond to her request that I pass her!<issue_comment>username_1: Actually you can state it pretty much as you have here. You are sorry but her failure here doesn't indicate success in the future in this program.
Alternatively you could re-analyze your own grading procedures, possibly just for the future. Perhaps you are putting too much emphasis on the final exam and making it harder/impossible for students to recover from some common errors.
But that would be for future cases.
In this specific case you could, fairly, see if she can demonstrate the knowledge that you feel the exam indicates is lacking. There are a lot of ways to do that. If she has the knowledge but your exam indicates a false negative you can correct it with a bit of work.
And note that this is not being unfair to the other students. But her begging alone is not sufficient reason to change the grade.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I think that you explained the situation very clearly and sensitively in your third paragraph, and that you should send a message to the student along the same lines. All you'd really have to say is that while you of course sympathize with the student, her performance on the final exam makes clear that she did not gain sufficient mastery of the course material to pass the class.
I'll add that I think your message to the student should be clear and concise. The longer your response to the student the more likely it is that you'll wind up in a long, drawn out exchange that stresses both of you out while benefiting no one.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Forget the "tea and sympathy chat," which doesn't do anything to change the situation. What she needs now is some straighforward practical advice about what to do next.
Set out the options she has *to move forward* from where she now is, and then stop writing. That might be a retake, or a change of course, or even facing up to the fact that not everybody is capable of getting a degree-level qualification - there is no sense creating false hopes by advising her to continue to attempting the impossible, if that really is the case.
If she is insistent about re-grading, you could point out that if you change the criteria *for everyone* on the course, the end result might not make much difference.
It seems like she had sensible study habits, put in a sensible amount of effort, but still lagged a long way behind the average. You can't (and shouldn't) fix that by tinkering with the assessment criteria. It can be a hard lesson that in real life, you don't get prizes for attempting something and failing, but everybody has to learn it eventually, one way or another.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: **A couple arguments in opposition to reconsidering the grade:**
---
* **Allowing students to pass who did not demonstrate the knowledge required is not only not ethical** (or at least begs for accusations of favoritism - or worse accusations, in a disconcertingly large number of instances I've heard about)**, it could be argued that it is a reflection of your own failure as a professor to let students pass without preparing them well enough to pass legitimately**. Let me explain what I mean by that:
I'm not saying that failing a student means that you're a failure. However, as a professor, it's part of the job that *students who do not perform to the passing standard cannot be given a pass in the class*. As professor of the class, you are a gatekeeper. It is an inherent quality of your job to turn away those who cannot satisfy the requirements to pass, no matter what. (In college/university, this is true. In lower education, say, high school or more likely younger, perhaps leniency might be better, but collegiate instruction does not lend itself to this type of rule-bending.)
* On principle, I would think that the answer should absolutely be a polite refusal to reconsider. Plus, if you allow it once, will you be able to refuse other requests from other students? **Reconsidering the grade would, in my opinion, set a very dangerous precedent.**
I hope that this post doesn't come across as accusatory or rude. I simply mean to provide an argument that you could use, if nothing else to appease your conscience.
Also, and this is just what I would do, I would not talk to that student about the refusal unless I was approached. It sounds cowardly, and it sure feels cowardly, but I'd rather not provoke any extreme emotional reactions if I can help it. Maybe I'm just too introverted, but that's how I'd do it.
Of course, I'd continue to **make myself as available to talk about it** as I was before, but imagine: if you were the letter-writing student, and had just been given the heartbreaking news by your professor, and out of the blue, that professor brings up the news, forcing you to talk about it and "relive" the experience and pain. As that student, and especially because I might be on a narrow emotional precipice, I could expect myself to cry, at the very least. As the professor, I would not be surprised if the student maybe brings the issue up, then is refused, then never mentions it again. But of course, I would prepare myself for that conversation, because some students do prefer to discuss this kind of thing instead of avoid it.
I guess what I'm saying is to be ready for the conversation, but I wouldn't initiate it.
---
**Long story short, don't "reconsider" the grade.** (Of course, you can check to make sure you didn't make a mistake somewhere, but don't change the grade just because of the letter.) **It's not only a dangerous pattern to fall into, it's just something that has to be refused as a professor.** Not everyone will pass the class, and some who fail may really have "worked hard enough to deserve it". But tough decisions must be made, and there is no justifying awarding grades on subjective matters like effort at any university.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I‘ve had to write similar emails in the past. Here is a possible way I might approach writing an email in the situation you described:
>
> Dear [name of student],
>
>
> I sympathize with your situation, but please understand that I gave you the grade you earned in the class, nothing more or less - ultimately you did not demonstrate the level of mastery of the material that merits a passing grade. You should also know that I am not allowed to change your grade because of irrelevant factors related to your standing in your program or similar things. Even if it were allowed, I could not make such a decision in good conscience, as it would be a betrayal of the trust my university puts in me to impartially evaluate students’ performance in the class, and would be extremely unfair to other students who also worked hard and may each feel just as deserving as you to have their own special circumstances taken into account in assigning their grades.
>
>
> I wish you the best of luck in your future studies.
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
> [your name]
>
>
>
As for “sounding insensitive”, keep in mind that there’s no language you could use that would make the student happy with your decision. It’s also possible that anything you can say will sound insensitive and cruel to her - that’s just human nature. Even telling her that you know she worked hard could have a similar effect and cause the student to just continue arguing and pleading with you. So I agree with the other answers saying the email should be concise: keep it short and professional, don’t try to offer personal or psychological advice, and offer your sympathy but in a way that doesn’t imply even a remote chance that you can be persuaded to change your mind.
**Edit:** thanks to everyone for their feedback. The comments, and seeing which ones got upvoted, are very helpful, and suggest my email may benefit from a bit of tweaking.
As a final thought, one takeaway I have from this whole discussion is that being told you failed a class for unsatisfactory performance and that the decision is final must surely be a very painful thing to hear (particularly in high-stakes circumstances such as those OP’s student is in), no matter how the message is delivered. One can try to be empathetic and sugarcoat or soften the truth, but the truth will still hurt.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: Most universities have a standard process which allows retaking exams a bit later (maybe at the end of the summer) or repeating the year. The main reason for those is to cover students who have issues in their lives which have interfered with that year's study or with the exams. Perhaps they've been ill. Perhaps there's been a bereavement. Perhaps a significant relationship has broken down badly.
Or perhaps they've just had an unrepresentatively bad day on the exam day.
So you should be referring her to the university's own procedures for this. Point her to the right person, and point her to the relevant documents online. And then it's up to her.
It's also important to point out that you're just covering one module of her course. Unless your module is a prerequisite for continuing, her final grade will be an average over all modules, so it isn't something which is as clearly on your shoulders. You might want to tell her that too.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: The answers by @BenLinowitz and others are excellent. Again, having had a one-on-one discussion, any email answers now need to be short and somewhat curt.
To expand on that: Anything you say can and will be used against you. In these cases, I'm actually a bit more verbose than my department office recommends (they suggest "All grades are final", end-of-message). But I do keep in mind that whatever I write is prone to be taken to an advisor or a dean and used as fodder to get them to overturn the grade somehow.
So I actually write those types of emails considering a possibly hostile administrator as part of the intended audience. To be maximally clear and transparent, I usually document the quantified ways in which the student was failing in the email (exact test scores, final exam, weighted total, etc.). For example, the fact you said this student was earning a 50% average pre-final, and then 35% on the final exam, should obviously end almost any question about whether the student should be retained in the program or not, and so I would include it in writing. This may be a bit sharp for the student -- but at this point your goal needs to be terminating the conversation.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: Do not forget that you only happened to be the last one in a chain of instructors by accident. If she had taken her courses in a different order, you wouldn't have thought twice about failing her, and instead some *other* instructor would now stand before the same dilemma.
She is not being kicked out of the program for failing *your* course, she is being kicked out of the program for failing *too many* courses.
Would you have failed her with the same performance if she had taken the course last year?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: At my own undergraduate university, it is considered academic dishonesty to tell a professor that the grade they assign might hurt the student [eg "if I fail this class, I will get kicked out of the program / lose my scholarship / etc"]:
[ASU Student Policy Part C: Student Responsibility (section 2.k.):](https://provost.asu.edu/academic-integrity/policy)
>
> Attempting to influence or change any Academic Evaluation, or academic record for reasons having no relevance to academic achievement.
>
>
>
The act of the student telling the professor what your student has said is sufficient for the student to receive a grade of `XE`, "Failure due to academic dishonesty."
If your institution has a similar policy, you might choose to inform her of it and that she will receive the grade she has earned and that she shouldn't try this approach again or she might suffer worse consequences.
It's never easy to tell a student they have failed, especially when they are begging, but you will be doing her a big favor by telling her you haven't turned her in for cheating, on top of it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: Every professor I had followed the "if I make an exception for you, then everyone will expect preferential treatment as well" policy. So, they didn't provide preferential treatment.
The syllabus should state what kind of preferential treatment is allowed, eg: a student that plays on a team may be allowed to take make-up exams, a student that misses a critical exam due to illness or such may be allowed to make it up in a fashion professor deems fit.
If this student failed.. they failed.
If they were under some kind of hardship during the semester, then they should have addressed it with you.. found some way to get extra credit or what-not.
I had a lot of major stuff going down in my grad semesters, from a parent ending up in the hospital to me ending up in the hospital needing surgery. I didn't dump my problems on the professor and go "woe is me, please curve my grade b/c I'm special!" The parent in the hospital issue made me have to organize and plan things in order to care for them. Me being in the hospital caused me to drop all my classes for the semester (the recovery time was putting me behind, and that just added stress to recovery).
Part of being in college is learning how to proactively deal with issues instead of just showing up to the professor at the end of the semester going "pity me and let me pass."
If she was having problems in the class, she could have dropped it and retaken it. There's just things she could have done proactively instead of dumping her situation in your lap at the last minute.
As a professor, you have an obligation to the other students to ensure people that don't make the grade don't pass. If you magically just pass this person, then you're devaluing everyone else's work and potentially their degrees. You're letting someone that didn't make the cut move on, when everyone else had to work hard for it and make the grade.
In the grad program I was in, some folks got a strange idea that professors would auto-pass everyone with at least a "C" even if they didn't do any work. So, it came as a shock to some students when they didn't pass.. and had to go back home since they were here on student visas.
Another aspect is she could be the type of person that's used to manipulating people. She may have done this to other professors. This may be her modus operandi in college. Don't do the work, don't make the grade, but then email prof's and ask for a pity party to get a passing grade.
Bottomline, if she didn't make the grade, she didn't make the grade. Tell her to go take it up with her advisor or academic counsellor so they can tell her what her options are.
You are a noise gate. Your job is to filter out the wheat from the chafe. You did your job. She needs to move on and figure out what she can do, and the university has resources for her to do that. But, she's trying to get something out of you that she didn't earn..and thus trying to manipulate her way past the filtering process.
If you pity her and give her a pass, word will get around and you'll have more students expecting the same going forward.
So, make a stand now.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_11: I did this once. She student ultimately got kicked out and went back to China. I just sent her a two sentence email to her response asking for mercy. This was in April. But for the **entire summer** she sent me emails asking to change her grade. She might have sent me 15 emails for that summer.
I think you need to change your psychology: I don't feel bad for her. It's 100% her fault for not studying enough. Why should I help her? And if she is mentally not capable of handling the work, do I want her in the real-world screwing up again? **No. I feel I did the right thing. She needs to take studying seriously or change programs -- simple as that.**
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/21
| 582
| 2,434
|
<issue_start>username_0: I would like to continue with my academic path but, the last year, I've been conducting mainly research activity with no teaching assignments. I would like to build up my portfolio to gain some teaching experience eventually thinking for a Lecturer/Assistant Professor position but, on the other hand, I would not like to hamper my outward mobility and compromise my research output. What would you suggest?<issue_comment>username_1: This would depend on your overall goals. If you want a primarily research path for the long term, don't do anything that takes you away from research. It is much easier, I think, to move to teaching from a research track, if you so choose, than to go the other way.
The more research oriented the institution is (R1, R2) the more important it is to have a solid research portfolio.
But if you really want to move to a primarily teaching institution, of which there are many excellent ones, then some teaching experience, even as an advanced TA, would be the way to move forward.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: In part to forcefully disagree with @username_1's remark that it's generally easier to move from research to teaching roles... my own and others' PhD students from my "R1" university in math in the U.S. have encountered disbelief about their sincere interest in teaching at an undergrad institution... Indeed, given the way computerized job applications often work (mathjobs.org), it's nearly effortless to apply to any place listed on mathjobs.org. In particular, making such an application is absolutely not a proof of sincere interest, beyond not wanting to be unemployed.
I suspect significantly for that reason, some (I don't know what fraction...) of non-research-fixated math depts in the U.S. simply do not list themselves in mathjobs.org, so that "the bar" to apply to them is set higher than clicking boxes.
So far as I can tell, "sincerity" (or its appearance, ack, ...) plays a significant role. I see this, and am not entirely opposed to it, in graduate admissions, postdoc applications, and tenure-track applications. So, if one intends to "game" the system (well, why not?) one needs to do so well enough to fool a certain number of people.
Depending on your personality, it might be less stressful to just follow the direction you want, rather than having your day-to-day life determined by some dubious long-term strategy.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/21
| 1,774
| 6,831
|
<issue_start>username_0: Background
==========
In a [question](https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/43871/why-is-neither-methane-nor-fracking-mentioned-in-the-green-new-deal) about the [Green New Deal](https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-resolution/109/text), I posted a comment to [an answer](https://politics.stackexchange.com/a/43891/19306) that asserted the Green New Deal was not based in any science:
>
> It's not a surprise that such a report [sic: read resolution] is lacking in science.
>
>
>
In context, his statement is referring to the Green New Deal itself, not the IPCC Special Report. In my comment, I mention that the resolution cites the [IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 ºC](https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/). The fact that that the Green New Deal does cite the IPCC report means that it is not utterly lacking in science (i.e. as opposed to citing nothing). While United States legislation [does not have requirements for rigor](https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/43748/does-each-different-kind-of-congressional-act-require-a-different-level-of-rigor), my question is about traits pertaining specifically to the special report.
With regard to the IPCC Special Report, I mention its page length:
>
> It does include science. The whole resolution is premised on the Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5C which is over 600 pages in full length. I was just curious about an omission of a detail.
>
>
>
My implicit assumption was that the longer the length of a peer reviewed IPCC report the higher its credibility. I am not referring to the Green New Deal; I know [united states resolutions do not have any research standard](https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/43748/does-each-different-kind-of-congressional-act-require-a-different-level-of-rigor).
That said, given the following comment, I am now questioning the assumption of length in relation to credibility:
>
> Why is the length of that report relevant?
>
>
>
This comment is what lead me to ask...
Question
========
Does the length of a peer reviewed scientific report, in this case the IPCC Special Report, imply in any way that it is more credible or thorough in its results?<issue_comment>username_1: This depends on the field. In mathematics, a significant paper can be short or long, as can a lesser paper.
In the sciences, it would depend on how much needs to be said about methodology. A significant paper could, in theory, be written without saying much about methodology as long as it is fairly standard. But it would get longer if the methodology is novel and needs significant exposition.
I'd say, therefore, that in general, length is a poor indicator of quality. It is *what is said*, not how many words it takes to say it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Very hard to say in general. A 600-page report could be 600 pages of garbage. Obviously a super-*short* report couldn't be very thorough, or contain very much detail/depth.
If someone said "I have here a 600-page scientific report: is it any good?" I would have no way to know.
If you want to make a claim for the credibility of IPCC reports specifically, I would quote the [Union of Concerned Scientists](https://www.ucsusa.org/global-warming/science-and-impacts/science/ipcc-backgrounder.html):
>
> The IPCC’s technical reports derive their credibility principally from an extensive, transparent, and iterative peer review process that, as mentioned above, is considered far more exhaustive than that associated with a single peer-reviewed publication in a scientific journal. This is due to the number of reviewers, the breadth of their disciplinary backgrounds and scientific perspectives, and the inclusion of independent “review editors” who certify that all comments have been fairly considered and appropriately resolved by the authors.
>
>
>
Recursively, you would then have to support the credibility of UCS, which [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_of_Concerned_Scientists) (which attempts to be neutral) calls a "nonprofit science advocacy organization".
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: <NAME>'s PhD dissertation was only 28 pages long. It earned him a Nobel prize in Economic Sciences. This at least proves that a report does not need to be long to be considered extremely good.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> Does the length of a peer reviewed scientific report imply in any way that it is more credible or thorough in its results?
>
>
>
**No.**
There may be a (relatively small) correlation between length and trustworthiness, but there are many very short but important scientific reports and *a whole lot* of very long useless ones. A bad scientific experiment does not become better if you explain every little detail about it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: No.
In physics, traditionally the best science is reported in a paper that is about four pages long. Other papers are nearly always longer. So I would say that in physics credibility has a *negative* correlation with length, but that nobody should use length to predict credibility.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: >
> Does the length of a peer reviewed scientific report, in this case the IPCC Special Report, imply in any way that it is more credible or thorough in its results?
>
>
>
In regards to *thorough*, certainly.
I work at the national labs. On some projects, part of our job is trying to take years of research and boil everything down to one page (!!!) that can be given to policy makers to help inform their decisions. We do our best to cram the most important take-away messages into that one page, but clearly there will some bits of information lost in the process.
Note that this is particularly relevant to the current question in hand; the IPCC reports are not about producing original research, but rather assessing research and informing policy makers:
>
> The IPCC developed from an international scientific body, the Advisory Group on Greenhouse Gases set up in 1985 by the International Council of Scientific Unions, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) to provide recommendations based on current research.[...] The IPCC does not conduct its own original research. It produces comprehensive assessments, reports on special topics, and methodologies [...] The IPCC was tasked with reviewing peer-reviewed scientific literature and other relevant publications to provide information on the state of knowledge about climate change.
>
>
>
-[Wikipedia article on IPCC](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergovernmental_Panel_on_Climate_Change)
Clearly, a report that is 600 pages has more freedom to include details than a one page report.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/22
| 852
| 3,610
|
<issue_start>username_0: If you write a thesis, is it legal to ask somebody if things you did are correct in the thesis? When it's my own work and this person says, everything correct, there shouldn't be any problem, right? When does plagiarism start?<issue_comment>username_1: From a publication point of view:
In general, this is nothing else than peer review and totally fine.
As long as the other person only tells you "all good", or "this here doesn't look good, maybe rewrite it so that X is more clear", that is no problem at all. If the other person writes the whole new version for you, that is obviously not good. Either way, this wouldn't be plagiarism in this case. Plagiarism means copying from a different paper/book/source without properly mentioning it. What this would be is someone else writing (part of) your publication without getting mentioned. That is at least as bad as plagiarism, but it is something else.
Depending on the level of help you got, consider mentioning the other person in the acknowledgements.
From a university point of view:
A thesis isn't completely the same as a paper, so here, other rules might apply. At some universities, you have to sign that you didn't use any sources or help apart from the ones clearly mentioned and cited. Thus, rules might be stricter here. While I would not worry about, say, a math major getting feedback on their English grammar by someone who has no idea about math, as soon as the one reviewing your work is from the same field and/or also gives feedback regarding content, this is something that should be cleared with your advisor first.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Certainly where we are it would be seen as very poor practice for your supervisor not to have read and commented on your thesis, and in certain circumstances might be considered negligence on the part of the supervisor.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: My answer will complement that of user username_1, but partly counter it. Yes, you need to follow the stated rules of your university. But ....
In most larger universities, students get a lot of help on their theses, not just from their advisor, and not just on their writing style. In both of the graduate (R1) institutions at which I studied I was part of a (mathematics) research group in which ideas were freely shared. The groups held weekly seminars for discussion and sharing. We would make suggestions to one another and get advice from the faculty members of the group. No one ever suggested that I wasn't sole author of my dissertation or the paper that resulted from it. My advisor was acknowledged, of course.
So, I doubt that the sort of "help" you got would be considered wrong, though the formal rules apply. You didn't ask for, or get, corrections to your work if your statements are accurate.
I think such research seminars are a marvelous thing. The insights that led to my dissertation were mine, though I suspect that my advisor had them in parallel also. The "help" from the seminar didn't lessen the quality or value of the research experience. In fact, it is how real researchers in the real world actually work. It would be foolish to lock yourself up in an office until you produce a paper with no outside consultation. Research activity would stop.
And plagiarism is only using someone else's work without attribution. I don't see it as having any bearing here. And, as I said in a comment, neither is it a legal issue.
Note, for the record, that my Erdős Number is 2. We value collaboration in mathematics and related fields.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/08/22
| 640
| 2,882
|
<issue_start>username_0: I would like to ask for advice in this particular situation of mine:
I am a Mexican medical doctor, and I am applying for a Master Degree in Biomedical Engineering at a german university. The program offers bridging subjects for students from non-engineering students in the first semester, however, when I e-mailed them about more in-depth information to prepare a more robust application, they told me that mathematics, physics and chemistry subjects are compulsory requisites for this program.
At medical school, I took chemistry and statistics, which may suffice the chemistry and maybe maths with a little bit of imagination, but the physics one eludes me. They specifically required for it to be taught at university so I am struggling a little bit.
As a solution I have tough I may ask for a physics course at my home institution and maybe they will allow me to take it and it may be shown in my transcript (even though I have already finished my career). I don't even know if it is possible to this yet.
I have studied maths and computer science on my own and I have held a chief developer position at a software company for two years now, however, no university is backing up my knowledge on math nor computer science. This at no point does anything for the physics requirement though.
Can anybody offer advice on how could I overcome this complication?<issue_comment>username_1: Ask the institution whether you can enter using prior recognition of your work history? However, I do not think chief developer uses much physics though but they may have a policy about work recognition.
Definitely worthwhile asking the institution whether there is a bridging course or whether you are able to take subjects with the German institution prior to formal entry into the course to make up the difference? You will probably need to pay for the subjects upfront.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: As a faculty member of a German university that also offers a Biomedical Engineering program I can confirm that the admission rules can be quite strict.
However, in almost every study regulation is a clause that the program's examination board (*Prüfungsausschuss*) can overrule any formal requirement.
The keyword here is "equivalence". E.g., being a software developer can compensate missing software classes, etc. Additional certificates from courses at your home university (as you suggest), even if you take them outside a regular program, can help as well.
So my advice is to bypass the administration and contact directly the head of the program's examination board, or (if such person exists at your target university) the head of the study program (*Studiengangsverantwortlicher*, sometimes, s/he is the same as the study dean of the program, but not always) and ask what would be needed to prove equivalence.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2019/08/22
| 1,120
| 4,944
|
<issue_start>username_0: I got kicked out from graduate school in the past. The reason was that I had very poor GPA, and I failed to meet the academic criteria (some administrative regulations, nothing personal like disciplinary action or anything). Actually I left before I got technically kicked out, but you get the idea.
So I do not know how to include this on my CV, because I believe it is too long a time frame to ignore - almost 2 years.
After getting kicked out, I managed to get into another program (THANK GOD), and I am getting back on my feet again. Obviously I need a CV, and I need some help with that.
In addition, I also had a decent scholarship there. Is it reasonable if I omit the university on "Education" section but include my scholarship in "Awards" section?
I have "Education" and "Experience" sections on my resume.
**Option 1:** Including it on the "Education" section as "Graduate student", and including it on "Experience" as "Research Assistant"
**Option 2:** Omitting it on "Education", and only including it on "Experience" as "Research Assistant".
**Option 3:** Your suggestions?<issue_comment>username_1: I would only mention it as part of your work experience. The *Education* header in a CV is usually where people put their finished and ongoing studies. Since you have not, and will not ever, actually graduate from your previous program it is essentially just a work experience now.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Our CV is a way to guide the interview/selection procedure to a path were we feel comfortable and gives us the high ground during the negotiation. You should include anything that would make you feel comfortable if the discussion is drawn towards it during the encounter with the company/institution representative.
If you feel that the time you spent there changed you as a professional and added something to your arsenal then you should definitely include it in the corresponding section but be ready for questions. The way you prepare yourself for those questions and the attitude you show when those questions are brought up can definitely turn the tide to your favor.
So, instead of hiding it try to make the best out of it!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I would include it, and if it gets brought up during an interview I would be honest but obviously try to paint it in a nicer light.
If the job does end up hiring you and does a background check similar to the one my job does (software company) they will find it and rescind the offer. I couldn't believe the things they went through the effort of finding, I had to explain away a job I held for two months in highschool that I didn't disclose (they asked for entire 10 year work history, I omitted that one but included jobs before and after.) They also questioned me about my previous living history, as they found my name and SSN tied to a comcast account at a friends house that I put in my name so her kid could have internet for school (she owed comcast a lot of money) so I had to explain that away as well. They also contacted my college to verify education history (I said I graduated) but somehow they only verified I received a certificate from the university and not an actual degree (I completed a certificate program post graduation, so I had both a degree and certification from there.) so I had to send HR proof of my degree prior to beginning employment.
Since starting here I have heard of two individuals failing their background checks due to not disclosing information. Better honest and asking for forgiveness than dishonest and subsequently asking for forgiveness.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: It's pretty common for an applicant to have an otherwise good record but a period where their academic performance was unimpressive. If they were impressive afterwards, I read such an application as "they figured their stuff out". Whether they changed institutions or not is less relevant to me.
I would simply list your former graduate program under "Education" with accurate years (and certainly list your award as well). If you choose to say something honest about that circumstance in your application, frame it however you want (but I do recommend saying that you left the program, rather than were kicked out, because it's accurate and does avoid a red flag phrase). If you choose not to say anything further about it, that's a reasonable choice too (although I suppose many opportunities would want your transcripts from there)—just know what you'll say if asked about it.
Never never lie, of course, and never even write something that's technically true but would be considered as clearly misleading by someone who knew all the facts. But you can choose how to present the truth in a way that reflects best on you—indeed, that's more or less the whole point of a CV or application. And as I said above, it's really not that big a deal to a random CV-reader.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/08/22
| 2,357
| 9,268
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a final year PhD in mechanical engineering. I did average/below average in my core courses, during my undergraduate, and PhD coursework. My research area involves using finite element and volume methods to model material and fluid flow. I had got B-'s and C's in my mathematics, mechanics, numerical methods courses during my undergrad and grad school. I love the subjects, but I am not good at them. I decided to go for PhD in them because the research area fascinated me.
I really enjoyed working on my research during my PhD and was quite productive. My research was not mathematically intensive and focused more on developing optimization procedures while making use of existing numerical tools. My advisor, my committee think I did a fair job on the research projects I worked on.
However, since my goal eventually is to be in academia, I feel that my poor academic performance is an indicator of not pursuing a career in university academic environment. I am confident that I can do good independent research. And I like teaching, though, I did not get any opportunity to teach the core courses during my phd. I am worried that considering my poor background, I will fail to teach a core course when given the opportunity to do so.
Is it justified for me to think about a future in academia in a university setting?<issue_comment>username_1: There are a lot of reasons for struggling though coursework and you don't really give enough information to make any clear recommendation. But I can give perspective at least.
One problem you have is that you haven't much experience teaching, so it is hard to guess how you would do at it. But some people who struggle with a course can teach it well and others who breezed though it can't. The reason for that is that the "struggler" recognizes (perhaps) the hard parts and can help others past them, while the "breezer" just doesn't understand why others don't just find it as easy as s/he did. Some people do some things naturally and without effort and find it hard to focus on the parts that others don't get and provide the insight to get past the problems.
Many new teachers holding PhDs don't understand that the students in their classes are *not like themselves*. Only a tiny fraction of their students will have the same motivation and the same *sort* of motivation that they do.
A second, orthogonal, idea is that your learning doesn't end when your schooling does. You say you "aren't good" at some subjects. Well that isn't necessarily a permanent condition. Moreover, your standards may be so high that you find it difficult to measure up to them yourself. So your *not good* may be someone else's *good enough*.
Teaching, like research, is hard work. It depends on understanding the students as much as understanding the "material". Your students can learn if you give them meaningful work to spark their interest and build their skill.
So, while I can't provide an answer, I suggest that you don't give up easily and think deeply about the implications of your choices. Independent research is very difficult. Having the collaboration environment provided by a university (or industrial lab) is a great help.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It is important that you enjoy researching, this would be a big plus since you are considering academia. As you know academia is very competitive especially for tenure and tenure-track positions. However, coursework performance is not a good predictor for research and academia, so don't feel discouraged. In [2016 an informal survey of Royal Society fellows](https://thebiologist.rsb.org.uk/biologist-opinion/159-biologist/opinion/1450-degreegrades), a UK organisation of distinguished scientists, 300 fellows were surveyed
>
> 18% achieved third class honours or worse, and even more had 'ordinary' degrees (the definition of which has changed over time, but generally means a pass without honours), closer to half (54%); 10% of these distinguished scientists never did degrees, and almost a third (30%) have a second, 2:2 or lower
>
>
>
You said you were productive, I hope this means publications!
Having a high number of high quality publications in your field is important to be academically competitive. [Laurence et al (2013)](https://bioone.org/journals/BioScience/volume-63/issue-10/bio.2013.63.10.9/Predicting-Publication-Success-for-Biologists/10.1525/bio.2013.63.10.9.short?tab=ArticleLink) analysed 182 academics in the biological and environmental sciences field (zoology, botany, ecology, evolution, genetics, environmental science and policy). They argued that "employment opportunities, grant success, and professional accolades are often tied intimately to one's publication prowess". In their [The Conversation article](http://theconversation.com/predicting-who-will-publish-or-perish-as-career-academics-18473) they elaborate that a high number of publications were associated with a prolific publication success, more important than institution ranking with minor advantages if you are male and a native English speaker.
In a [2013 blog analysis](http://www.calnewport.com/blog/2013/02/17/the-single-number-that-best-predicts-professor-tenure-a-case-study-in-quantitative-career-planning/), Cal Newport analysed pairs of PhD students who graduated at the same under well-known professors in his area of theoretical computer science for 4 years post PhD graduation. He found that "successful professors" published 25 conference papers on average during their first four years with non-successful professors on average had 10 publications. Successful professors their top 5 papers had over 1000 references, with non-successful professors, the number was closer to 60.
Teaching is also an important factor to consider as username_1 mentioned. In many vocational fields, academia is less attractive so your PhD will put you at a big advantage. So look wide and look far, there will usually always be a position around somewhere if you are willing to move.
**References:**
<NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., & <NAME>. (2013). [Predicting Publication Success for Biologists.](https://academic-oup-com.elibrary.jcu.edu.au/bioscience/article/63/10/817/238191) BioScience, 63(10), 817–823. <https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2013.63.10.9>
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I'm surprised the earlier answers didn't emphasize that the PhD is a research degree as opposed to a coursework degree. When applying for academic jobs that require a PhD (which for mechanical engineering I suspect will start with postdoc positions), you will be judged primarily on your research track record---publications, presentations, patents, etc. This, not transcripts, will indicate whether you are "good at" the work of a PhD scholar (with scare quotes to remind that being "good at" something is an acquired skill rather than an immutable quality).
For roles that involve teaching, you will also be asked to demonstrate at least some *potential* for teaching ability, though the more *evidence* you can provide the better. Even for teaching-focused positions, this will be required *in addition to* (not instead of) research excellence. If this is a direction you want to go, you can voluntarily complete training in evidence-based STEM teaching, for example through [MOOCs offered by the Center for the Integration of Research, Teaching and Learning](https://www.cirtl.net/courses). If your PhD (or future postdoc) funding permits, you can also enquire about teaching an evening course as an adjunct at a local university or community college. (This suggestion comes from chapter 7 of [*The Professor Is In*](https://www.librarything.com/work/15952426/) by <NAME>.)
While there may be some variation with field and country (from your mention of letter grades for "PhD coursework", I suspect you're in North America), at least in STEM disciplines transcripts will typically not be requested or given much weight in post-PhD job searches. To give some anecdotal evidence, I did not have to provide transcripts for any of my three postdoc positions or one tenure-track job in theoretical physics. When I was in grad school I had (at least) one professor who graded his postgrad courses on an A/Fail system, on the grounds that no employer should ever look at grad-school transcripts.
TLDR: You can still have a successful academic career despite poor performance in courses, so you should not give up solely for that reason.
Of course, a successful academic career is rarely easy in any case. I strongly suggest you discuss with your advisor/mentors what positions would be good (and realistic) for you to apply for as you complete your PhD. (I also suggest you do this soon, since at least in my field, postdoc application season for final-year PhD students has already begun...) They know your field and your track record, and can therefore make much more specific recommendations. Providing this sort of advice (and reference letters to go along with it) is part of your advisor's job, and advisors & programs also benefit from placing graduates in good positions. (Among other things they are able to highlight this success in future funding applications.)
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/22
| 1,374
| 6,175
|
<issue_start>username_0: I understand reviewing literature is an important part of completing the application. Do most applicants develop a plan independently solely based off of the articles they read or do faculty advisors usually give students a specific question to write about? How feasible are the research plans written by say a first year grad student who is new to their field? Is the intent of this part of the application just to demonstrate that the applicant is familiar with their field and can formulate a research plan or is it meant to be an actual plan of action for their grad student career.
The context of my question is I am considering whether to apply to the nsf fellowship this year or next year. I would say I have done enough literature review to identify holes in the literature that I could possibly propose a research plan for, but I am not sure if it would be something I would actually study or not because there are many things up in the air in my lab related to available facilities/research direction, etc.<issue_comment>username_1: There are a wide variety of solutions for this, but, mainly, the advisor/PI is a good source for advice and even for a specific problem.
Some people come up with their own ideas independent of an advisor, though I think that this isn't the most common path. But at least, if you are able to come up with what you think is a plan, then your advisor should be able to give you good advice about its potential and any caveats that there might be.
A new researcher will generally (not always) find it difficult to measure the potential outcome of a research plan. Some ideas are too big to study as a student as the field isn't "ripe" for their solution and it would be unlikely to result in success. Others are too small to be worth studying as the results might be seen as trivial. Ideally you want a "just right" sort of problem and the advisor may be a better judge of that at the beginning than the student is capable of. So, get advice.
My own study was instructive. I worked under a really great mathematician on three problems. One of them was so easy that I could generate a new theorem and its proof every day or so. Kind of fun, but lacking substance. Another was so hard that I couldn't see any crack in the problem that might be exploited into a solution. The third problem was "just right": hard and significant, but do-able. It resulted in a really great dissertation, but I couldn't have predicted that at the beginning of the exploration.
IMO, a literature review probably isn't enough, though you indicate you have found some holes that might be filled. Write up a couple of those and ask your advisor what s/he thinks about them as potential problems. Advice is good. Forgoing it is just thrashing in the dark.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Having reviewed GRFP applications, and gone through the NSF orientation sessions, I'd say it depends very much on the level of the applicant, but generally, literature reviews are not anywhere near as important as you thought they were.
This process only vaguely resembles a research grant review, primarily because there is ZERO effort to match reviewers' expertise to those of the applicants. Broadly, electrical engineers will review applications of electrical engineers, and biologists will review applications from biologists, but that's as fine-grained as the process will guarantee. This means that you can't display fundamental gaps in knowledge that any practitioner in your broad field should know, but in all likelihood, nobody is going to go check your sources, or know much about the very special second messenger system that impacts a new subtype of cation channel that 2 people in the world study.
As to where the research plan comes from, that's going to vary incredibly by the level of the applicant. A student about to start a program, who hasn't even set foot on their campus yet, is very different from a student that's been placed in a PI's lab for a year, and both can get funded! For the young student, reviewers are looking for your ability to put together a cogent hypothesis-driven study and communicate it well (and not many reviewers would believe this is the study you will actually do your graduate work in) along with a somewhat viable path to get yourself established with the type of resources you would need to actually do similar research, and somewhat more than that for an experienced student. My recollection (though I could be wrong) is that there is some earmarking of awards to the four levels of application status, and that young applicants will get a competitive amount of awards, even though the experienced students clearly have more polished packages.
Reviewers are trained to assess you in two areas; "Intellectual Merit" and "Broader Impact". Both are rolled together to make a holistic assessment of your application package. Reviewers are looking for evidence that 1) you've got the intellectual goods to thrive in science, 2) you've made opportunities for yourself and have taken advantage of them, and 2) that you see areas where you can bring your skills to the larger community. I can't say that you'll be successful if you can demonstrate success in these areas, but I can say that you won't if you can't. Using your literature would be a part of this, but I'd say that if you don't make any mistakes in your use of the literature, you won't be hurting your application.
As to whether you should apply this year or wait until next year, that's a tough call. The risk with the "make believe" type of applications, where you aren't even affiliated with a lab yet, is that one reviewer might not buy that the path you've outlined is viable, and considers this to important to recommend funding (I try hard not to do this, myself, though naivete can certainly be a strike against intellectual merit). This will kill your application. I don't believe you are excluded from applying a second time, though, so the risk of application this round seems minimal. You should verify eligibility for a second submission on your own, though (i.e., don't take my word for it).
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/08/22
| 1,895
| 7,931
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a mathematics paper ready for publishing, but I can't decide to which journal should I publish it.
The main thing based on which I want to publish the paper to a specific journal is its short period of peer-review process (because I need to publish it as soon as possible).
Suppose I have a list of journals I want to publish the paper. How should I know the average period of peer-review process for each of them?<issue_comment>username_1: For publishing in mathematics you could check out the AMS' [Backlog of Mathematics
Research Journals](https://www.ams.org/journals/notices/201810/rnoti-p1289.pdf). Among other things it provides a current estimate of
waiting time between submission and publication and historical data for the time between submission and final acceptance.
I'd personally take these estimates with a grain of salt, but I suppose if you're desperate it's better than nothing.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: *This is more of a comment, but it needs to be said:*
The length of the peer review process depends on the reviewers. If the reviewers are slow, there is little the journal can do about it beyond some reminder emails.
Ultimately, all the journals will be asking the same set of people to review your paper. So don't expect that one journal will really be much faster than another.
Conferences can present a faster publication route because they have a schedule to keep. However, reviewing speed often comes at the cost of quality.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: *n.b. I think this answer is more relevant **outside** of mathematics, which is the OP's field ...*
Although @username_2's answer is correct that most journals to which you could submit your paper will be sharing the same reviewer pool, there *can* be big differences between journals in how efficiently their editorial processes run and, importantly, how much they pressure authors to return reviews quickly.
* You can look on a journal's web page to see if they give any metrics, or emphasize speed: for example, *Nature Communications* says in their [Aims and Scope section](https://www.nature.com/ncomms/about/aims):
>
> We are committed to providing an efficient service for both authors and readers. Our team of independent editors make rapid and fair publication decisions.
>
>
>
Obviously that doesn't give you anything hard and fast, but it does at least tell you that they prioritize speed.
* As I've mentioned in a [previous question about rapid peer review](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/122330/can-i-ask-the-editor-for-rapid-processing-rapid-peer-review-in-the-cover-lette/122333#122333), [SciRev](https://scirev.org/) is a web site that is attempting to gather and collate journal-specific information about the peer review process, including processing times. (Unfortunately it hasn't reached a tipping point of popularity yet, so it may not *actually* provide much useful information.)
* someone has done an [analysis of publication delays based on data from PubMed](https://blog.dhimmel.com/history-of-delays/) ([Zenodo repository here](https://zenodo.org/record/45516#.XV8UIPx7lzA)). The linked blog post has a dynamic graphic window that lets you select specific journals, but some caveats:
+ the data are a bit out of date by now (up to 2015)
+ PubMed has good coverage only for biomedical and related journals
+ not all journals post the necessary metadata (submission and acceptance dates)
+ resetting due to "reject and resubmit" can skew the values
---
The other point I made in my previous answer about rapid peer review is that depending on your situation, it might not be as important as you think to have your paper published; in many cases, *submission to a reputable journal* counts for almost as much as publication - it indicates to potential admissions committees, employers, etc. that your work is actually ready for prime time (as opposed to "in prep", which can mean anything from "I've got a good idea" to "submitting tomorrow"). Depending on journal policies etc. within your field, you could also consider posting your paper to a pre-print service such as [ArXiv](https://arxiv.org) - another way of convincing people that your work is for real.
The best way to figure out the true importance of rapid publication for your situation is probably to talk to a senior colleague in your field who knows your situation.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Unless the journal makes the data public, there's no way to tell. That's because the information needed isn't publicly available.
The speed of the peer review process depends on a few things:
* How efficient the editors are. For example if you submit today, do they also invite reviewers today? (That would be *really* fast.)
* How quick the peer reviewers are. If I invite reviewers today, when can I expect a review? This usually isn't within the ability of the editors to control unfortunately. Editors can prod reviewers, but cannot force them, and this is therefore a big question mark.
* How quick the authors are at revising. Again this is going to depend on the authors. If they're busy they might delay resubmission; alternatively if the revisions requested are major they might also need time. Either way this is another big question mark.
When you say you want to know the average period of the "peer review process", it's not clear what you're actually looking for.
* If you want to know the average period when it's the editor's turn to act (e.g. between submission to first invitation of reviewers, between reviews complete to decision) then you really have to ask the editors since they're the only one who'll know. You cannot tell this time from the outside; the information needed isn't publicly available.
* If you want to know the average period between submission and decision, then you could in principle do it by looking at the previous 1,000 papers published in the journal and checking the given submission & accepted date (or published date if available). However the number you get necessarily involve the two big unknowns above (time taken by reviewers & authors). The numbers are unreliable as a result. You have big confounding variables that's going to affect all journals, not just the one you're trying to measure.
In any case the variance in the peer review times is very large. If the average is 30 days, you could still easily get a decision after 90 days.
Honestly, I would not worry about this because it's just not something you can get good data on, and it's not clear how the data is going to help you anyway. It's like attempting to predict whether a coin flip is going to end up heads or tails, and someone offers to tell you what the results of the previous 100 trials were: sure you can get the data, but it's not helpful in predicting what the next trial's results are going to be.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Many papers in many journal have submission dates and acceptance dates right at the top of the article pdf. In the example depicted, this info is right below the author info. The publication dats at the top.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/e3TkU.png).
This won't give you an average, but a fairly quick sampling of your target journals should provide you with "typical" information. As an aside, you're probably most interested in the acceptance dates, the point at which you can list a paper as "In Press" on your CV.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: I may be completely wrong but I think, based upon the nature of our research topic, we first should select the appropriate right fit journal and then should start the research paper writing process. This will help our ideas, writing process, references , writing style , level of detail s we need to integrate etc aligned well ahead of the time.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/08/22
| 519
| 2,150
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have written a professor from the USA about a Ph.D. position with my CV. He replied saying its excellent and I should apply in the next fall. Now I have some queries which I will ask him in my next mail and one of my paper has been published today in a very good journal (which I wrote 'submitted' in my CV). Should I include my paper in my next mail saying you can have a look? Will it add extra value or a good impression?<issue_comment>username_1: Just send the link with a "By the way, if you are interested in seeing more of my work, I have just had this paper published in X journal: LINK"
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Honestly, I find the whole discussion in the comments and the other answer rather strange. There are two options:
* The professor doesn't care about reading the paper. If you sent the paper attached to the email, he can just ignore it.
* The professor wants to read the paper. If you attached it, perfect. If you didn't, either he has to go look for it on the journal's website, log in the publisher's website because many don't do IP-based authentication anymore, and eventually find the "PDF" button behind all the crap that publishers put on journals' website these days; or ask you to send it to him in case it's not public yet (e.g. it was *accepted* today and it will be months before the journal even mentions it publicly) or his university doesn't have a subscription to the journal. That's a complete waste of time.
We're in 2019. Getting a 5 MB attachment in one email is completely insignificant. If the professor is on a roaming data plan in Belize and hasn't set his email client to not download attachments automatically, it's his own fault, and he will rack up hundreds of dollars in charges anyway from all the email a professor routinely gets every day.
My opinion: write your email with your additional queries and so on, and conclude with something like "By the way, the paper 'XXX' that was listed as submitted on my CV is now accepted in journal 'JJJ'. I have attached it to this email in case you would like to take a look." Unobstructive, no pressure.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/08/22
| 657
| 2,820
|
<issue_start>username_0: I prefer to be called by my maiden name by colleagues and friends. Is it unprofessional or illegal to use my maiden name at school and even after graduation?<issue_comment>username_1: I know a variety of women who have retained their maiden names for publications (some because they started publishing before getting married and changing their legal name). If they had been publishing before getting married, one concern is making it easy to link all their publications under one author name, making it easier to see their whole record. (But, even that is not required, having seen publication lists where it rapidly becomes clear that there was a name change - I hope things like Web of Science figure it out, but I'm not sure.)
I also know a number that never changed their name legally to begin with. That is not uncommon, at least in the US.
Likely you know such people as well, or looking around your university would find some fairly quickly.
So, bottom line, do what you and your partner are comfortable with, the academic world has seen it before and is just fine with it.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: UK perspective
==============
In the UK, you can legally use just about any name you choose, and change your name (or not change your name) as and when you see fit. In fact, a married woman is under no obligation to use her spouse's surname **at all** (not even on her passport), although many still do so socially and for identity documents (because border-control officials ask more questions if a parent and child have different surnames in their passports -- a copy of the child's birth certificate is normally adequate proof of parentage).
**In academia** (and many other professions)**, it is very common and positively recommended for married women to use maiden names professionally** (irrespective of which name is used socially and on identity documents). This is because changing name makes it harder to maintain any recognition or reputation acquired under the old name.
Having said that, I know various academics who have changed name in interesting ways. Among my colleagues, there is:
* a male academic who changed his surname for professional/public purposes, but keeps his 'original' surname on his passport and tax records (the reason he made the change was that, with the 'original' surname, he could have been confused with someone else in the same field);
* a male academic who uses a surname consisting of his wife's maiden name followed by his own 'original' surname (as a result, you can surmise when he married from when that extra name started appearing on his publications);
* a female academic who uses a surname consisting of her **ex**-husband's surname followed by her maiden name (and she has remarried!).
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/23
| 1,287
| 5,221
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an Indian student in the United States and I am a Lawful Permanent Resident (Green Card). After my PhD in STEM (computer science), I had a postdoc offer from a professor in a new university (I'll call him Prof. A).
I'm really looking forward to start that project, as it totally fit my skills and expertise.
Another professor, <NAME>, stepped in proposing to be a second advisor. Prof. A and B and their colleagues met many times to figure out a co-advised project.
After a while, Prof. B proposed to work only with him, saying that my citizenship would be an issue to get a tenured position and work in the same research field as Prof. A's (due to sensitive information-->clearance). I turned down Prof. B's offer because I want to work with A.
After some days, I met Prof. A, and he seemed to be almost convinced by Prof. B that it is in my best interest to go on with Prof. B, for the same reason as above.
What Prof. B is forgetting (or, most likely, pretending to) is that in a year I will apply for US Citizenship and that I will be a Citizen by the end of the postdoc. I had to be very insistent on this to re-convince A to hire me again. He still accepted to hire me, but I've seen him somewhat doubtful (he was always so enthusiast about me).
Two questions:
1) Is Prof. B's behavior ethical?
2) Is it legal to talk on my behalf about my alleged "best interest", without informing me and without my consent?
3) Should I cut B out?
As stated above, the country is the USA.
Thank you all.
AS<issue_comment>username_1: Professor B’s behavior sounds highly unethical.
The only consideration one should make during such deliberations is your fit as a researcher. What you plan on doing after, what your long term visa plans are (except of course in cases where you wouldn’t be able to legally work in the USA, which isn’t the case for you), or anything else should not be discussed at all. In fact, Professor B might be engaging in outright illegal discrimination by doing so.
If you can secure a postdoc with A with no repercussions from B is a different matter. It depends on both their standing in the community, and their personalities. I personally wouldn’t feel comfortable working with B after this, but perhaps you are more forgiving. It could very well be a simple miscommunication that could be cleared up over a cup of coffee.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Prof. A's (due to sensitive information-->clearance)
>
>
>
CyberGuy, I am really not convinced that there is bad or malevolent intent by either Professor A or B but Professor B's discouragement resulting in Professor A to withdraw his offer does seem unethical and patronizing.
The security clearance issue is significant though, in Australia, there is a difference between a citizen working on sensitive material compared a permanent resident or a visa holder, and I would imagine it is similar in America. The fact that you are about to apply for citizenship may not be appreciated by Professor B. Professor B overly forceful because he may be worried that you would pigeon-hole yourself into a narrow field and become unable to work if your citizenship is delayed. Professor B may have your best intentions when he advocated for you to work in a field that is still viable without citizenship, which is his field. I do not think that that is morally wrong, he seems to concerned about your long term employability (but unfortunately minimizing your passions and interests). However, Professor B's lack of responsibility for taking responsibility for Professor A to withdraw his offer seems unethical and wrong. But Professor B may not be aware of the seriousness of Professor's A withdrawal of the offer.
Why did Professor B insert himself into your negotiations? Professor B may be interested in collaborating with Professor A as well, the same way as you were keen to work with Professor A. You must also be an impressive candidate for Professor B to have been interested in working with you and wanting you to work with him alone. Now that you have an offer from Professor A, it may worthwhile clarifying how your skills and expertise fits better with Professor A and that you are soon to apply for citizenship. Professor A's lack of enthusiasm may improve if Professor B understands the situation better and their concerns are clarified. You may also be able to return to work with Professor B if you are unable to get security clearance at a later stage if you are able to smooth things over between them.
Other things that would clearly be unethical would be if Professor B misrepresented your Green Card status and implied that citizenship is not achievable for you. If Professor B misrepresented you as being more enthusiastic for his work instead of Professor A than that would be quite unethical. Also if Professor B lies and misrepresents the Green card or citizenship process to Professor A as a way of pouching you for himself. I am not sure that is the case and they both genuinely seem to want the best for you. I hope Professor B apologizes for the impact of his behaviour and your distress and he turns around support you in your decision CyberGuy.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/23
| 801
| 3,294
|
<issue_start>username_0: How can I improve a paper which has the following comments from the reviewer:
>
> There are missing references to recent literature, which are closely related to this submitted work. A proper comparison of results and the methodologies among these efforts, as well as clear motivation for the incremental progress is typically required.
>
>
> In addition, the submitted paper has several typographical and organizational errors.
>
>
>
Is the reviewer asking me to cite more references?
What does it mean for a paper to have "typographical and organizational errors"?
Can someone tell me what is the reviewer asking me to improve?
The decision is "reject".
Should I resubmit to the same journal after making corrections or to a different one?<issue_comment>username_1: These are all fairly clear.
>
> There are missing references to recent literature, which are closely
> related to this submitted work.
>
>
>
Exactly what it says on the tin. The reviewer believes you are missing references, and importantly, recent references in areas close to what your paper is on. You should find them, and include them. More importantly...
>
> A proper comparison of results and the methodologies among these
> efforts, as well as clear motivation for the incremental progress is
> typically required.
>
>
>
Your reviewer is asking you to put *your* paper in research in context with those papers. What does this add? Why did it need to be done. What *is* the motivation of the work?
>
> In addition, the submitted paper has several typographical and
> organizational errors.
>
>
>
This, again, means exactly what it says. The reviewer has found what they believe are typographical errors, and errors where the paper isn't well organized - for example, possibly where a section relies on something not yet introduced.
>
> The decision is "reject".
>
>
> Should I resubmit to the same journal after making corrections or to a
> different one?
>
>
>
If they wanted you to revise and resubmit, that would have been the decision. A flat "Reject" decision means you will need a new journal, though I would suggest taking the reviewer's comments to heart. It's possible they're correct, and it's possible you'll get the same reviewer again.
To expand a bit on your comments, because replies are a bad place for nuance:
>
> I have one question? suppose i sent this paper to a lower standard journal and the same reviewer gets hold of the paper, will his/her review change subject to the journal
>
>
>
This is very unlikely. You might get away with it if the primary criticism was about the novelty or importance of the paper, or not fitting with the right audience. But, to be direct, the reviewer's comments are things that would be fatal flaws in most respectable journals - just going down a tier won't fix them. Instead, I'd strongly suggest you mull over the reviewers comments, go looking for the recent studies they mention, etc.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The message is that the reviewer doubts the originality. In case of a resubmission you have to clearly state, what is the difference to other similar work that was recently done.
In addition, the reviewer criticises the presentation.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/08/23
| 682
| 2,912
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am doing my bachelor's (undergraduate) thesis in a research lab. My supervisor, who is head of the lab, has assigned a junior professor and his PhD student as my direct point of contact. With both of them, I have a weekly meeting where I present the work that I have done.
I get severe doubts while reading the literature, etc. Should I approach my PhD point of contact for this? How often should I approach the head of the lab?
The PhD student seems willing to help. But, as a new researcher, am I supposed to ask him the conceptual doubts I am getting? The way you ask professors after a lecture? The topic of my research is completely new to me (I haven't been taught it formally before).<issue_comment>username_1: My undergraduate project meant I had a meeting once a week for 10 minutes... Some meetings left me with 3 weeks work... So it depends but for an undergraduate, once a week is ample.
Some PhD students have daily conversations, others less often, but that depends on the topic, field and the people involved.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: For a bachelor's, I would say a weekly meeting is above average (lucky you!).
If the PhD student is happy to help, then don't feel guilty about approaching them.
If you're meeting them on a weekly basis already, then I wouldn't want to interrupt many more times outside of that meeting. Try to save up a list of questions to be answered all in one go rather than giving constant interruptions to the PhD candidate. I've been in this position, and whilst I was always happy to help, I was always MORE happy to help if I could see that the student had really tried to work out the answer to their questions. If you go to them showing no effort on your part then their goodwill may run out quickly.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Once a week is fantastic and it is ok to sit with your doubts and concerns. Expectations are not high when it comes to undergrad research and your confusion is universal as people move away from a structured coursework environment into the more chaotic research arena. Learning to manage your doubts and frustration is an important skill as well.
Another way to break the long one week stretch is to email the PhD student and junior professor a couple of days before your meeting. Emails are usually well-received and allows both of them time to think about the issues before meeting you. Emails also force you to articulate and write out your confusion which is a great way to learn and practice writing. Just make sure you clarify that do not expect a reply and that you are just keen to maximize your weekly meetings. You may have already solved or come up with solutions by the meeting, that is great and you can present your new understanding but at least by emailing beforehand you have made given them a sense of your progress and your problem solving skills.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/08/23
| 830
| 3,400
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an undergraduate student in my final year and started doing my bachelor's thesis in a research lab. My official thesis supervisor is head of the lab, and a highly experienced expert and equally busy person. He has assigned a junior Professor and a PhD student as my direct points of contact.
I will be applying for masters in another university in a year and would need letter of recommendation from the head of the lab. But, since the interaction with him would be very minimal (2-3 meetings in 6 months), how can I ask him for the letter of recommendation? Also, is there anything I can do at this point in time to get the strong letter from him later?<issue_comment>username_1: The solution seems fairly simple. At your next meeting with this professor, or one you can arrange sooner rather than later, let him know of your future plans and that you will eventually want to ask him for a letter. Make a special request that he "follow your work" enough that he can write such a letter. But also ask hime for advice about how to be a success in the project and to prepare yourself for later academic work.
The goal is just to get him to notice you even if you aren't interacting much. But, of course, this assumes that your work will be very good overall so that there are only good things to say about you when the time comes.
It is helpful for a professor to know that students have certain aspirations beyond the current project/course/degree. Make him aware early on, rather than later.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: username_1's suggestion about arranging a meeting is good advice. Outlining your aspirations will mean it will be easier to ask for a letter of recommendation later on.
Networking is the other aspect to this question. Even though you are being "supervised" by the head of the lab through his PhD student and junior professor, networking is a useful skill that you might want to work on while you have the opportunity now. Find out which meetings, activities that your head of lab goes to. This might give you opportunities for informal discussion about your project and for him to get to know you.
Consider developing your "professional identity" online as well. This may be useful for you as you network with your future university and developing a strong presence. Sign up to Twitter, ResearchGate, Mendeley, etc. Participate and engage with the various meetings of the department and lab - [Academic Skills article, Manchester Uni](http://www.academiccareer.manchester.ac.uk/about/do/skills/)
I liked this light-hearted article about social networking by [Thesis Whisperer](https://thesiswhisperer.com/2010/09/23/top-five-ways-to-better-academic-networking/). [Jennifer Streeter's article](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266973555_Networking_in_academia_Generating_and_enhancing_relationships_with_your_acquaintances_and_colleagues_will_create_a_diverse_network_of_sponsors_eager_to_help_you_succeed) is also impressive.
Remember, if you can meet and get to know your future colleagues from your other university, you would be light-years ahead from the competition. If they grow to trust and appreciate your work, they would be bending over backwards to help get you across to them. Academic excellence is important and so is the recommendation letter, but if they like you, it does matter as well...
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/08/23
| 3,905
| 14,850
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a student who's on the autistic spectrum. He exhibits several disruptive behaviors in class, such as
1. Inability to moderate his volume/interjections: he will shout out questions and comments irrespective of whether others are speaking (be it myself or other students).
2. Unintentionally mocking other students: when other students ask questions, he will sometimes say things like "you should know this stuff by now!"
3. Physically inappropriate behavior: he will lie down on the floor in front of his seat, or sneeze loudly. He will sit in the front row and at times pick up stuff from my table (e.g. my notes or my markers) and play with them.
I recognize that he cannot control most of these things, and that they're not done with ill intent. Thus, my inclination is to handle it in a more forgiving manner than I would a normal disruptive student, but this is not a straightforward solution. First, there are many other students who shouldn't suffer because of one disruptive student. Second, when I do make a harsher comment he often completely shuts down for the rest of the class, which makes me feel really guilty.
The undergraduate office is aware of the situation and has already received numerous complaints from other courses he attended. The problem is that their hands are mostly tied as he is not registered as a special needs student (I'm guessing his parents are refusing to do this for their own reasons), though he is officially diagnosed on the autistic spectrum. Other lecturers have basically been treating him increasingly harshly, or ignoring him.
I am wondering whether anyone here has any experience with these kinds of situations, and how did you approach it. I am more than happy to accommodate him, but would not want to compromise the course quality for everyone else.
**Edit/Update**:
* I had a talk with the student and things are much better. He’s been a positive force in the class since (albeit a slightly loud one). Thank you for the suggestions!
* I tried to strike a positive tone rather than a disciplinary one. He told me his parents will kick him out of the house if I contact them so that’s definitely not happening.
* The undergraduate office was sympathetic but is limited in what they can do.<issue_comment>username_1: Perhaps the key part of your question is that he student is *not* registered as a special needs student. Check your faculty handbook, student code of conduct, etc. to see what remedies are available for disruptive behavior in class. I've read your remark that "he cannot control most of these things," but he's impinging on the rights of the other students to get the most out of classes. At the institutions where I've taught, there were provisions for removing disruptive students from a class.
While that may seem very harsh, perhaps it will get the attention of the student's parents and maybe even begin to get the student the help he needs. At a minimum, it will remove a source of disruption from your classroom.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't believe that the "unintentional" outbursts of such a student are inevitable and uncontrollable. An autistic student isn't a deterministic mechanism, just as no other student is. Such a student can learn to behave appropriately. The problem is that for some (at least) such people, they just don't recognize the societal signals that others find natural.
But anyone can learn. And, like any sort of learning they may need to be taught. They may also need to be given non disruptive ways to meet their own needs. You can be part of that, though it would be your choice to do so. I'd hesitate to suggest that it is a requirement, since you already have so many requirements to the other students.
But I've had success with other sorts of "odd" student behavior by "adopting" the student as special project. If you hold regular office hours they may not be well attended. In that case you can invite, or even require, them to come to you frequently. I once had a couple of students who were basically camped in my office for a semester and it changed their learning behavior. In this case the problem wasn't disruption of others but just detachment and a seeming inability to learn.
Out of class you can, gently if possible, let the student know that their actions are not acceptable and need to be redirected in a better direction. You can let them know that you will call them out in class for outbursts. ("<NAME>!". "<NAME>".) They can learn only if they can be made (a) to recognize the issue, and (b) to redirect/sublimate their "natural" reactions.
Ignoring the outbursts won't help. Getting angry won't help. But you can try to make the inevitable as non-disruptive as possible.
One trick that I would try in this situation is to give the student a few index cards on which they can write questions, etc. during class. Convince them that if they write the questions and comments, rather than shouting them, that you will deal with them (office hours, hallway...). If they shout out a question, just hold up a blank card as a signal to them to write. Make the signal obvious, since they aren't processing the normal subtle signals, due to their condition. They are, for example, unlikely to recognize your frown.
Of course, I can't guarantee success, and different people will react differently. In fact, if you make a "pet" of the student the other students may resent it (as happened in the case I described).
But you need to understand that there are many successful academics on the autistic spectrum. Through various means they have *learned* to act in a way that others don't find issue with. But for some of them, at least, it means specifically learning to *play a role* as a "normal" person. One, in my experience, learned this by joining a theatre group.
Perhaps not a real solution here, but, I hope, a different way to think about the issues. Good luck.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> "they're not done with ill intent"
>
>
>
Although disruptive behaviours by people with autism/autistic people are not done with ill intent, they do usually respond well to clear boundaries and feedback. A useful concept to consider here is Theory of Mind (ToM), something that is almost always impaired in this group.
>
> Individuals with autism are impaired in ToM; the ability to understand mental states such as thoughts, intentions and beliefs that influence human behavior. ToM is about the mind and how it is needed for all human interactions, such as understanding, explaining, predicting, and manipulating the behavior of others [(Adibsereshki et al., 2015)](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4577697/)
>
>
>
As the result, firm communication about the impact on others is worthwhile, "I am not sure whether you are aware that I (or X) was speaking, I would like to finish my point please". You should offer [explicit, clear boundaries around disruptive behaviours,](https://www.autismhelp.info/for-professionals-teachers-employers/autism-in-the-workplace) so consider emailing the appropriate policies and refer to the code of conduct and describe clear behaviours that will result in an escalation process. [Avoid irony and sarcasm](https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/the-gift-aging/201304/people-autism-spectrum-disorder-take-things-literally) as concrete and literal thinking is common; ironic/sarcastic negativity may be misinterpreted causing damage to the relationship. Consider asking whether he would like to contact anyone else when you email, which may be a good way to get his parents involved if they are preventing support.
Having said that, praising seems to be effective with people with autism. Praising has been shown to decrease disruptive behaviour in a study of 73 self-contained autism support classrooms [(Piotrowski et al).](https://ldi.upenn.edu/sites/default/files/The%20Effects%20of%20Increasing%20Teachers%20Praise%20to%20Behavior%20Correction%20Ratios%20on%20Disruptive%20Behaviors%20Among%20Students%20with%20Autism_David%20Mandell.pdf) Try to squeeze in as much positive reinforcement on non-disruptive behavior as you can, without being too awkward. Piotroski's study (unpublished) found the minimal increase from 1.3 to 1.7 praises (on average) produced a significant change in disruptive behaviour (p<0.01).
[Gelbar, Smith & Reichow (2014)](https://depts.washington.edu/uwautism/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Systematic-review-of-collegiate-supports-for-ASD_Gelbar-et-al.pdf) did a systematic review of college support for students with autism. They found 20 articles that had first-hand description of services or experiences of the individuals. "Non-academic" interventions were found in 45%, 9 out of 20 studies examined -
* Peer mentorship programs (5 of 9, 56 %)
* Assigned counselors, aides, or liaisons (5 of 9, 56 %)
* Parental involvement (3 of 9, 33 %)
* Single instances using Social Stories, disability teams, support groups, video modeling and cognitive behavioral interventions were also described.
A study from Belgium which examined over 23 student by [<NAME>, Moyson & Roeyers (2015)](https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/55800867.pdf) recommended "more extensive and effective coaching of students with ASD". That the usual "academic" support structures are not sufficient for ASD students, so if coaching is available at your institution, it may be worth making sure that your student and any decision-makers are aware of that useful option.
**References:**
<NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., & <NAME>. (2015). [The Effectiveness of Theory of Mind Training On the Social Skills of Children with High Functioning Autism Spectrum Disorders](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4577697/). Iranian Journal of Child Neurology, 9(3), 40–49.
<NAME>., <NAME>., & <NAME>. (2014). [Systematic Review of Articles Describing Experience and Supports of Individuals with Autism Enrolled in College and University Programs](https://depts.washington.edu/uwautism/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Systematic-review-of-collegiate-supports-for-ASD_Gelbar-et-al.pdf). Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 44(10), 2593–2601.
<NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., & <NAME>. (n.d.). [The Effects of Increasing Teachers’ Praise-to-Behavior Correction Ratios on Disruptive Behaviors Among Students with Autism.](https://ldi.upenn.edu/sites/default/files/The%20Effects%20of%20Increasing%20Teachers%20Praise%20to%20Behavior%20Correction%20Ratios%20on%20Disruptive%20Behaviors%20Among%20Students%20with%20Autism_David%20Mandell.pdf) Conference poster.
<NAME>., <NAME>., & <NAME>. (2015). [Higher Education Experiences of Students with Autism Spectrum Disorder: Challenges, Benefits and Support Needs.](https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/55800867.pdf) Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45(6), 1673–1688.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: My experience with autistic students and colleagues is that if they are aware that they are on the spectrum, they generally appreciate having straightforward feedback given to them -- it's difficult for them to understand nuance or "suggestions" and being given clear rules about things not to do actually helps them quite a lot.
Do you have a way to schedule an after-class one-on-one conference with the student so that you can discuss the situation directly and lay out some specific rules?
Some of the behaviors (such as loud sneezing and the like) will be very difficult for the student to curtail, but interjections can be responded to with a direct statement such as "Please wait your turn," and for physical stimming behavior it is certainly okay to ask them to find a different behavior such as using a fidget toy, or to go outside to take a break if they're simply feeling overwhelmed. It will probably never be possible to *prevent* the behavior, but there are absolutely approaches that can reduce their impact on others.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I would like to comment an aspect of the question which is not directly addressed by other answers.
>
> Physically inappropriate behavior: he will lie down on the floor in front of his seat [...].
>
>
>
> >
> > Perhaps I should mention that he laid down on the floor in front of his seat in a nearly fetal position after I made a comment. His head was on someone's shoes.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
Remembering back when I was in elementary school, I used to have this behavior, but locations being also outside of the class room. Whenever I was stressed or frustrated I would just lay myself on the ground and simply do nothing. While being in that state I would also not answer to anyone, not even to my best friends. You could drag me around and there would be still no reaction from me. I could still clearly listen and see what is going around me, I just had extreme difficulties on communicating and moving. Any Actions I wanted to take was basically blocked at brain level. For the next few hours I would not move until someone took care of me.
However I can't tell if this fully applies as well to your student, mostly because he is older now than I was.
What followed on is hard to remember, but I will give it a try.
* One time it took so long until the school ended, so someone came by and told me about the school ending. At that time, there was almost no one walking around. I had no other choice than to stand up and go.
* The other time I guess my teachers dragged me to the next best free room, and left me alone with pencil and paper on a table. I did not start writing right away, but after half an hour there was text on the paper. So that way they could at least find out what was wrong with me.
---
So yes, I'm on the autism spectrum, but thanks to psychologists I act pretty normal today. I can only share these memories but I can not simulate my old behavior and tell how I would react to X.
Throughout the school time I had what we call here in Germany a "Sozialpädagoge" (translates to "social worker") which would sit in the class in the background capturing situations between the person with autism and the rest of the class. Sometimes we played board or card games together with my best friend. The social worker would later discuss these situations with the person with autism in special lessons or even at home. This helped me to better understand people and make appropriate decisions. However, this might require support from the parents as they have to apply for such help.
>
> He told me his parents will kick him out of the house if I contact them so that’s definitely not happening.
>
>
>
This is unfortunate, but I hope this Information above is still helpful.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/08/23
| 445
| 1,852
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have submitted a manuscript that was returned by the Editor mainly because there is "no enough data" on the manuscript. The manuscript is a bit shorter and to-the-point. Of course, I have been also asked to revise the English and proofread it.
Now I have addressed the editor request, should I just re-submit the manuscript alone or I need to include a "response to the Editor" as well?<issue_comment>username_1: If you mean "dispute the editor" then I don't recommend it. For the most part, if you don't generally follow the editor's advice as best you can, then you are likely to be rejected at the end.
But if your response is of the form "these are the changes...", then yes, include a response, as they will make the editor's job easier and more likely to give you a fair and accurate review.
There may be a difference of opinion, of course, about how much data is enough, but that can be worked out if everyone stays positive. Just don't try to tell an editor, who has all the power, how to do the job. That isn't a path to success.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Did the editor decide on "reject and resubmit", or simply returned the manuscript to you? In the former case, if you resubmit, you'll need a fresh submission in the Editorial Management System; in the latter, you can use your original submission.
In the former case, a "response to editor" is not necessary; just write what you need to in the cover letter. In the latter, you'll need to attach one because you probably won't get to submit a cover letter.
In both cases you should submit a response - it helps the editor remember what happened to your paper (especially if it took you a long time to make the revision). It's true the editor can just check the logs in the editorial management system, but that's more troublesome.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/08/23
| 4,629
| 19,340
|
<issue_start>username_0: I did my PhD in computational materials science. I used molecular dynamics simulations and finite element method to carry out my research investigations. I have published several publications and about to defend my thesis next month.
But, I did not take any classes on finite element analysis or molecular dynamics during my undergraduate or graduate school. Whatever theory I know about them is through self study and through work experience. I understand the concepts of the methods, but I never got a chance to have a formal course with exams and assignments on the subjects. So, my self study hasn't been very meticulous.
Now, I feel like a charlatan, and don't feel like I deserve a PhD degree. I am also feeling lost and like a loser. Saddest thing is that, I passed all my qualifiers, proposals and no one questioned my abilities.
I don't know what can I do to feel confident again. I am 31 years old. I always thought that by the end of PhD I will be a confident researcher.<issue_comment>username_1: First, learn something about [Imposter Syndrome](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impostor_syndrome). This sounds like a classic case of it. You have been a success already. Your advisor, I assume, had no doubts about your ability. So try to just ignore the "feelings" and keep on doing what you do.
Success comes from hard work, not from feeling like you are capable of it. Your feelings might well change as you produce more in your field. But even if they don't, you can still be a success.
But I suggest, also, that you build up a circle of collaborators that you can interact with. You will learn from them, but you may also learn from them that you have all the necessary qualifications.
Moreover, your education needn't end when you finish your degree. Books and papers can help you fill in the formal bits you think you lack. Your advisor has, I hope, given you feedback. The same will be true of reviewers of papers you submit. If they don't notice and lack, then you probably aren't lacking in fact. At least not by a lot. Everyone can learn at every stage of life.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: The PhD degree is a qualification standard rather to do research in your field, publish, acquire funding etc. than being a qualified teacher. As a possible professor looking for tenure you have to have and show this ability.
Also you stated you still not defend your PhD! But your oral defense is normally not only a presentation and scrutinization of your PhD work by the examiners. Often fundamental questions more or less related to your PhD topic and theories of your field will normally be asked by the committee to test your general knowledge or if you are a very narrow-minded specialist. So, I have never seen someone not graduating with a PhD being unable to answer most of such questions, as most questions after the defense circle around the results. But for the best grade a thorough and broad background is necessary imho or you are lucky that only easy questions hit you.
If it is your feeling or assessment that you are not at all as knowledgable as your colleagues on the underlying theories of your field after several years of research, then I would think twice about pursuing an academic career, because there is not much time left to make up for the knowledge gap competing with them for tenure. Teaching quality and ability is a distinct and important criterion among several to judge post-docs for professorship.
The impostor syndrome has nowadays become a general mantra and excuse, so I don't see how it helps someone to judge critically his personal situation and abilities and succeed in his academic career, which will always be as unique as yours. This phenomenon might exist like Loch Ness by simply everyone repeating it, yet, it more detracts you from asking yourself what your actual abilities are, which brought you up to ask this question here, at least this is my understanding. If you lack theoretical background, try to gain more the next years if possible and if there is sufficient time. Relying on the impostor syndrome will be a sad consolation when you don't meet your personal academic goals finally.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> I am also feeling lost and like a loser.
>
>
>
You are an established expert in molecular dynamics simulations and finite element methodology now. With so many publications that is no longer under debate. Yes, you did not learn the fundamentals and there will always be the fear that there is a kink in your knowledge that might expose you as an "imposter". That seems a reasonable fear. However, you have now leaped miles ahead and published papers that have been proven to be novel and exciting and new. Are you saying that the editors and all the peer reviewers made a mistake when they published each of your papers??
Could you also be feeling [anticipatory anxiety](https://www.betterhelp.com/advice/anxiety/understanding-anticipatory-anxiety-how-to-cope-with-it/)? The fear increases as you approach the PhD finishing line? PhDs are far more structured than post-docs or working as an independent researcher, so it is very understandable that you would be anxious as more responsibility is expected from you when you leave. Anxiety always increases as you approach a change in circumstances. There may also be fear, when you change teams or work for a new institution, that new colleagues might test and find you wanting. That is also very common.
One way to break the anxiety cycle is to organise and celebrate your achievements. Organise something energetic and fun. You deserve to reward yourself. Get a couple of great massages, etc. Finishing a PhD is a massive win in anyone's books.
PS: I do not think anyone ever feels confident. Feeling unconfident is fine. Most researchers go through their whole lives feeling unconfident. There will always be more to know and someone better than you...
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: PhDs in the UK include few or no formal classes, they are entirely research based. Most topics studied at PhD are too advanced to be studied at undergraduate, and most people don't do masters degree before doing PhDs. Thus **almost no UK PhDs have taken classes in the formal theoretical underpinning in the topic of their PhD**.
For most things I have studied in my career, I have taken no formal classes in. My degree and my previous experience taught me how to teach myself, but also to be aware of the limits of my knowledge, and to know when to ask someone more expert in what I was doing. And yet here I am, a funded PI in a permanent position, with a perfectly respectable publication record.
In one part of my career though I did get a chance to do some retraining to move from being an experimentalist to being a computationalist - a 3 year retraining program. I had already been doing some computational work for a while, but felt like I was making it up as I went along, so thought this was an amazing chance to gain a formal footing in it.
The training turned out to be only a small amount of formal training and a larger amount of project based, on the job learning. **Part of the reason for this is that formal training at that level does not exist, it cannot**, things are too specialist, and change too fast. The best way to learn things, beyond a few basics is to study the literature, take part in discussions and try things out. It turns out **everyone in the field is making things up as the go along to an extent - that's the point of research**, to try new things. Some of the deep theoretical roots have come over time, through immersion, use and deep thought, but not through formal learning.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: Several answers have properly pointed out that you have in fact honorably earned the PhD you are about to be awarded. Congratulations.
In your work you needed several tools (finite element analysis, molecular dynamics), Clearly you understood those tools well enough to use them correctly to do good science. You need not know all about how they work any more than you need to know how the engine in your car works in order to drive to work.
In your ongoing career you may in fact want to know more about those tools so that you can use them better or even improve them. Perhaps look for a postdoctoral appointment that will offer you that chance.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I commend you for your honesty with yourself. I think that what you wrote in your post shows that you hold yourself to a high standard. I take that as a sign that you have healthy degree of self-esteem. That's all good.
Since you are being awarded a PhD without having taken any of the courses you say you are lacking, I must conclude that such courses were not *central* to your field. Such courses may be central to other fields and careers, but not to yours. If so, I think that you can get comfortable with having "only" a practitioner's knowledge of those areas. Yes, you won't have had the experience of having seen the material from the perspective of a formal course, but that is not necessarily a bad thing.
Just remember that neither <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, nor <NAME>, all giants of 20th c. architecture, ever took a university exam in architecture. They managed OK.
If you still feel that you want that classroom perspective on the material, then take class! Do a post-doc at some university where you can sit in the kind of class you feel you need.
Or better yet, get yourself an academic position somewhere, and teach a course of the subject you want to learn. I am being only half-facetious. It is well known that professors often teach those subjects that they themselves want to learn.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: >
> I did my PhD in computational materials science. I used molecular dynamics simulations and finite element method to carry out my research investigations
>
>
>
I will presume you also have used a library without a librarian degree. To be less flippant and a closer metaphor, not unlikely wrote some software without a CS or information engineering degree.
It is not your job to question the adequacy of your thesis, that's up to your advisor and especially the examiners at your viva.
Even more as the [Defending your doctoral thesis: the PhD viva](https://www.vitae.ac.uk/doing-research/doing-a-doctorate/completing-your-doctorate/your-viva) page says
>
> Be ready to admit if you don't know the answer to a question
>
>
>
It's okay. Even if you had formal classes on a topic in the past you simply could've forgotten it by now.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: I have had a situation similar you, with the support of my sister that she is very younger than me. I could manage it, approximately.
It is not important that you are being qualified as much as you have had a good presentation. Now, the most important thing for you should be how to present your final thesis and your ideas.
My suggestions to you:
1. check your final presentations and thesis with a friend as an editor. It is not very important that the degree of he/she is what.
2. Give a pattern from a good and an exciting presentation and try to match your final presentation with it.
3. Consider major concerns about your presentation and focus on them. For example, consider how to show your oral defense as animations, images of your idea, diagrams from your data, etc. These techniques even improve your theoretical background.
4. You are respectable as much as your reviewers. Hence, be polite first with yourself, and then with your audience. Practice, practice and practice to be similar a polite and expert man, especially for your oral presentation. For this you can record your voice, and even distribute it as a voluntary content publishing to increase your chance to have a good feeling about your challenge and feedback.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: I'll be brief and practical:
>
> I don't know what can I do to feel confident again.
>
>
>
1. Consider a combination of humility and confidence, rather than trying to attain full confidence. I've never been confident about my PhD field of research, and I *did* take the relevant courses...
2. Swallow your pride and ask for permission to sit in on a Finite Element Analysis and/or a Molecular Dynamics course (not for credit). Tell them you what you told us: You have some knowledge gaps you need to fill.
3. Alternatively to (2.): Get textbooks for those courses; read the parts covered by the course syllabus, slowly and carefully, and solve the exercises. Try to get copies of past exams and solve them with a time limit as though you were taking them.
I don't think doing (2.) or (3.) would have such a huge effect, but at least you'd need a different excuse for feeling deficient (which it seems you aren't).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: Look, it sounds like you are very highly qualified. In order to feel better about yourself I would suggest approaching the course instructors at your college and offering to be a TA for the courses you feel you might have needed. You will then be able to see firsthand how much and how effective your knowledge is.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_11: Most people don't reach any particular theoretical depth or insight until about Post-Doc or even Assistant Professor time (if ever).
There are some rare birds with sick intuition and insight already at PhD student level, but you should not compare yourself with those. Just work hard and do your best.
Also you seem to have fallen into the trap to believe that a PhD diploma represents stamp of approval for "final knowledge form" in some sense. This is not true at all. The best researchers keep learning and ramp up their speed even higher with increased experience.
The PhD is just to get you started. To have some kind of training and platform to stand on in your future endeavors in life.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_12: Logical analysis of your conclusion
-----------------------------------
Your conclusion is:
>
> I don't have the theoretical background
>
>
>
But your supporting arguments fail to support that conclusion:
>
> Whatever theory I know about them is through self study and through
> work experience. I understand the concepts of the methods, but I never
> got a chance to have a formal course with exams and assignments on the
> subjects. So, my self study hasn't been very meticulous.
>
>
>
Let's take those sentences in order...
>
> Whatever theory I know about them is through self study and through
> work experience.
>
>
>
This is actually 2 statements against your conclusion: 1) you have studied the topics on your own, and 2) you have work experience in the topics. Both of those are supporting evidence of having theoretical background, not of lacking it.
>
> I understand the concepts of the methods, but I never got a chance to
> have a formal course with exams and assignments on the subjects.
>
>
>
Again, 2 statements in 1 sentence.
1) I understand the concepts of the methods
I can only repeat what I said for the previous sentence. This is another statement supporting the presence of theoretical background, not the lack of it.
2) I never got a chance to have a formal course with exams and assignments on the subjects.
We are now 4 statements in before we find one that does not counter your conclusion. This neither counters it nor supports it. This is a neutral statement on its own (though combined with a later statement it will help your conclusion a little).
Having a formal course with exams and assignments is not the only way to have the theoretical background. In fact, exams and many assignments do not provide you with it at all, they tend to be merely a measuring tool to see if you have the knowledge, not a vector of providing it.
>
> So, my self study hasn't been very meticulous.
>
>
>
If you had just said "My self study hasn't been very meticulous," then I may have been more concerned. However, you prefixed it with "**So**, […]" That makes a difference.
If this statement is a conclusion from the preceding statements (I.e., the prefixing "so"), then it is utter nonsense. No preceding statements lead to this conclusion.
If, on the other hand, the prefix was not meant in that way and this is a separate assertion you are making, then let's include that in the analysis: If you combine this with "I never got a […] formal course" with "[…]hasn't been very meticulous" then we finally have the first bit of logic to support the conclusion in your title.
Solution
--------
If "[…]hasn't been very meticulous" is true to the point that your understanding is lacking - which is not given, but could be true - then all you need to do is study more meticulously.
Identify the classes that you are worried about not being knowledgeable enough about. Buy the textbooks for those classes. Study them meticulously. Now your problem is fixed.
...but you might be just fine how you are
-----------------------------------------
My situation was not all the same, but there are some comparisons that should be useful to you.
My father studied electrical engineering, and I studied his college textbooks while I was young. In high school, I studied textbooks for my own chosen topic. In college I expected to learn many new things, but instead I was quite disappointed. I found that I did not encounter anything in formal courses for my field that improved my theoretical background until close to the end of my studies. And even then, there wasn't much that I had missed from my own private studies in high school, and what little I did miss could have been taken care of by buying the textbooks for those classes and doing more self study.
So I was at one time in a position similar to yours, of having the self-study book-taught knowledge and hoping for more from formal classes. Now, I am in the position that you might be considering: I have since taken the classes. I did get a little bit out of those classes, but it was certainly not worth the time that I sunk into the entire ordeal and I regret the time I lost.
Whether it would be worth it is something you need to figure out for yourself. If your statement "was not meticulous" is true enough, maybe it would be worth it for you. But if you suffered imposter syndrome as I did, you'll mostly be reinforcing the self confidence in realizing that you already knew it.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_13: Something that I didn't see anyone else mention, and it is REALLY important for you to understand.
A PhD is not so much about mastering what is already known about some topic, as it is in venturing out into the unknown, and becoming QUITE LITERALLY the world's FIRST (and, necesssarily, foremost) authority on what was previously unexplored territory. You are doing something that NOBODY has done before. You are researching something that NOBODY has researched before, or (at best or worst, take your pick) the previous researchers failed to do what you successfully did - or are setting out to do.
You did that.
Master's Degrees are for learning a lot about what is already known. Doctorates are for doing something NEW. You did that.
Upvotes: -1
|
2019/08/23
| 1,328
| 5,919
|
<issue_start>username_0: Say for example a physicist (person A) came up with a theory and sent it to a journal. But it was rejected. (As an example, maybe person A came up with the idea for the Higgs particle).
Then 10 years later the same theory was published by someone else (person B). And this time it was published. And maybe they even went on to win the Nobel prize.
Can person A then claim precedence? And then what will happen to the Nobel prize will it go to person A instead?
This must happen quite a lot that papers get rejected but later someone else has the same idea and gets published. What happens in those cases. How do they claim precedence? Or is the polite thing not to make a fuss?<issue_comment>username_1: Your scenario seems pretty improbable, especially in today's world of published scholarship. If a claimed result for an important problem (worthy of Nobel consideration) were submitted it would receive tremendous scrutiny. If it was rejected, then that wasn't a random or accidental outcome. There was some flaw.
The later paper would also receive tremendous scrutiny and if published, no one found an error or hole in it. So, it is most likely sound. Not necessary, of course, but likely.
The new paper is published. Time passes. More time passes. There is a lot of scrutiny. Much of it is in public, not just private letters of a few academics. The result is eventually seen as so important that the Nobel committee awards the prize. It is extremely unlikely that it would ever be withdrawn if someone else claims priority. "Where have they been all these years?"
In mathematics, for example, proposing a theorem but not having a proof, or providing an incorrect proof is worth very nearly - nothing, though it might spark some inquiry that results in later success.
The [Higgs Boson](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson) story is instructive. Higgs and Englert won a Nobel, but there was actually prior art on some of it.
---
I don't know of any field in which there is a *formal* mechanism for claiming priority after some other work is accepted.
That said, some fields are "hot" and there is a lot of parallel research. All the researchers are working with the same base of knowledge (papers, etc). Priority is almost a random situation.
I know of one example in CS in which two students solved exactly the same problem in the same way at the same time at different (high prestige) universities. It took the community a year to determine that both should get their degrees and share the honor on an important problem in language theory. But the process was very ad-hoc. The underlying reason for the simultaneous result was that there was a lot of interest at the time in answering that question.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: If the paper was rejected the journal still should have the archive where the manuscript and all communications are preserved. If the paper was rejected and was actually a good paper ahead of its time it will be of great interest to investigate *why* it was rejected. Of course the more time passes the greater risk that this archived information may be lost but in 10 years it is unlikely.
It is likely that both persons will be mentioned in the history books. The person B may be still considered more important because it was his/her work that actually influenced the scientific community. There were a lot of examples in the history of science when even published work was unnoticed and only later independent work attracted interest. Concerning Nobel Prize... Well, it will be decided by the Nobel Committee that will not surprise anyone by surprising everyone.
Nowadays one can easily share the work placing preprints into a public repository like the mentioned arXiv (where some subjects like gen-phys have a reputation of having quite a low bar). One can also put a preprint into some sufficiently trustworthy repository like one owned by the institute. In the old days before internet preprints existed too. They were sometimes printed as small booklets by the author or printed by the institution. The problem with preprints is that while in theoretical physics it's almost strange not to publish a preprint and journals often encourage and sometimes even require that, in other fields journals sometimes may treat a preprint as a prior publication.
Some priority may be claimed if the work was presented at a conference and something like a presentation and numerous witnesses are available. However this is really unreliable. Because often much less evidence can be provided there are a lot of instances when people claim that some of their unpublished work was stolen and of course no one can prove anything. On the other hand if the work was published as some sort of proceedings (that often have no real peer-review) this claim may be quite solid.
Then there are personal notes and letters that are used by historians. However it is really hard to use it to claim priority when actual interest of living people are involved. Though I remember a smart trick in the history of aluminium electric extraction - one of the authors sent himself several of letters safekeeping the unopened envelopes with official mail stamps and then successfully used those in court to prove his priority.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The scenario as outlined is extremely unlikely for reasons already outlined in other answers. If one did have a substantial priority claim of this sort the most obvious evidence would be (in no strong order) a) the presence of a preprint b) the presence of a copy of the result on a personal/academic website c) the email records that one sent a copy of the paper to a specific journal and d) the records of the journal. Many journals keep records of all submissions as a general policy. And if one does have strong evidence of priority, people will likely take it seriously.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/08/23
| 903
| 3,732
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently sent an email to a professor asking him about an administrative problem I was having, but after I'd hit the send button, I realized I'd forgot to say: "Sorry to bother you" or something of that sort in the beginning...
Now I'm wondering is that considered impolite? Shoud you apologize to professors for bothering them or does that just make you sound phony? I greeted him with"Dear Professor X", told him who I was, asked the question, and thanked him in advance.
He answered my question and all, but I'm just asking for future reference.<issue_comment>username_1: I think that @ndpl hit the nail on the head when he commented that what's most important is that your message to the professor be clear and concise.
During an academic semester I, like most academics, get a crazy number of emails. (I'm an assistant professor of mathematics at a college in the US.) If your email is short and to the point then chances are I'll be able to read it right away, decide what action on my part needs to be taken (if any), and move on to the next email. Empty statements like "I'm sorry to bother you." are polite, but just make my goal of getting through all the unread messages in my inbox that much harder to achieve.
So if your email was written in a professional manner, but was just terse, that's absolutely fine.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'm not a professor, but as a professional who works in an office setting (and gets a lot of random requests for help from people I barely know), I'd say: it's probably good to get yourself out of the habit of using filler like "sorry to bother you". I personally find it disconcerting, as if people assume I'm some kind of ogre that is just as likely to chomp their head off as to help.
Certainly politeness and concision are important, but others have already highlighted this. Keep in mind too that your professor is aware that one day you will, hopefully, be their colleague/work-equal, and that as such, conducting yourself in a professional manner (which includes holding *yourself* in esteem) will be important.
**Edit:** my only experience is working within the United States, so this answer is intended only to apply there.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Perhaps it's worth making one point clearer: certainly blathering pseudo-politenesses is silly and off-putting, *BUT* demonstrably knowing the currently-accepted forms of politenesses is itself a filter, which you'd want to pass.
That is, knowing *what* exactly to say that is currently considered polite and appropriately respectful for the situation, is in itself a filter, whether or not we think it has genuine meaning. But it is surely the case that knowing the current formulaic politenesses does a good bit in the way of getting one's foot in the door.
Actually-non-ironically, as people try to use internet resources to find out what the successful formulaic politenesses are, the criteria shift to compensate. E.g., all the discussion of "what makes a good X" is self-defeating, in sort of an inflationary way, in the sense that whatever the current formulaic answer is is a failure.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: This makes no sense, why should you apologize for sending an email? If they gave you an email to contact them, then they should expect emails... It's not the same as instant messaging where it can interrupt someone when you send it, emails already have a natural barrier between you and the one who receives it and some time between them is expected. After all, they are the virtualization of letters, imagine saying "Sorry to bother you" when you send a letter. Just don't think about it, it's stupid.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/08/24
| 710
| 3,064
|
<issue_start>username_0: During my research on a specific topic, I found two interesting papers by same authors. So, I decided to implement their proposed idea but it was not possible. At first, I thought that I was wrong but after thorough exploration of the papers and reading other papers in the field, I found many mistakes and errors within those papers.
For examples, some of the standard and common rules were presented mistakenly. Since the papers published in highly-esteemed journals, it should be considered as a real drawback. Frankly saying, I take it as some type of betraying to the science and research community.
It seems that either they did not have adequate knowledge to write such a paper or they intentionally added some noise (!) to the paper to make the simulation by others impossible.
So, me and my supervisor have decided to write a critical review for those papers. However, I'm afraid of the consequences.
Can this be a possible scenario that the authors - specifically the somewhat famous ones - affect my future researches, for example trying to reject my papers through their relationships with other editors and researchers, i.e. blacklisting me.<issue_comment>username_1: If you are correct in your analysis and can back up your ideas then there should be no long-term consequences. Truth will out. But in the short term, there may be some disruption.
Science only advances based on valid work. Calling out problems in old work helps move us forward.
But be straightforward in your "criticism" focusing on the work and not the motives of the authors. The latter can get you in trouble.
And, of course, make sure you are correct.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Many scenarios are possible, depending on the authors' character. You might even earn their esteem and gratefulness. However, if they write intentionally misleading papers and don't answer emails, they will surely not like that you denounce their errors (or worse).
Nevertheless, another flaw of human nature is working in your favour: there is nothing like a good polemic for attracting attention. If the authors are belligerent, you could be starting a polemic that may take a lot of your time, but may also make your reputation.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: **Have you tried talking to the authors directly?**
Reach out to the authors before you publish. Don't phrase it as a criticism. Try something like.
>
> I'm confused by how your paper used X, Y, and Z. The normal interpretation is W.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: According to the comments and responses I've came up with a new idea, perhaps best of the two worlds! It may be more useful and less threatening (both for me and the original authors) if we write a comment referencing their paper including some questions and some other suggestions for improving the works.
It's far moderate than a critical review with the aim of questioning validity of their works. Moreover, they have right and opportunity to respond to that comment, by the way.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/24
| 1,129
| 4,673
|
<issue_start>username_0: how do ask for a teacher to let you do a Ph D thesis despite your qualifications are bad ?
a) invent a new formula (even a useless one)
b) to solve an unsolved hypothesis : this is the hardest option
are there any other options ? i would like to do a thesis i have a master degree (FISYMAT) and a degree on physics but my qualifications are 'bad' 1.45 of 4
what can i do ? i have had some ideas and formulae that could be interesting :<http://vixra.org/author/jose_javier_garcia_moreta>
but they are not groundbreaking :( so what should i do ?<issue_comment>username_1: Science isn't about groundbreaking discovery, those are sci-fi movies.
Real science is about boring consistency. You don't need to solve the Riemann hypothesis, you need to demonstrate you can churn out a few good enough papers a year with minimal supervision. Include some funding proposals in there, bam MVP :)
Unfortunately for you, grades are a reasonable proxy measure for boring consistency. The reasoning being: good grades imply that you can understand new content and have the discipline to put the hours to get a decent grade doing boring work unrelated to your interests. So you would need to demonstrate with papers, which is significantly harder (and takes a while), and this idea will backfire if the papers aren't good enough...
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I will assume in my answer that when you say "qualification" you mean GPA. I am not familiar with the University of Granada - all my experience with academia has been in the US and Europe - so keep that in mind.
As already noted, PhD candidates are not expected to produce a work which will shake a field to its core. I see it more of proof that you can think critically and creatively, and that you have the stamina to deal with a major research project. In that way, it is more about jumping through hoops than creating your *magna opus*...
The application process in most Tier 1 universities has at least two parts. First, most universities have a "graduate school" which will make sure that all candidates meet some set of general requirements. Second, each department will usually have their own additional requirements. This is handled somewhat differently in different schools, but in my experience the graduate school will generally use a GPA/GRE/LSAT cutoff, while the department will take a closer look at subject grades, letters of recommendation, statement of purpose, etc...
With a low GPA I think you would have to do a few things as faculty support on its own might not be enough:
1) Take a good look at how the universities you are considering set GPA requirements. Do they consider cumulative GPA or graduate school GPA? Do they take all your years in school into account? Do they look at courses relevant to the degree?
2) Do well on standardized tests. What weight is given to standardized tests? Would a high GRE/LSAT/GMAT/etc weight out a low GPA?
3) What role does faculty have in this process? Can you find a professor or two in your preferred schools with whom you could work? I find that strong candidates usually reach out to faculty *before* applying, but faculty do not necessarily have the power to push a candidate through the process. So this can help, but it is not the deciding factor.
Finally, make sure that your motivations for pursuing a PhD are clear. Do you want to pursue an academic career? Research? Consulting? Private sector? It is vital that you find a faculty mentor who understands and is sympathetic to your motivation (not just your research question). It is even more important that *you* know why you are pursuing a PhD. It is quite different from a masters in content, context, and outcome.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: My experience is limited to certain countries in Europe.
I was in a similar position when I was applying for PhD's. My grades have never been good, so I had to set myself apart in other ways.
My advice would be to talk to your master's supervisor about trying to publish something. That would help prove that you are capable of doing research and developing it into a story.
I would also (as others have suggested) recommend researching PIs in your field of interest and sending them e-mails. You don't need to wow them in that email, just introduce yourself, say what your masters topic was, say why you want to do a PhD in this field, and then ask if they have any openings. Even if they don't, I found that many people were happy to pass me on to someone who did have money for students, simply because they could see that I was interested.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/24
| 1,410
| 6,166
|
<issue_start>username_0: *I re-uploaded this question here, since a user from Physics Stack Exchange told me it might fit better.*
**TL;DR:** I feel like I could not come up with most reasonings myself, so I end up feeling like I'm a phony, a bad student, or not good enough, and I can't focus on the actual problem.
I have been meaning to post this question for a long time. I am aware that this might be a little too personal for this forum, but at the same time I think I might not be alone here. And whether this is a common phase to go through during one's mathematical education or just something people have to learn to deal with, I think it could be of use to others. So here it is.
I'm a third year physics student in university. I am not American, but Spanish, and university/college here does not work like most Americans are used to, which is why I want to clarify this first. **(You can skip this if you know how college works in most countries outside the USA)**. People can't choose what they want to study with as much freedom as people do in the USA: you just choose a degree, like Physics, or Mathematics, and then follow the curriculum with very little deviation. You can choose a bunch of optional classes to start leaning to a certain branch of your discipline, but that's it. No history, language, arts, cinema or biology classes if you're a Physics student. Therefore, a physics student is expected to have passed all of their mathematical training in their second year of university: linear algebra, real and complex calculus, differential equations, etc., and all of the major branches of Physics after their fourth year: Mechanics, Thermodynamics, Electromagnetism, Quantum Mechanics, and the rest of them. There is very little actual research, so students are expected to spend four years studying to get "the basics" down before they can help or research for themselves.
I wanted to tell you this to give you some kind of idea of the type of content that I might struggle with. Now, my problem is the following:
Every time I have to follow some kind of mathematical reasoning (even if it is applied to a certain physical problem), I get nervous and lost if I can't grip it the first time I read it. Sometimes because I don't remember the mathematics too well, sometimes because I just don't understand *why* they chose to complete a step in the way they did, kind of like when a professor suggests a change of variable that works for solving an integral and you think you could have never come up with that. Even after seeing the complete reasoning, I just don't know why they knew they had to do what they did to get there. **And the most common one for me:** sometimes I *can* follow the reasoning, but I have the feeling that I could have never thought about that myself, and therefore I'm just being a phony. When I feel like that, I just feel like giving up and checking the final result: "I am going to forget this anyway, since I could not come up with that line of reasoning".
Is it normal to feel like this at this point of one's education? This might be impostor's syndrome, or just the fact that maybe I am not very well prepared, or that I might need to find some kind of mental peace in the fact that this is common before I can actually sit down and do things.
Thank you all. You are a great community. I could talk to my therapist about this, but first I wanted to talk to people who might actually have encountered this problem in their lives.<issue_comment>username_1: What you are experiencing is very normal for a student. It takes a lot of practice solving simpler problems before you can, on your own, solve the harder ones. You have also discovered the truth that it is harder to produce a proof than it is to follow it. But it is also easer to read and follow a fictional story than it is to create one. That also takes a lot of practice.
In fact, it takes a lot of failed attempts before you learn to see the successful path. Even then it is hard.
Moreover, if you are reading the professional literature (published papers), note that most mathematicians will leave out all but the most essential steps. This is both because of page limits, but also because they are writing for people just like themselves, and not for novices, including students.
So, while it is discouraging, it isn't something to think of as an indication that you are a failure. It is just genuinely difficult to follow sparsely written proofs and even harder to produce the steps between what you already know and what you want to prove. And the more practice you get, the easier it will become, partly because that practice helps you recall what you once knew but don't remember very well, having not used it actively for a while.
Press on.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Every time I have to follow some kind of mathematical reasoning (even if it is applied to a certain physical problem), I get nervous and lost if I can't grip it the first time I read it.
>
>
>
Why do you think that it's unusual to have to go through a line of mathematical reasoning several times the first time that you've seen it in order to fully absorb it? I do that all the time when I come across something that I haven't seen before.
As for not understanding *why* someone chose to perform a certain step in a mathematical procedure (like a change of variable in an integral) or a physical argument and then feeling inadequate because you feel that you wouldn't have been unable to think of the step yourself, realize that when you're reading a book describing some mathematical proof you're looking at a *final, polished product*. You don't see all the dead-ends and speed bumps and wrong turns that the person took in the course of delivering that final product.
With time, *experience* should make you feel more comfortable and confident. You'll notice that oftentimes a mathematical proof is making use of a trick or concept or procedure that you remember seeing before. You'll start to see familiar, recognizable patterns in the mathematical proofs and procedures more and more often as your experience grows.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/08/24
| 474
| 1,942
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am submitting my article to IEEE Access to get its rapid response (degree deadline time problem). I'm hopeful of their fee waiver/discount because I am student/unemployed as well as physically impaired. However, I am not sure if I would be definitely given the fee waiver/discount.
What if I get acceptance of my paper from IEEE Access and find myself unable to pay the APC? Can the journal take any legal action against me?
Note: Application for fee waiver/discount to the journal cannot be lodged before submission/acceptance.<issue_comment>username_1: No, they won't/can't take legal action. The worst that could occur is that they won't accept the paper. Nothing to worry about beyond that.
But if you are a student, explore with your university whether they have funds to pay the fees. Some will be able to do this and others not. If you are working with a professor perhaps s/he has grant money that will pay such fees also. It is worth asking.
Not all journals will have liberal forgiveness policies, but some do. Just ask and be prepared to state your case.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Understand what APCs are and why they exist. Traditionally journals have made money from subscriptions. In this model there are no APCs, and the reader pays for access to the article. Today there's a movement towards open access, where the author pays and the journal makes the article available for free. Both types of journals exist right now.
If you can't pay the APC, you can:
1. Find the money somewhere. Ask your professor or library, if you have one.
2. Ask for a waiver. Tell the journal you can't afford it and see if they're OK with giving you free open access. You will need to demonstrate you indeed cannot afford it.
3. Submit to a non-open access journal.
If you can't pay the APC they won't take legal action against you, but they won't publish your article.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/24
| 1,211
| 5,451
|
<issue_start>username_0: For a high school engineering project, a friend and I have found ourselves deriving an equation for how to most efficiently configure a system.
We found an equation that, given a few parameters about the system, equates the amount of material added (and thus weight), to the amount of energy this system will gain. Along the way, we needed to find an equation that, given an amount of material, would describe how to most efficiently use the material.
We were thinking we'd write this up in a nice paper, and publish it somewhere. (For resume building, college applications, etc.).
Where/how could we do this (if anywhere), and how long would it take?
---
I posted this on Physics StackExchange and it was recommended that I post it here as well.<issue_comment>username_1: The big question here is whether what you've done is new to the world - whether it's a genuine new advance that nobody in the world has done before, or whether it's something known to the world that you, and perhaps your teacher, have not seen before. Without meaning any disrespect to you and your friend, the second option here is more likely - but the first is of course possible.
If it's genuinely new, you can look to publish in a scientific journal. If it's not new (but perhaps still unusually advanced for a high school student), you should perhaps look for other types of publication, which could still be good for your resume. The difficult question is how to tell which category your work falls into.
My suggestion is to speak to your high school teacher about this. They have seen a lot of different students' work. If *they* think that it may be a novel development, then either write, or get your teacher to write, to a professor in a relevant subject at a local university. See if they will look it over and advise you.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Do you both have any contacts in the engineering field? They may be able to situate your issue and have contacts that might be able to help.
It is a big ask for high school students I know but try to spend the time to do the research if you can? Paywalls to journals are a big problem. What else has been done around your issue and question. What other available equations can be used? What do people do now to sort out this problem? This would give you a clue to who and what sort of people/researchers are tackling the problem and would be interested in your equation if it is indeed unique. Even if it is not unique, the contacts may also become a useful resource for your future.
Physics SE have not addressed your question and I suspect that your equation addresses a pragmatic issue rather than a theoretical problem so maybe the [Engineering StackExchange](https://engineering.stackexchange.com) might be a better fit. However, spend the time going through the various tags and branches in the SE rather than just jumping from one StackExchange to another. Write a couple of paragraphs about the current approaches available, quote other relevant questions or sites that explain the issue in better detail and explain how your equation is unique. This skill of "situating" the problem and being to respectful to others trying to solve the same problem while discussing the background in an engaging way is an important and underappreciated part of "doing research".
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Check out the [American Journal of Undergraduate Research](http://www.ajuronline.org/). You need a faculty mentor. Make contact with your state university.
Do plenty of online searches to see if your work is already published. This will take some time. Use various keywords.
Even if your formula or equation is not new, if the derivation is new, you can still publish. This is especially true if your derivation yields new insights into the result, or if the derivation serves as a model to solve harder problems. So take a look at the derivation to see if it yields any insights to harder problems.
If you have something publishable, don't give up. Be persistent. This may not happen for a while, but keep at it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I agree with @lucidbrot's comment.
Even if you are not the first to derive the formula, successfully doing it on your own shows you have a fairly good understanding of it. This puts you in a good position to help others understand it or learn of its existence. Write it up, post it online, give a talk, whatever. There are many opportunities created for young people to practice their communication skills or get recognised for impressive work. And you can create your own opportunities.
I'm sure you have read useful online tutorials about technical things; hardly any of them are actually written by the first person to publish that concept!
A journal is not the right avenue unless there is something new and of significant value in your work. But there is nothing stopping you from writing things up on your website, or making some YouTube videos. There are online communities of various sorts (hobbyist communities may be a good bet). Also you should see if there are student awards that may be applicable to what you've done, and look at the criteria.
*Do* try to find an existing publication about the formula (or a more sophisticated version of your formula.) It's great to give a simple, practical explanation and then say, "by the way, you can check out xyz."
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/08/24
| 1,751
| 7,622
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am starting my Ph.D. and am interested in a specific field of research which seems quite promising for the next years. Now, my masters supervisor does not work in this field, nor anyone in the department, and it seems in the country.
Nonetheless, *he is interested* and suggested me to find an expert in the field from another country to collaborate and said he would sign a recommendation letter1. In the better scenario this would be a formal co-supervision, but not a requirement.
So, I sent an email to such an expert (in fact it seems one of the researches who started the field) with my masters thesis attached as well as the recommendation letter. After a week unfortunately I didn't get any response.
I asked my masters supervisor and he suggested me to reply the email resending it, because he said that usually there is an answer. He also told me to add one line asking if someone else could be suggested.
I've sent the message last week and no answer as well up to now.
To be honest I'm confused. I mean, the thesis has been quite complimented by a very famous researcher in my country who integrated the examination board. The recommendation letter speaks quite well about my work. Finally my university seems to be respected internationally. With all this, I thought at least a no as answer I would get.
Perhaps the only point is that I have not worked in that field in my masters, but that was because no one in the country knew it.
Now, is this lack of response, in the timespan I told about, effectively a no, totally dismissing the possibility, and so should I already disconsider it? Or a no would be really be said explicitly? Should I wait more before looking for some other possibility?
**Edit**: In trying to make the question more concise and to the point (whether or not one could expect an answer in the timespan of more or less 10 days) I left out a detail. The email was focused on asking for a collaboration. Of course, formal co-supervision would be better, but it is not required, and we briefly mentioned it. So the email was entirely focused on collaboration. The scholarship pays for just a collaboration also, where the PhD student spends one year working on the group of another researcher.
---
1. I don't know how things are done in other places, but here it is possible to establish a collaboration with a researcher from anywhere, including other country, and have it all paid by the scholarship if you need to stay a certain time working there with him. This may or may not be a formal co-supervision, so that the researcher has the option to not sign if he cannot.<issue_comment>username_1: Your time scale seems too short for me. Patience might be a virtue here. But sending the thesis and the request at the same time is probably a pretty heavy load to drop on a person.
Ask your advisor to follow up with a request and a recommendation. It might be more successful coming from them than from you.
But in general, making a request and offering to show related work in the initial request might be more successful than just sending it all at once. Some people get a lot of these requests and have learned to ignore them.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I would suggest emailing with multiple people at once for practicality. People can take a lot of time to respond or simply do not respond. Couple reasons might be,
* They might be on holiday (I have seen academics who do not even check their mails in vacation)
* It might be ignored
* It might get tagged for spam
* The recieving end might be talking their time to consider
I had similar issues when I was trying to find speakers for certain events. I might be practical to add a time limit. Something along the lines of "if you could reply within a week it would be really helpful".
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: 1. I would never answer an email from a student suggesting I co-supervise him with someone I do not know. At the very least the email should be from the supervisor.
2. I would never co-supervise with someone unknowledgeable in my field.
3. My university does not allow co-supervision by people who are not at least adjunct to the core unit of the program.
4. I would never accept remote co-supervision in a unit where I do not know the supervisor and in which I do not have some sort of appointment at least at the adjunct level.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> told me to add one line asking if someone else could be suggested
>
>
>
I would like to take a different perspective and reframe the issue as an issue about networking and also about investigating the networks present in a narrow field of endeavour.
If the field is so narrow and there is only one recognized expert in the field, ie. the person you emailed, then you have to appreciate how difficult it is for him to engage and represent such a narrow field. He would be working extensively and focused on growing the knowledge of his field rather than expanding his networks. So investigating his networks for other co-supervision would be worthwhile. What conferences has he presented in, what are the other sessions and authors in that area? Who are his collaborators? His co-authors on papers, what skill-sets or areas that make his work interesting?
There may also be institutional barriers or other structural barriers that would make co-supervision difficult that you may not have appreciated. Does his institution allow international co-supervision? Is this acknowledged in his institution? As username_3 said, most institutions require a lot of paperwork and approval before co-supervision is permitted. What are the rules around co-supervision for your institution? What are the administrative demands and expectations? Has international co-supervision been done before? What will the impact of timezone differences be? All these issues are important barriers to co-supervision that will take him a lot of time to figure out even before he emails you.
Lastly, have you thought of collaboration instead? This may be more reasonable as the administrative burden is far less and you are able to do all the work with your current supervisor. Have you also thought instead of potentially doing your postdoc with him instead? All these options are far less "heavy" as username_1 as said.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: First, we cannot know the precise answer obviously. In theory, the professor may have his/her own reasons for not answering.
But using some common sense my answer is that it is highly probable that the answer to your question is "**Yes! The professor is declining a cooperation**".
Unfortunately, it is very common for academics nowadays to simply not answer emails. I find this behavior rude and unacceptable, unless the emails are spams, or the said academic simply receives thousands of emails each day in case he/she is a well known public figure. But in most cases, academics can and should answer reasonable informative questions, like yours, and they choose not to, simply because they can.
I call this unprofessional behavior "academic ghosting!".
The reason why, probably, the professor has chosen to ignore you is most probably this: he/she does not know you, and does not find your suggestion attractive enough for them, or risk free enough (that is, they don't know if your are a serious enough researcher, etc.). If you are talking about *cooperation* with you staying in your current university, then the professor does not view this as an attractive deal for him/her, due to many administrative and other reasons.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/08/24
| 587
| 2,354
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm writing a paper with a professor. I want to put a link to my website in the paper. I am first author, so I'm wondering if the following is okay:
```
<NAME>, Slifer University, https://BobSmith.io
<NAME>, Georgia Tech of Mechanical Engineering
```
Suppose I'm <NAME> and the professor is <NAME>.
This way people can see my other work and potentially hire me. I'd also mention, this is a quite well known professor, so don't say "No one will look at your website".<issue_comment>username_1: Some papers I've written, I've included, in the header with my name and email address, a link to my website, though not to the paper. Just a link to the front page. On joint papers we have all done this.
But only consider doing something like this if everyone approves, including other authors and the journal/conference authority.
But, if you don't own the site (say the university has provided you a web space), I would recommend against it as your affiliation will change eventually and you will lose control of your university owned web site. If your link is to a personal site (as you indicate) that you own and intend to maintain over the *long run*, say 50 years, then it might be fine.
However, Google and other search engines can find you and your work easily enough. The link isn't really necessary. If the paper has a reference on the site then a search with your name and some part of the title will probably turn it up easily enough. So, I think the advantage would be quite small.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Since the OP has commented that they've never seen an example of a published paper including the URL of an author's website, here is an example of such a paper:
[Local Selectivity of Orders in Central Simple Algebras](http://www2.oberlin.edu/faculty/blinowit/papers/selective2.pdf), <NAME> and <NAME>, Int. J. Number Theory 13 (2017), no. 4, 853-884.
Our website URLs appear with our institutional information on the last page of the paper.
By the way, here's another lesson to draw from this example: try to use email addresses and website URLs that are permanent. By the time this paper was published I had already moved to a different institution and the University of Michigan had deleted the email and web accounts I listed in the paper.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/25
| 1,199
| 4,785
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a grad student. I have been away for an internship in another city. My professor came to meet me at the weekend and he invited me to dinner.
I did not have any time to prepare and I did not bring a gift and he brought me a gift. I was embarrassed, really.
I recently got a result from my project and was very interested to show him my result as I had not seen him for a long time. I am feeling so embarrassed.
Do you think these behaviors were rude? I was very clumsy. Could I write something as thankyou letter and apologize about not being prepared?<issue_comment>username_1: Welcome to academia.SE :-)
See, many things that we do in our life are most of the time unplanned and spontaneous. The thing that you did is not a big deal for good people. Just say sorry sometime during tea time and get on with it. Don't keep it scratching.
Further, one positive to that is: He would have felt so happy that he has got a very dedicated (and weird) student who shows results during family dinner.
I have done it quite few times and I am not sorry about it. It feels weird initially, but not so apologetic.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I agree with username_1. There aren't usually any rules with informal family dinners with the supervisor. On the spectrum of interactions, it is not formal and does not hold as great a social weight as you seem to imply. It could be that he and his family really enjoyed your excitement and your passion explaining your project. It is likely that it may not be inappropriate at all. His family recognise that it is not just a "social dinner" and they know that you are his student and they are probably very used to work debate and discussions. Imagine how awkward it would be if you became overly familiar and overly social with him and his family, asking about personal sensitive issues. That would have been a far much worse scenario, with huge implications and damage to your professional relationship.
Definitely thank him and show deep appreciation for the gift, time and dinner. Take the time to figure out how best to do this, his secretary or someone who knows him might give some clues. Remember it is something thoughtful rather than the cost that matters. When people get older, "stuff" and "trinkets" are more of a burden than appreciated. At a minimum, send an email.
Don't focus on apologizing, because his might make further invitations awkward. At a push, consider saying that you feel awkward or clumsy but you were excited about your project. Gifts are not usually expected from students. Usually people bring wine or a little something for home cooked dinners from colleagues or peers but not for restaurant dinners. If it is a more formal event then the gifting follows the rules around that type of event. So well done with your project and your internship. It sounds like great work and I am sure your professor appreciated catching up.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> I did not bring a gift
>
>
>
In most (?) cultures, a person above you in a hierarchical structure should not expect gifts from you, especially if his income is significantly higher than yours - unless he is doing you some great favor. A dinner invitation is not a great favor meriting a gift from you.
>
> Do you think these behaviors were rude?
>
>
>
The only part which may have been rude is "talking shop" in the presence of his family. And even that depends on subtle aspects of your relationship with your supervisor and whether or not he hinted he might be interested in seeing the result.
It couldn't have been significantly rude, because you only did it at the end of the meeting. So, either a bit rude or not rude at all.
>
> I was very clumsy.
>
>
>
Whether you had been rude or not, you weren't clumsy. You're berating yourself well beyond what your actions merit, even under the worst possible interpretation.
>
> Could I write something as thank you letter and apologize about not being prepared?
>
>
>
That sounds like too much. But when you next meet, you can *tell him you what you feel*; you can even say you're sorry (whether that's merited or not). He will likely tell you that it's all fine and say there's nothing for you to be sorry about.
If you're not meeting him for a long time, then it's ok to send a thank-you email for the gift (assuming it's not completely trivial gift like some chocolate); and you can tell him how you feel as a secondary point in such a message - but don't over-dramatize things.
>
> I do not know what should I do right now. I am feeling so embarrassed.
>
>
>
Consider some breathing exercising, or light physical activity, to reduce tension. Until you next meet your Professor.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/08/25
| 565
| 2,463
|
<issue_start>username_0: Imagine, you did data evaluation, published. When preparing your data for the thesis, you've realized that your approach was wrong. It does not change the main course of the paper and do not damage main conclusions, although it does affect the quantitative part of research. It is more than 1 year back published, so instead of erratum you decided that you put your updated data in your thesis and will do your best to address your mistakes in the next publication.
Question is how to formulate decent answers during the PhD defense if the committee asks why didn't you publish erratum/correction if you've made a mistake in your data evaluation?
Could I answer in a way "I've realized I've made a mistake and it will not happen again. The correction will not change main conclusions of the publication. I will make sure to address these points in the next publication concerning this topic to avoid any misunderstanding"
Maybe some other ideas?
Thanks in advance!<issue_comment>username_1: There is a world of difference between publishing correct data with correct results that are in an incorrect direction compared to data and results that are incorrect.
The former may well save someone else lots of time when choosing the direction they need to go, in fact, it may well be the correct direction for them.
So, in your defense, it's not a "mistake" , just a "blind alley" which meant you had to change direction to the method you subsequently used. **All** the people at your defense have had the same...
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: If I were on your committee, the key take-away I would look for is that the mistake *will* be corrected in the literature. Either an erratum or an explicit correction in a future publication would satisfy me, though in the latter case I would ask, "What additional steps need to be completed before this future publication will be available, and how long do you anticipate that may take?"
If the future publication is still quite far away (by the standards of your field), then I would recommend an erratum in the meantime, which should do no harm. I would not consider a long period of time since publication a very strong argument against providing an erratum. [Here](https://arxiv.org/abs/1006.4518) is one famous paper in my field that received an erratum after 3.5 years.
A promise that no mistakes will happen in the future would strike me as naive and unrealistic.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/25
| 574
| 2,405
|
<issue_start>username_0: Are they tenured / on tenure track?
Are they more like clinical teaching professors?
Do they perform research?
I recently saw this job with lots of teaching duties but no research listed.<issue_comment>username_1: This may vary from university to university and department to department, but in general at many locations a Professor of Practice is essentially tenured with a 100% teaching load. This sort of title has become more common, partially with schools taking people who were previously labeled as lecturers or senior lecturers and relabeling them as such. Iowa State University is one example where this happened recently <https://www.inside.iastate.edu/article/2018/05/03/fs> .
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: This answer will be a little different from that of [username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/135210/75368).
Yes, such a position is intended for people wanting to build a career as teachers/educators, rather than theoretical researchers. But there are caveats.
First, the job may not come with a tenure track leading to eventual traditional tenure. Instead, as at Duke, after a probationary period the holders get long term (say ten year) contracts that are renewable. The ones I am familiar with also come with various ranks. You don't get a lifetime employment commitment, but you do get security. I know people who have held these positions over a long period. (I actually don't know of a situation in which traditional tenure is offered.)
But it isn't quite correct to say that there are no research expectations. The professors of the practice are expected to contribute to the profession and, normally, to publish and have a presence at conferences and such. But the research is more likely to be in pedagogy than theory. This is the situation in computer science at several very good universities. The people are very active professionally and may be text book authors.
These positions exist when a good university has both a commitment to research in a field, but also to high quality undergraduate education. Holders of these positions relieve the top theoreticians of teaching lower level courses, especially to large classes, but still provide high quality instructors for the undergraduates. Of course, such people are also able to interact with the more traditional research focused faculty.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2019/08/25
| 4,965
| 19,937
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've been reading [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/96813/how-to-silence-the-voice-that-tells-you-youre-being-financially-irresponsible-b) question, whose premise is that going directly into industry after (presumably) just a bachelor's will make you more money than doing a PhD and then going into industry. To my surprise, most people seemed to agree with the OP.
My thinking has always been that, yes, going into industry with just a bachelor's will make you some money in the short term, but it will also:
A) Land you in a relatively low level position to start.
B) You will eventually hit a ceiling past which you cannot rise.
My thinking has always been that with a PhD you will start in a relatively higher position, and you will not hit a ceiling, so in the long run you will make more money. Why is my reasoning wrong?<issue_comment>username_1: While the comments of user <NAME> are instructive, I'll try to give a bit more perspective.
A PhD is training to do research. In most fields it is theoretical research, and in a few (applied math) it is applied research. Many large companies (IBM, Google, ...) have quite large research divisions. Some of them do theoretical research but the trend has been (last 20 years or more) toward product focused applied research. But the people that hold positions in these divisions need to know how to do research and so a PhD is the more appropriate training.
A person who enters such a company with only a BS or MS has had much less, if any, real research training so would typically be hired into another division - product development, say, likely at a lower salary. A PhD would find the work there to be pretty boring in most cases (startup companies excepted, I suppose), but it would feel "about right" for a BS holder.
Depending on the company there may be a ceiling or not. Most companies try to make it possible for promising employees to move up, so the chance is often there, but in order to do it you need to get the skills to do the required research. That may require additional education, not just "on the job learning". And a person who is trying to move up will always be competing with others (recent PhDs) who already have the skills that are needed at the moment. And you not only have to do the current job but learn how to do the next one.
None of this relates to your headline question, however. If you study six or so years for a doctorate, making essentially no money beyond bare essentials, it takes a while to make up for that financially even if you then start at a higher salary. And then there may be student debt, as well.
But people who get PhDs and similar are seldom driven primarily by money. Such people are more likely to be willing to sacrifice a bit so as to follow the lure of mathematics or science, or whatever. Ideas. But a lot of people, fiction writers, say, value other things more than money. If you can follow your dreams and get paid for it, that may be enough. It is why a lot of people want to be academics, actually.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I don’t have experience in industry myself, but know several people who do (and have made the transition from industry to academia and vice versa).
Broadly speaking, getting a CS PhD in the USA with the intent of switching to industry after will result in about $500k in lost wages. This is accounting for about 5 years of PhD salary vs programming salary, raises, bonuses etc. The jobs that necessitate a PhD in industry are few and far between, and are highly competitive. Thus, starting a PhD with industry in mind, and assuming you’ll get that job is, statistically speaking, unrealistic. There are still many good reasons to still do it!
1. It’s a fun and fulfilling endeavor that offers you a chance to think freely about things you care about for 5 years!
2. If you are entrepreneurial then I know some people who start companies based in their PhD work.
3. If your undergraduate degree isn’t in computer science then your PhD can be treated as a semi vocational degree (though granted a masters will do as well)
4. If you’re interested in moving to the USA then a PhD offers a path to permanent residence.
5. You like research and want to leave the door open to academia. In that case a PhD is a must.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_3: **This question can't be answered without the details.** How much do Bachelor's degree holders earn in your field / locality? How much do PhD degree holders earn? What jobs are enabled by a PhD that someone with just a Bachelor's degree cannot do? It's certainly possible that people with PhDs earn more, but remember you also invest time into the PhD that you won't get back, and because of exponential growth in savings/debt, this can mean you're better off starting to work immediately.
Once you know the answers to these questions, you can run calculations such as [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/29504/is-it-worth-self-funding-a-phd-to-attend-a-top-10-university/109282#109282) (which is for a different situation, but the same concepts apply) to find out whether it's indeed financially irresponsible. Without the answers, this question is also unanswerable.
Example of [how variable the answer to this question](https://www.businessinsider.com.au/emolument-humanities-phd-cost-2016-5?r=US&IR=T) can be:
>
> The research shows that Bachelor, Masters and PhD graduates in Humanities — who studied History, Geography Philosophy or Politics — all end up on the same salary, suggesting Masters and PhD students did not see a return on their investment.
>
>
> In fact, PhD graduates in these subjects earn less on average — £40,000 ($58,000) — than Masters students, who earn £44,000 ($64,000).
>
>
> Physics, Chemistry, Life Sciences and Healthcare PhD’s also don’t do much to raise pay, with just a £4,000 ($5,800) difference.
>
>
> Conversely, PhD or Doctorates in Maths, Computer Sciences, Law, and Psychology graduates earn much more than those who only did Masters in the subjects.
>
>
> PhDs in Mathematics and Statistics earn twice as Bachelor degrees alone — £112,000 ($162,000) — with 78% of PhDs graduates working in the financial and consulting industries.
>
>
>
If you're thinking of doing a PhD, do yourself a favor and study the job market before committing to the PhD.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Your assumptions are questionable
---------------------------------
Let's take a literal look at the assumptions you make there.
>
> A) Land you in a relatively low level position to start.
>
>
>
The appropriate point of comparison is not at the point of "start" determined by the decision to get a PhD, but at some fixed point of time - for example, the time when you'd start working after getting a PhD. By that time the equivalent bachelor's student would have had something like five years of experience, raises and promotions - and if they'd put in as much learning and work as a PhD program requires, I'd expect that position to be comparable or better than what a PhD graduate can get as their first job offer.
>
> B) You will eventually hit a ceiling past which you cannot rise.
>
>
>
This is simply not true. The majority of career paths (except regulated professions e.g. medicine and law) do not *require* an advanced degree even in cases when one might be helpful, and someone starting with a bachelors degree generally can progress to the very top either through work experience, or by getting a masters later in life while working.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: Getting a PhD is not financially irresponsible¹.
------------------------------------------------
Your career earnings may be less, or may be more, than without a PhD. Whether this is the case depends on too many factors to be answerable without details. It shouldn't matter too much.
If you earn enough to finance the present and future life of yourself and your dependents, then you are not being financially irresponsible.
With a PhD, you can perfectly well finance the present and future life of yourself and your dependents, therefore getting a PhD is not financially irresponsible². A PhD is not a recipe for unemployment and homelessness.
Examples of financially irresponsible behaviour
-----------------------------------------------
* Getting a loan and spending it on consumer electronics, vacations, expensive cars, or gambling.
* Spending your salary in the pub as soon as you get it, leaving your kids go hungry and failing to pay the bills.
* Spending savings, inheritance, or lottery winnings within a few years without having a stable job.
Examples of financially responsible behaviour
---------------------------------------------
...or at least examples of behaviour that are not, by themselves, financially irresonsible:
* Getting a job that earns less (but enough) but makes you happier than otherwise.
* Getting a PhD and enjoy life or a research career while still earning enough to pay the rent ones entire life.
* Declining a promotion+raise because one doesn't want to perform the duties or have the responsibilities associated with the new role.
* Making a career as an artist earning very little, but correspondingly spending very little, in a country with a strong social safety net and quality free public healthcare and education (including tertiary education).
---
I earn more than I need (in a position that requires a PhD) and I have no clue what I would do with the money if I earned much more. I still have plenty of savings from the salary I earned as a PhD student. Plenty for my needs and wants. Nobody should *need* €100k+ per year except in places where real estate prices are extremely high (many people may *want* more, though), but in those places highly skilled people should be able to find jobs that pay enough to pay the rent too — including if you have a PhD — or one can look for a job elsewhere.
---
¹*Self-funding* a PhD can be financially irresponsible if it puts you (massively) into debt and causes difficulties to make ends meet. I believe self-funding a PhD is very rare (I've never met a self-funded PhD student) but I do not have the data and [academia varies more than I think](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4471/1033), so maybe it's not always as rare as I believe it to be.
---
²I don't have data on PhDs in all fields and I don't know how much, for example, a humanities PhD may earn; but I would be surprised if a PhD increases the risk of *poverty* compared to a humanities BA or MA. In this case, it of course makes a [difference where you do your PhD](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4471/1033).
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_6: **In the past, now or in future?!**
With currently declining number of stock corporations, world population growth converging, machine learning algorithms replacing high-qualified academics in medical diagnostics, finance mathematics, law... you should also internalize into your decision making how future-proof your education based on a bachelor or master degree is. Having a relatively good and demanded but specialist degree now might turn out a professional dead end in 10-20 years with the exponential progress rate in technology.
A PhD diversifies your knowledge and job risk, qualifies you to teach yourself new things and to solve bigger problems autonomously as well as asking new important questions concerning research and industry applications. PhD students often look too much on the title itself which will give you often no salary bonus and lose out of eyes or don't know what they learn on the way to earning the title. During academia you can meet and work with very different people and make very different experiences in comparison to industry.
While doing a PhD later is still an option and many master graduates often choose a PhD sometimes because the job-market is overloaded with applicants in a economical regression, I wouldn't start a PhD in your 40s. Then I think your financial losses will be much bigger than doing it after bachelor/master or in your 30s. But working in industry a few years before doing a PhD is an option I would always consider if you are not sure to pursue an academica career.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: The answer is very straightfoward: A PhD is an apprenticeship towards becoming a researcher. It's not furthering a general education, but rather job training for a specific career path. This career path is *not* on the route towards becoming an industry worker, which focuses much more on using well-understood techniques to solve well-understood problems than it does on expanding the boundaries of human knowledge. (Both are very respectable careers to have, they're just different things.)
As a result, if you want to go into industry after having completed your PhD, you're asking a company to hire you after you've spent 4+ years of your life doing something else entirely. The person who spent those four years in industry is a safer bet, and also has 4 years of raises, promotions, and job experience under their belt for exactly the kind of work they're competing with you for.
If you know you want to go into industry for certain, get your bachelor's or maybe your master's and then land your first job. If you want to go into research, get your PhD. Don't get a PhD just for the prestige if it doesn't take you down the career path you want.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: Unless you have people who depend on you as a source of income due to inability to support themselves financially and broken economic systems that don't address this, there is simply no such thing as "financial irresponsibility". It may be financially disadvantageous to you to get a PhD, but you're not wronging anyone else by doing it. You're well within your rights and reasonable, non-antisocial behavior to make use of academic opportunities because you think it will make your life better/happier/whatever or because you think doing so will bring benefit to others or to the sum of human knowledge.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: As a software engineer who has worked for Fortune 100 tech companies, I can assure you that the lack of an advanced degree is no impediment to securing lucrative employment. I say this as someone who not only lacked a Ph.D and MS, but even a BS degree! In fact, you may be shocked to learn how much *interns* with no discernible experience besides a few years of schooling can earn at a FAANG or similar. At no point in my career did a boss or anyone else suggest: "Your path to promotion is limited by your education/schooling/degrees." On the contrary, I regularly participated in the hiring process and found that candidates with advanced degrees were, on average, no better than those with a BS or simply a lot of practice.
If your goal is to obtain one of the few positions that actually *requires* a Ph.D, then I don't have much to say about that. But the software engineering sector *in general* prizes *youth*, not *education*. Software companies are eager to snatch up fresh-faced college grads because they will work long hours, learn new technologies quickly, let go of obsolete technologies equally quickly (or better, agitate for change), and absorb the company culture without so much bickering about work/life balance. As you can imagine, someone who spent 5 years in academia is not actually going to look so competitive or attractive, relatively speaking. I would go so far as to say that if you bother to get a Ph.D, then it would be "financially irresponsible" to pursue any positions that *don't* require such an advanced degree, because of the compromises and trade-offs entailed by that choice.
Of course, you can succeed in technology at any age, but age discrimination is real and not going away any time soon. Software engineers are increasingly becoming like new automobiles--your value declines dramatically the moment you step off campus.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: There is an implicit assumption in the question which (at least in the US, and with a CS degree path) is completely false. That is that you must follow a sequential path: BS -> MS -> PhD -> employment (whether in industry or academia). It's perfectly possible to do BS, lucrative employment while working on MS, more lucrative employment, work on PhD because all that lucrative employment (and a lack of extravagant habits) you don't really need any more money (or at least not much), and can pursue things that interest you.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_11: If money is your main concern then yes, you should **not** go for a PhD.
If you are more concerned with risking your the tasks in your working life to be 99% trivial under-stimulating boredom traps if you don't go for a PhD, then you should go for a PhD.
The thing is, you don't know how boring or understimulating you would find typical BSc or MSc tasks to be until you try working for a year or two.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_12: Part of answering the question accurately is defining what you think "Financially Irresponsible" means.
In the linked question, the user seems to define it as the maximum amount of profit they can make in their lifetime or at least in the time period of them finishing their PhD and finding their first job. By this definition, in fields where industry is mostly practical application of skills (think software developer, system administrator, etc), it would be financially irresponsible to get a PhD since you would be losing out on a higher salary, potential bonuses, and most importantly industry experience that could lead to promotions and higher salaries.
In some industries, getting higher education like a masters degree or PhD is necessary to find a high paying industry job. There are many very general degrees like biology, chemistry, physics, or mathematics that have very few positions for BS graduates but more, higher paying positions for those who furthered their education and got a more specialized degree (Biology BS -> Dermatologist, Mathematics BS -> Big Data Analyst, etc)
In terms of the points you brought up:
A. Regardless of whether or not you have an advanced degree, you will more likely than not end up in a relatively low level position if you have no industry experience. Even if you end up in a more advanced form of industry because of your degree, you will probably start out on the lowest rung of the ladder.
B. In industry, you are usually only capped by your skill and turnover of the higher ups in your company. The second point is irrelevant if you are finding a new job with the experience you have from previous ones.
If you are asking because you had plans to get a PhD and are now second guessing yourself, try to figure out the exact reasons why you would like a PhD, even before thinking about if you feel it is necessary for your field. If you are only in it for the extra money/higher level position, you may need to evaluate whether a PhD will actually be beneficial in your field.
If you asked just out of curiosity, hopefully these answers have helped you out.
To put it into context, I have a BS in CIS and a minor in System administration. The sysadmin classes were quite close to what I experienced when I worked as a sysadmin with the caveat that you cannot possibly touch on every technology, command, etc that you may need in an industry position with the amount of courses you would take for your degree. As a software developer, I use little to none of what I learned in my CS classes and in retrospect, I feel like universities are starting to treat the CS curriculum similarly to how they treat other hard sciences in the sense that you are learning primarily theoretical concepts and techniques and spending very little time on the application of such techniques.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/26
| 2,798
| 12,518
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a senior at Worcester Polytechnic Institute. After asking another question on this website, I have decided to become a professor of practice. To do this, I will pursue a Ph.D.
A Ph.D. project that I have already started in my free time this summer is developing an application and website that would help with calculus education. The application has
1. A computer algebra system which solves the calculus problems
2. A system which shows the work that the computer algebra system performs
3. A system which gives hints for the user
4. A system which allows the reader to type in each line of their work for the system to check for correctness and possibly identify the reason the answer is incorrect. This would include a system which would allow the user to draw graphs with their mouse for curve sketching problems.
5. A website where the application would be available for free use.
6. If there is still time left, typed notes and maybe even video lectures to correspond with the application.
I already have done 3,014 lines for the computer algebra system over the summer and I would love to make this my research project. I think that this would make an awesome research project because I would do it even if I didn't get a Ph.D. (I originally was considering making a level with the website as an alternative to the Ph.D.)
However, I worried that it would not be eligible as a Ph.D. project because I'm creating something rather than discovering a new theorem, numerical algorithm, or mathematical model. This made me even consider not getting a Ph.D. as my previous experience with research in numerical analysis was not enjoyable.<issue_comment>username_1: This might be a good research topic for a Ph.D. in *mathematics education*, which is a thing that you can get a Ph. D. in (see for example [this list](https://amte.net/doctoral-programs) of schools offering that degrees). However, it would not be a good topic for a Ph. D. in mathematics.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: I think you need to do some reading up on the path towards getting a PhD. In general, an idea that you have on your own based on knowledge you acquired during your undergraduate studies is extremely unlikely to be suitable as a thesis topic. Rather, to get a PhD you’d need to apply and get accepted to a PhD program, take classes, and find an advisor who would help you develop a research topic to work on. The advisor has to be familiar with the area you’re working on. So in order to work on a research topic related to computer algebra you’d need to be in a department where there are people interested in this area.
As for your specific idea, as someone who works a lot with symbolic math software (which I’ve used as an aid when teaching calculus among other things) I do like it a lot. Computer algebra is actually an active research topic and I know of students who did their PhD developing algorithms for computer algebra software. However, if your project consists simply of implementing known algorithms, it sounds more like you’re doing software development rather than math research. That’s not what PhD research is about (although it may be a great idea for a commercial product or open source project). But as I said, the general area is certainly one that may be suitable as a research topic, once you are in the right environment where you have access to an adviser knowledgeable in the area and other relevant resources. Good luck!
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: A suitable Ph.D. program could be to develop a machine learning system that can assess the weaknesses of the student and can come up with effective exercises to train the student. You would then need to write algorithms that can simulate weak students who are prone to make errors in certain areas. You then let a suitable machine learning system interact with such algorithms using a computer algebra system. When the system is sufficiently well trained to be able to recognize the weak points of the simulated student, you can apply the system to real students to fine tune it.
Since such a project would involve novel applications of machine learning methods, it would lead to quite a few peer reviewed publications making the work good enough to earn you a Ph.D The requirement is that a Ph.D. thesis must be based on original research, many universities demand that it be based completely based on peer reviewed articles of which the Ph.D candidate was the major contribution.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: Generally speaking, you need to do more than develop software (any software) to get a PhD. Even creating a new Operating System isn't quite "enough". But the reason is subtle. An many people base their doctoral degrees on software they develop.
The issue is that, in most cases, people will, like myself, have the belief that you get a doctorate by *advancing knowledge*. To advance knowledge, a computer science student might write some nice piece of software, but then must show/prove/demonstrate that the software does, in fact, advance the state of the art. You have to show that the software represents a genuine advance in knowledge. That it embodies some advanced *concept*, not just cool coding.
I was once an external examiner in such a situation. A student in a fine German university built and utilized a certain very sweet system for allowing students to interact remotely with each other and with their professor on projects and assignments. It manages all sorts of communication, permitting effective group work for students not co-located. The university focuses on distance education.
But the doctorate was given, not for the software itself, but for the student's analysis of it and proof that it was effective and showed some new ways of thinking about group work and how it could be effectively done an managed. It was that demonstration that was the essence of the degree, though it was based on the software he built.
However, I can't guarantee that every such software-based degree has the same sort of requirements. In a lot of ways what your advisor will accept is what is actually required. But, I think that this philosophy of "advancing knowledge" rather than just "building cool stuff" is pretty fundamental and widely shared.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: Having fairly recently completed a PhD where the main anchor was the creation of a piece of software, you will find the software alone will not be enough of a contributing factor to be awarded a PhD. (That said, you may be successful in your defence of originality and contribution with software alone, but it's very subjective and country specific. I highly doubt it, though).
What I found was while the development of the software did form several chapters, the methodological approaches I adopted and enhanced were unique enough to form an original contribution. Here are some suggestions for those looking to create software for their PhD can do:
1. Adopt solid software engineering principles and follow rigorous methodologies. Can you perhaps extend this methodology and propose a new one for your domain, thus making an original contribution? Can you then defend your proposed methodology?
2. Your software is, arguably, an original contribution but is very unlikely to pass any form of defence if you just code dump. It will be a tremendous help and go some was to successfully arguing and defending your methodology.
3. Does the creation of your software pose any research questions on the periphery, so to speak? You mention this is educational software, so you can research the pedagogy of using software as an educational tool. What has the literature previously shown us and what does your approach contribute to this body of knowledge?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: I literally just had a class that touched on this subject today as a part of the Introduction to Research unit I'm taking as a part of my Master's Degree.
Basically, the goal of research is the creation of new knowledge. If you're not creating new knowledge, you're not doing research, you're doing development. So, the question you have to ask yourself is this: once you take all of the artefacts like data sets or software programs that you've created away, what is left? What is the new knowledge you've created?
Have you created a new process for solving a particular problem, or discovered a method for improving an existing process for solving it? Have you uncovered some facet of how a complex system functions? Have you discovered new insights on how humans interact with systems, or how systems interact with the world around us?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: There are at least a few places where you can work on educational tech / research. Neil at WPI runs the [Learning Sciences and Technology program](https://www.wpi.edu/academics/departments/learning-sciences-technologies), and is a great place to start. (I was a grad student of his.) There's folks / programs at CMU, Stanford, and U Penn that I can think of. You'll need to do more than just code the system, tho.
One of the points of getting a PhD in this field is to learn how to test your design. It's great to have come up with a design / program, but how do you make sure that it actually delivers on the promise to improve learning? That's what an LS&T degree will help you learn to test. It will also let you know what other systems are out there.
Given that you're at WPI, whether you want to stay in the same school for grad work, or go elsewhere is a big decision. Neil is an awesome guy, loves to talk about LS&T and will be very happy to talk to you about his program and/or the pluses / minuses of staying / going. He also knows (and is known by) people in all of the programs I've mentioned.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: I have a Ph.D. in Computer Science from an Ivy League school. Throughout my Ph.D. program, I focused very heavily on developing educational software like you are proposing. I succeeded, but there were some big challenges on the path.
First, the most important thing to my success is that I was able to find a Ph.D. advisor who really believed in what I was doing. I can't stress enough that this was key and it didn't happen through walking into an office and just asking someone who seemed like a fit to advise me. I failed with three other professors before one became interested in my work and willing to guide me, back me up, and help me find funding.
Second, for the first few years of my program, when I would show off my latest work, I was plagued by the repeat question, "That's really great, but where is the research?" As other answers are stating, creating a great piece of educational software isn't really research worthy of a dissertation. I didn't have a good answer for that question. It didn't matter that my software was being used at several schools and was really helping students. I had to change my mindset. I identified some parts of my software where even though I had a solution that was good enough for my use, a more general solution would be applicable to other problems that I wasn't working on. I expanded on those parts. I connected with people working on those other problems, and built up a solution that was novel and useful. It was also full of hard math which I suspect satisfied some unwritten standards of my department.
In the end, I had something to show which was a research problem worthy of a Ph.D. and I used my educational software as a way of demonstrating that research. I was able to bring a professor (not in my department) who was using my software onto my committee. I was able to answer the question "where is the research?" at the start of my defense. I believe having such a strong application of my research really helped me through my defense, but the application alone certainly would not have been enough.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: While you most likely won’t get away with no research in addition to producing the software there might be situations where the focus can be less on research.
You need to find a thesis supervisor who is willing to accept your work and can guide you towards the degree of practical outcome vs. research your thesis needs to contain.
And while this is not „pure science“ if the supervisor and institute have a financial interest or expect prestige you would be surprised how flexible academic principles suddenly get.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/08/26
| 770
| 3,485
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a paper under review for over 6 months now. Recently I have done some more work which is an extension of paper under review and wrote it as a new paper. As there is dependency on the paper under review, I have included some important theorems of paper under review in appendix of the new paper. Can I submit this new paper to (a) the same journal, although there is a paper already under review for a long time. (b) Should I submit to another journal, even before the review process of current paper still going on.
(c) should i seek advice of the EIC of the current paper under review
(d) Don't do anything and wait for the decision on the current paper under review and proceed accordingly?
Appreciate any pros and cons or suggestions/advice in this scenario.<issue_comment>username_1: In what field are you working?
I would suggest to proceed with caution because of several factors. If you submit your new work and gets published faster, there is a risk of rejection of your first paper because it is not novel enough, etc. I have heard of a case in physics in which the review process took ~1 year, and it was eventually rejected because the same authors during that year generated data with better resolution, and thus their original work was not *worth* as much as it was.
Another important point to remember is that you can't plagiarize yourself. This means that if you add appendixes with copy/paste of your own paper, that does not count as plagiarism. However, journal editors may disagree. Many journals have automated software, and if it gets marked for not-to-publish, editors won't spend a second more on it. Again, proceed with care, because your first paper can be locked out because of your follow up paper.
If you have the option to submit to different places, I would ask the first journal to withdraw the first paper from the revision process, and submit it somewhere else (but again, you are the only one who can judge whether it is smart for your career). Sometimes just asking it, makes the editors speed up the review process.
Finally, you can consider publishing your first paper to a pre-print server, and cite it in your new paper. If it happens that your first paper gets approved before publishing your second one, you can update the references. And if not, both reviewers and readers have access to the original work if they want to follow your procedure.
I think that it is a tricky situation, in which a lot of what is wrong with the review process starts to surface. In some areas, reviewers block the publishing of papers because they are working on the same area and they want to be published first. You can always pressure the editor to speed up the process, perhaps finding new reviewers, or if you say you are going to submit elsewhere and your paper is worth it, editors will speed up the process. Remember that publishing is, in almost all cases, a business, and losing a paper is losing money.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I wouldn’t submit the follow-up paper while the first is still under revision. For the moment I’d consider the time that you’ve waited as pretty normal. So stay calm and wait some more time. If the first paper eventually gets publish, fine, then proceed with the follow-up paper. Otherwise, I would consider the option to merge both versions to a more influential single version and submit this one (maybe even in a higher-ranked journal).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2019/08/26
| 1,426
| 4,583
|
<issue_start>username_0: This [press release](http://www.flcgil.it/universita/ffo-universita-sempre-peggio.flc) by an Italian union mentions a huge difference between the number of academic positions in various countries:
>
> Per fare solo un esempio, sul personale, a fronte dei circa 50.000 docenti universitari nel nostro Paese, ce ne sono circa 250.000 in Germania, 200.000 nel Regno Unito, 95.000 in Spagna, 80.000 in Francia e analoghe differenze si verificano rispetto al personale tecnico e amministrativo.
>
>
>
My translation:
>
> As an example, let's mention personnel: corresponding to about 50,000 university professors in our country [Italy], there are about 250,000 in Germany, 200,000 in the United Kingdom, 95,000 in Spain, 80,000 in France, and there are similar differences regarding clerks and technicians.
>
>
>
Are these numbers accurate? Do they compare apples to apples? For instance, as far as I understand, many PhD students in Germany are employed as "Wimi"s and would probably be counted as "academic personnel", while in Italy they are still considered students and they would not fit in the same category.
Regarding Italy, [this 2018 press release](http://ustat.miur.it/media/1127/focus-personale-universitario_2016-2017.pdf) by the Italian ministry of education shows that in 2017 there were 54,235 academic positions in Italy, counting only professors and junior positions, both temporary and tenure-track (*Professore ordinario, professore associato, ricercatore a tempo indeterminato, ricercatore a tempo determinato*). This excludes postdoc grants (13,946) and all PhD students (9,288 in 2017 according to [another source](https://www.agi.it/data-journalism/dottorati_di_ricerca_crollo-5720622/news/2019-06-26/)).
Where can I find similar breakdowns regarding Germany, UK, or other countries?<issue_comment>username_1: The data is roughly accurate for France. The French ministry's HR department [releases data periodically](http://www.enseignementsup-recherche.gouv.fr/cid118435/personnels-enseignants-du-superieur-bilans-et-statistiques.html#note), and one of the latest report (2017-2018) is available there: <http://cache.media.enseignementsup-recherche.gouv.fr/file/statistiques/62/3/Note_NP_2017_2018_1146623.pdf>
In summary, in 2018, there were 81,563 teachers in French public universities. This includes 62,491 permanent positions (full professors, lecturers, and full-time tenured teachers), and 19,072 non-permanent. Of these, 7110 are PhD students with teaching duties, and 4500 are "ATER" (a kind of "postdoc", it's complicated). Depending on how you want to count what, the 80k figure is probably overestimated if you exclude PhD students and postdocs, but it's in the ballpark.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The numbers for Germany are definitely counting different things. Take the following official source
<https://www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/Gesellschaft-Umwelt/Bildung-Forschung-Kultur/Hochschulen/Publikationen/Downloads-Hochschulen/personal-vorbericht-5213402188004.html>
On page 98 is the full list, in which a number around 250.000 indeed occurs, but as the number of total full time scientific personal, which on one hand includes 193.000 "Wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiter", i.e. PhD students and Postdocs, many of which will be involved in teaching, but only some of which might be counted in similar statistics for other countries. So if you count only full professors and "Lehrbeauftragte", you will actually get a lower number then for the other countries, but then again you will have missed many non-tenured people you would have counted in other countries.
Also this number excludes around 100k part-time (which can mean anything from giving a small one week-course once a year up to 49% of a position) "Lehrbeauftragte", which often do the similar work to professors especially at "Fachhochschulen", where most of them teach.
I think it is impossible to get comparable numbers for a common definition of "university teacher" for the different countries. Personally I would go the other way and compare the number of full time scientific (teaching and academic research, especially including paid PhD Students) personell between the different countries instead.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Do they compare apples to apples?
>
>
>
No, among other reasons because they aren't demographically normalized:
1. The population sizes of these countries differ.
2. The numbers of foreign Ph.D. candidates per capita differ.
Other normalizations may be relevant as well.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/08/26
| 391
| 1,476
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently finishing my masters in Germany and I will start my PhD soon. I will be having a TV-L contract, however, I haven't acquired my official diploma yet. In case that the bureaucratic stuff are not finished before my starting day, would I still be able to sign the contract by proving I have submitted my thesis (or getting something like 4,0 bescheinigung)? Or do I have to wait until I am officially graduated?<issue_comment>username_1: I know some people who signed their contract with "4,0 Bescheinigung" and got the final mark afterwards. As far as I know submitting your thesis is not enough, you have to prove that you passed your masters.
But it would be better if you ask your supervisor or the people in the HR.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: To sign a TV-L 13 contract, you definitly need a proof that you have a master's degree (or something equivalent). I think a 4.0-Bescheinigung should suffice but this might also depend on your university's policies for that matter. As pointed out already, go check with your university's HR department.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: There is no general answer I guess. I know how my university handles this (in Bavaria): If you have no official diploma yet, you will be employed within TV-L 12. Once you provide the diploma, you will be "upgraded" to TV-L 13. A 4,0-Bescheinigung is not sufficient.
I'm sure you can find out quickly by calling someone from HR.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/26
| 1,135
| 4,715
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am sure this is a quite subjective topic, but I haven't been able to find clear advice or info about this particular situation. Also, I'm going to give some context; therefore, you could understand my dilemma.
I've been in the IT industry for a considerable amount of time, but I have always wanted to get a Ph.D. since this is a life goal.
For the last 4+ years (in Europe), I've been working in a technology company between a software engineer and a kind of IT consultant where I have developed software, introduced new technologies, good practices, and techniques that allowed me to promote a couple of times, but that feeling of getting a Ph.D. in *a new country* (kind of requirement, preferably Western Europe) is still there alive, I still would like to go beyond.
When I started to work I was more open to any Ph.D. since I was finishing my master, but 3+ years have passed and I have seen so many changes in IT from web development, desktop development to **Robotic Process Automation** and **Machine Learning** and many more ([DARQ](https://www.accenture.com/gb-en/insights/technology/new-emerging-technologies-darq)) that are coming that create thousands of doubts of this decision since I have no friends or relatives with a similar story who I can talk about it.
Also, most of the advice is connected to early studies, not after working for a considerable amount of time.
[Pros & Cons of a Ph.D. in Computer Science](https://study.com/articles/pros_cons_of_a_phd_in_computer_science.html)
Furthermore, I need to add an important point, I want to come back to the industry since I really enjoy it, but I'd like to read your opinions about this situation. What Pros and Cons do you see? Have you ever experienced something like this? Or maybe you know someone?
As Scott suggested about my personal goals (excellent reminder since we need goals in our lives):
* To relocate to a new destination.
* To establish my own business.
* To develop new technologies.
* To build a successful network of contacts.
* To improve the lives of my fellows in Latin America.
I could have more goals that I'm working on them (I'm not waiting for them to happen, I take regular actions). Also, I would like highlight one point, I'm aware that for my goals, I don't need a Ph.D., I could go higher in my company without a Ph.D. since it's not a requirement in almost any organization, the only place that I have seen where they ask you for a Ph.D. is in the Academia that as I said I don't see myself as a lecturer, perhaps, per hour.
Thanks for any advice that you have.<issue_comment>username_1: As with most people asking such questions, your approach is exactly backwards. You shouldn't be thinking about the pros and cons of going for a PhD -- you should be thinking about what your career goals and long term goals are, and whether you need a PhD to reach them or not.
Once you understand the answer to that, all your other questions will then be in context. For example, If you long term goals are to retire at age 55 with $2M US in a retirement account, now you can actually do the math based on current salaries, starting salaries in a new position, living on a stipend, ....
Without us knowing your goals, because you haven't told them to us, there is zero context for answering this question. Unless YOU know these goals, you can ask about pros and cons all you like, and not really understand the answers you get.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In Germany, for becoming a professor at a "Fachhochschule" (University of applied sciences) a period (3-5 years) of industry R&D I heard is very common and wished. Also for normal universities you will often see in CV's of STEM professors that they had such an period in an industry research lab (IBM, Phillips,...).
You also have to see that industry has sometimes a quite big advance in knowledge, but they neither publish it as a patent or article. A company like Intel, Samsung will not give away their secrets of nanofabrication etc. Having such knowledge or just seeing how industry researchers work can be a big advantage in disinct fields and topics for an academic career.
In Germany funding programs in which Postdoc's develop together with industry R&D departments and several companies demonstrators or prototype on the TRL ladder are very common and necessary to bring newest results and methodology from fundamental research into industry.
There are always pros and cons to a distinct decision, but when thinking about a job career or decisions with long term consequences, I suggest to rather think in maximizing options and diversifying risks instead of looking on short and mid-term pro's.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/26
| 722
| 3,184
|
<issue_start>username_0: I made a mistake 5 years ago. I changed my field from materials science to civil engineering. I did a PhD under a professor whose research expertise was not in my research topic. I had to independently work on my knowledge and skill set to become productive and produce research. But, due to lack of technical guidance, I produced mediocre research. My research is very novel and rigorous for my field of research, but the scope of getting a future position in the field seems bleak.
I want to diversify to other area of research, but I don't possess the experience or knowledge to carry out the projects. I am getting rejections from all postdoc positions as I don't meet their requirements.
I don't know what I should be doing now? My adviser doesn't have any connections in my research area. She just says to keep trying, and to not lose heart.<issue_comment>username_1: First of all note that your experience has probably made you a lot more independent than many of your peers. This is a desirable quality for a post-doc, and you should sell it. If you have produced any a single author publications (which sounds likely in your scenario), this is again something you should emphasize.
As a second piece of advice, consider applying for a suitable post-doc fellowship. Advertised post-doc positions are often bound to specific funded projects, therefore a PI will be more inclined to hire somebody with proven expertise to work on that project, putting somebody switching (sub)fields after their PhD at disadvantage.
Postdoctoral fellowship applications allow you to put more emphasis on your individual qualities and allow you to tailor a research proposal to your combination of expertise. You would (in most cases) still need to find a suitable host for your fellowship, but this may be easier than getting them to hire you as a postdoc (it is relatively low risk for the host). Of course, you should be warned that many fellowships have a very low acceptance rate. (10% acceptance rate is not uncommon for many grants, although some have rates as high as 30%) So, you need to submit a very strong application.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: arbitt, you have a strong track history of working independently and persisting despite the lack of supervision and structure that others have had. Unfortunately changing fields is tough and you would be unlikely to land a post-doc or scholarship in the new area as mmeent has said.
You would need to build your reputation and scholarship in the new field independently. Aim to collaborate and network with the new field that you are interested in. Attend important conferences and organize to meet the important scholars in the questions that you are able to develop independently. Hopefully, you are able to develop the skills in the new area and be able to land the post-docs in the future.
Edit: I may have misread your question. I thought you were only applying in the new field that you were interested in rather than in your current field that your PhD is on. If you are not landing a postdoc in your current field, then that is a very different question and issue to address.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/08/26
| 2,440
| 10,051
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a PhD student in a math department at a research university in the US. When I started the program I was given an account on the department server with a website and a nice department email address. Now I've found out that the department (or the university?) is doing away with the server and instructing everyone to instead use the [G Suite](https://gsuite.google.com/) email and Google services that the general student body of the university uses. So I suppose I'll have to pay to host my website somewhere, or convert it manually into a [Google Site](https://sites.google.com/) as the department is suggesting (which unfortunately, to my knowledge, doesn't support [math markup](https://www.mathjax.org/)). I'm worried that having a Google Site as opposed to a `.edu` website will appear unprofessional, and I'm a bit irked that I'll have to take the time to migrate my site elsewhere. Also I think it's peculiar that not even the math faculty will have a `.edu` domain to host a website.
Should I be upset by this? Is this unusual? Or is this just the trend of the future? Is this more typical than I think it is?
---
Update regarding my specific scenario to address some questions in the comments: The *email* through GMail still gets the `.edu` extension as `<EMAIL>` or some variation. I'm not sure what will happen to my `<EMAIL>` email, but it *sounds like* that will still work? Word is that they're still figuring out specifics. But they're planning on getting rid of the web server though. They haven't been giving new faculty or grad students the `@math` email address or a `math.university.edu/~name` website like I received, and they're *working with people with larger sites [on the math server] to fit their needs.* But it sounds like after the switchover the `math.university.edu` domain won't be available to redirect to any new website either, which sucks because there's at least one faculty here with a *massive* website, and the switchover will break tons of links online, and references PDF notes and papers.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I've found out that the department (or the university?) is doing away with the server and instructing everyone to instead use the G Suite email and Google services that the general student body of the university uses.
>
>
>
It sounds like the university is outsourcing IT, which is normal.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> I'm worried that having a Google Site as opposed to a .edu website
> will appear unprofessional...
>
>
>
I think that this worry is unfounded. Similarly, I don't think that it would be unprofessional were you to have a url like www.MikePierce.com. You just need to avoid having to put something like www.badboymowers.com/mikepierce on your CV when you apply for jobs.
More seriously, several of my collaborators use Google Site pages as their main professional websites, and I know of several more respected mathematicians that do so as well. And this is all off the top of my head. So I doubt you'll stand out in a negative manner if you have to migrate your website to a Google Site.
Similarly, there are also a lot of people that have .edu email addresses but choose not to use them professionally (though this is *much* less common). For example, one of my collaborators has a website hosted by his institution but lists his gmail email address in all of his publications.
>
> Should I be upset by this? Is this unusual? Or is this just the trend
> of the future? Is this more typical than I think it is?
>
>
>
I think that your department's situation is that of a growing minority of departments. I think that if you have a professional looking Google Site page that is linked to by your department's official website then you'll have nothing to worry about.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: As a math graduate student in the US, current norms make it reasonable for you to expect your department to offer you access to certain IT services, including:
1. A (free) email address that is credibly affiliated with your university’s recognized domain name, i.e.,
>
> <EMAIL>.edu
>
>
> <EMAIL>
>
>
>
are both good and reasonable, but anything along the lines
>
> <EMAIL>
>
>
> <EMAIL>
>
>
> <EMAIL>
>
>
> <EMAIL>
>
>
> <EMAIL>
>
>
>
(etc) doesn’t sound really acceptable to me. I’d be very upset if my department forced such email addresses on everyone (fortunately I’m now the chair of the computer committee, so I’ll make sure that doesn’t happen ;-)).
2. An easy (and free) web hosting solution for hosting a personal web page.
3. Ideally, the web host will have a URL associated with the university .edu domain.
4. Also ideally, any third parties that such services are contracted out to should be ethical companies that offer strong guarantees to respect users’ privacy, and have a reputation for living up to their promises in this area. In an even more ideal situation, these companies will be ones whose profits are positively correlated to how good of a job they do respecting and protecting their users’ privacy.
From the situation you described, it sounds like item 3 above is a legitimate reason for you to be upset, and potentially also item 4. With item 1, by your description it sounds like you’ll still have a campus-domain email address, which is reasonable. As for having to migrate your web page, I think you’d look a bit petty if you were to try to turn that into an issue.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: It is becoming less common for individual departments to operate their own IT infrastructure - things are usually being centralised.
It is also becoming more common for parts of that centralised IT infrastructure to be outsourced - which in practice means that email ends up on Gmail or Microsoft's system. I would expect that your email address will still have uniname.edu as its domain - it will just be operated by a cloud provider.
Along with this second tendency, it's becoming less common for universities (or departments) to provide web space to staff or students. This can be annoying. But as others have said, there's nothing unprofessional about setting up your own domain (with a sensible name) and hosting your web content there.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: Domain name, email and website are three different things.
Your university doesn't have to have any computer equipment at all to own the `university.edu` domain, all they have to do is pay for it. Having their own domain is indeed the standard so you can be pretty sure they'll keep it.
The e-mail is apparently getting outsourced to G-suite (probably together with calendar / document share). It will not be visible externally: G-suite is specifically designed to support e-mail addresses on a domain their customers own. So, again, you can be pretty sure you'll either keep your old e-mail address or get a new one on a `university.edu` domain, perhaps something like `<EMAIL>`.
The website is a different entity usually hosted on a separate server. If I were you, I'd ask whether your university moves their web services to an external hosting (and which one). It doesn't have to be Google Sites, and if they do it right, you should be able to keep your website the way it is, unless they pick a very cheap hosting which lacks the features your website requires (this may be the reason they are "working with people with larger sites to fit their needs"). What will change if they outsource it is the way you manage your website, that's why you should ask about this better sooner than later. Which name your website will get is also up to them, and there's no relationship between e-mail and web servers other than the name: it's entirely possible to have e.g. an e-mail server with Google and host the website with the same domain name on Amazon AWS.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: As @flyto said, there are many universities using google, GitHub, and Microsoft as their cloud provider for mail/storage/web/repo/authentication. AFAIK, both have HIPPA and PII approved products, so those universities are mitigating their risk by transferring them to those providers. I personally know of 8 universities which are using Microsoft and 5 google for mail; that does not mean Microsoft is more popular but my sample size is small.
About domain names, you do the same as you would with every single cloudy web provider out there: edit your DNS to direct queries properly or have them run it (and then you edit your domain as needed). There is nothing stopping bogus university to have office.bogus.edu, which can redirect to a office365 landing page customized using their identity. Their members can also go to the Microsoft default office website and login using their university credentials, which would direct them to the university-specific stuff.
There is nothing stopping you from having a <EMAIL> email address instead of <EMAIL>; one of them is just the alias to the other.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: What can we expect from the infrastructure of an university, if they cannot run their own IT anymore?
An excellent university has excellent IT staff, which is able to develop and enhance software to their needs. They will also conserve and transfer IT skills to students.
I doubt a university can perform free and independent research, if all communication and data is tracked by a cloud provider who runs also one of the most often used search engines. Once the IT is outsourced it is practically impossible to rebuild the own infrastructure when the experts were gone.
Most universities exist since more than 100 years an invested a lot of effort to stay independent.
A university would not outsource their most important infrastructure as long as they are financially secured.
You should be highly concerned.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/08/26
| 1,346
| 5,716
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a mathematics PhD student and I have a question.
I am writing my thesis, and I'm looking for a postdoc too. I would like to do research long-term, but I am not sure that I will be successful as a researcher because of the following problem.
I am very good in the research that I am doing. Everyone confirms that I am very good in what I am working on. But, I have a big problem that I can not solve simple questions. Let me explain in further details, some month ago, I wanted to use the fact that supremum attains for every upper semicontinuous function on compact space. My supervisor asked me to prove it in front of him, but I couldn't do it. These happens a lot to me. My supervisor said he did not know how to possible someone do high-level research, but he couldn't prove simple things either. I am suffering because I think everyone can prove simple things, but they can not do high-level research. Does someone have any ideas or advice for me? I want to improve this issue, because I have a final exam for my PhD. I am so scared that they maybe ask some basic questions that I do not know.<issue_comment>username_1: Sounds completely normal for PhD level work.
Many people doing PhD:s are like this. Some people who are envious or feel threatened of your high level abilities may try to shame you or make you unconfident with your lack of low level skills. There really is only one advice to give for this...
Trust in yourself and don't let it discourage you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Let me suggest a reason that you may be experiencing what you are, and it has nothing to do with any lack of ability. But it may, I think, involve *intensity of focus*. And "brain freeze".
When I'm working on something intensely, I tend to separate myself from all other thoughts and concerns. I dive very deeply into what I'm doing. I tend to do it even when writing here, actually. If someone asks me a question - any question - I freeze up for a bit in order to change context an reestablish a new one before I can answer. Maybe this is all it is with you, also.
If you are thinking deeply about some research issue, large or small, you focus very closely on the problem and various potential solutions, evaluating pros and cons, etc. If someone asks you, right then, to go get the mail, you won't, perhaps, even hear them.
But some people need a bit of time, when asked a question, to establish a context in which that question can be answered. If the question has any complexity, so might the context, and it may take a while to get there. You are "struck dumb" by the question and the impatience of the questioner just makes it worse.
So, here is a thought experiment. Take the same question that "stumped" you when asked and consider how your thought process (and potential success) might have been different if you posed the same question to yourself while sitting quietly with no specific other focus. I suspect that I would be able to work it out fairly quickly, and fill in the empty parts sufficiently well. Perhaps you would also. But the questioner wants an immediate, well formulated answer, just as if you had memorized it.
But memorization is a poor tool in mathematics. You can't (unless you have a very differently organized brain than others) simply memorize all of mathematics, theorems along with proofs. A much better tool for a mathematician is *insight* that lets you re-assemble the concepts and why they are valuable and true. If you are doing valuable research, I suspect that you have such insight.
---
But a bit of advice about oral exams. Don't worry too much about having answers instantly on the tip of your tongue. Don't worry too much about wanting to "work out an answer". Doing so aloud can be valuable as it is obvious to the questioner that you aren't stuck, just working. Don't worry too much about making an error, but then, admit that the train of thought isn't going to be productive and say why. This reveals to the questioner that you have a good grasp of fundamentals, and can *think productively* even if the actual answer eludes you.
I once, taking an oral in Algebraic Topology (not my strong subject), did exactly the above, working out the answer to a question and not getting there. After a bit, I said something like "I'm sorry but this line of thought isn't going to end properly. I can't see the answer, but I can at least explain why this isn't working...". Later I was told that it was a great response. Like a lot of things, it is more important to demonstrate competence than it is to answer every question on demand.
Insight, not memory.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I agree with all the supportive comments here and that the relationship between the rapid recall and a research career is poor. Your supervisor should not have shamed you or put you down due to your poor memory recall. Your question of whether you can improve or rehabilitate your memory is a difficult one and I think an irrelevant one as others have argued here.
However, if you think there is a bigger and significant neurological issue that needs and you want further investigation, then definitely do so. Not because of your professor's inconsiderate remark of your poor memory recall, but because you have other concerns or patterns that have impaired your life and ability to enjoy life. Many people are being investigated and diagnosed with neurodiversity issues at an older age. So full neuropsychological testing that can place your memory issue as either isolated or part of a broader phenomenon is useful. Find a psychologist who is able to do formal cognitive testing, ideally a neuropsychologist.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/08/26
| 1,147
| 4,598
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am now torn apart between leaving Canada to do a masters program in a foreign country, which will put a huge financial burden on me, I don't even know if I can afford it, and I would also become isolated from my family and would likely have to break up with my GF.
I also could spend the next year doing research with a professor at a local university while also working, but I am sick of working, all I want is to do research, all I want is to learn math.
If I can get accepted into a direct entry PhD program, delaying entrance is worth it, because I can start the program a year earlier. But if it's very unlikely, then I would have ruined my chance to get back on track into the only thing that really matters to me for trying to optimize for some less important (but still valuable) variables.
So in short, is it likely to get accepted into a direct entry PhD? I understand each institution, program and professor is different, and that it depends on the candidate, I just want a general idea.
Edit:
I am considering it, but if I am going to do a masters anyway, from a purely academic perspective, there would be no reason to delay my studies and simply go to the foreign university. It would be much easier to justify and additional "GAP year" as a way to invest my time into improving my profile to be accepted into a PhD program directly and skip the masters alltogether, mostly because I know for a fact I want a PhD, I know for a fact I want to do research.
Direct entry simply means bachelors to PhD, i.e skipping the masters, currently the plan is next September (2020 not 2019).
I had a 3.67 GPA, however if we take away 4 japanese courses (that I tok out of interest) it's 3.72, 3.8 in CS courses, 3.98 in math courses (I have a pure math minor).
I did honours but did not publish the research (some non negligible additional work was needed to get it published and I graduated right then, then moved to a different city).
I am in a rush to start because that's all I wanted to do for the longest time, I let my family convince me to work for a while to see what the "real world is like", and after working and doing undergrad research, I understand with full clarity that I'd rather do research for 20k a year than work for 100k a year. I want to learn more math.<issue_comment>username_1: 1. Is there any reason you're not considering a Canadian Master's program? They're usually funded, and doing a Master's is pretty standard before doing a PhD in Canada.
2. What do you mean by "direct entry"? If you mean starting this September, then your odds are quite low. If you mean "straight from Bachelor's to PhD" then that's a different story.
3. What are your grades like? Do you have any undergraduate research experience? Skipping the Master's is generally reserved for "exceptional students" in Canada, so your odds depend on how your Bachelor's went.
I know some schools have a "PhD Track Master's" where you start in a Master's and transfer to PhD after a year. Maybe that's for you?
Graduate studies is a long haul. Don't be in a rush to start it if it doesn't work for your life.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: To answer the titular question: yes, direct entry from a BSc to a PhD definitely is possible. This may be anecdotal evidence, but I know several who pulled it off. In practice though, MASc to PhD is much more common. To go straight from a BSc to a PhD, the bar in terms of grades, previous research experience, publications etc is higher. From my anecdotal evidence, you will probably need an 'A' grade overall and previous publications.
In the end though, it is down to each individual department and more importantly each individual professor. If you can convince a professor to take you on and he has funding, he can vouch for you on the departmental level to help you secure the department-level scholarships needed provided you clear the minimum grade requirements (which are higher for BSc -> PhD than BSc -> MASc). Your best bet would be to ask about direct entry on a case by case basis by contacting professors you are interested in working with. I have found that professors are usually much more eager to take on PhD students rather than MASc students if they can help it. I speculate this is probably due to the fact that they will be able to get more work done tying a potential student down for 4 years than for two.
Joining at the masters level then subsequently switching to a PhD after a term or two is also possible and common from what I have heard as the previous poster pointed out.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/08/27
| 4,048
| 16,876
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a post-doctoral researcher in computer science, but my next position will be in industry. I've been negotiating a contract with this commercial company to do R&D work (not while I'm employed at a university). It's been a negative experience overall, because - like many companies - they did not write their draft contract themselves, nor gave it serious thought, but had some lawyer draw it up (without seriously reading it afterwards).
Not going into all the horrors of what the IP part looked like - here's a bit of it:
>
> "Invention" shall include but not be limited to improvements, designs, discoveries, developments and works of authorship or artistry (including without limitation software, integrated circuit, printed circuit board or computer design, and documentation).
>
>
> ... (etc. etc.)
>
>
> I have attached hereto, as Schedule 1, a complete list of all Inventions to which I claim ownership and desire to remove from the scope of this Agreement, and acknowledge that such list is complete ("Prior Inventions")
>
>
>
and basically they get to own everything else.
This may (?) be just fine for people who move from employment in one commercial company to another and never feel the need to publish anything or have rights to develop anything independently - each company makes you essentially say "you own everything" and then they can dish it out amongst themselves. But - it obviously won't fly if you're involved in continuing research - earlier, in an academic institute and now independently, outside the scope of your commercial employment, and/or if you're writing free software. I've had lots of ideas, notes, open ends of other work, talks with people, etc. which may be developed further - in addition to things you've actually published or registered in any way. I can't just recite all of them - nor do I want to tell the company all about them.
My question is about how to deal with this situation, or perhaps - how indignant I should be about it. Some options:
* Just strike out that section of the contract and explain to them it's an unreasonable request.
* Try to tweak the wording so that the list isn't wholly definitive ( <- A bad idea IMHO)
* Write a list, but add items which are general and vague to represent half-baked (or unbaked) stuff, sort of catch-all "inventions" you could later claim cover actual things you pick up on.
* Give in, write down some sort of a list and hope they don't go after you.
Suggestions with concrete examples are especially helpful.
Notes:
* It isn't just this one company, I've seen similar contract drafts in several places already. It's not like this everywhere, but I don't want to have to rule out workplaces just because they are careless about their contracts (that is, assuming they don't actually want to suck you dry of your independent contributions).
* I have no problems rewording this part of the contract whichever way I like, so I'm not asking for help with reading or writing "legalese" here.
* I'm not in the US (and I don't want to make this question country-specific).<issue_comment>username_1: I have my doubts that they will compromise much unless they really, really (did I say "really, really" enough?) want you. If they are paying you gigantic money for your mind, then you may want to accept. But I would probably want to look elsewhere.
I think that such clauses, while, perhaps, not quite so blatant, are pretty common. The company does, in fact, have an interest in keeping IP that you develop with their assistance, in any way, from being exploited by others if you leave.
So, I think your concerns are very justified. Among your bullet points you might be able to negotiate a bit over the wording of your third point, but you are likely to fail on the others.
If they employ such lawyers, then the WILL go after you and put a lot of resources behind it. And they will probably laugh if you try the first point.
---
Mostly, however, people in such companies are allowed to publish things. I know some folks who publish a lot and have such agreements in place. But patentable ideas are another matter altogether.
For a young researcher, who is involved in research and ideas that are potentially patentable, I suggest that you employ a strategy that can save you in such situations. I learned this from a researcher at IBM. Create a "Patent Book" for yourself. It needs to be a bound book, not a loose leaf collection. You should probably create a new one each year. In the book you write down the essence of any potentially patentable idea that you have. You date the entry and sign it. You get a trusted colleague to also sign the entry and date the signature. Don't let any significant time elapse between the signatures. write in pen on good paper. Do not ever erase anything in the book or you will invalidate it.
Now, if you need to establish priority on any idea, you have evidence, with dates and with witnesses.
And if you need to make a list of prior art for a future employer, you also have the basis for one that is very difficult to counter. But all of the above elements are necessary. The record needs to be immutable (ink, paper, no erasures) and witnessed (with dates).
Also note that while you are employed, anything you put in such a book can probably be claimed by the employer. And the dates in the book and the dates of employment are evidence they can use. You really do give up all rights to your IP. But after you leave, new ideas not represented in the book during employment are also, perhaps a bit protected from claims by the company.
Finally, for such a company, also look to see what the *non-compete* clause looks like and how long it extends past your leaving the company. Some will claim perpetual ownership of your IP. That can possibly be challenged in court in some places, but doing so is an expensive proposition. Beware and be forewarned.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: There's going to be a bit of jurisdictional aspects of this, but in the United States these types of agreements are fairly common as part of work for hire agreements when intellectual property is being created (e.g., software development, engineering, artistic works, etc.). I'd have to see the full scope of it, but it seems like it is a fairly standard template that effectively says:
>
> Any intellectual property created during your employment or inspired by your employment, and relevant to your job, is property of the company.
>
>
>
There's not much you can do to get around that intent.
Likewise, the scheduled list of prior inventions is to protect both of you in the case things go to court (i.e., you can point to the schedule as evidence that an invention existed prior to your employment and was not inspired by it). There's also not really much you can do about that either since *not* listing things puts you at legal risk (i.e., prove you came up with this before your employment).
So really the amount you can push back is going to depend on how much they want to hire you. Best case is if you are working on a narrowly defined problem you could modify the agreement to say something like, "Both parties agree that work after *DATE* related to *PROBLEM SPACE* is a result of employment by *COMPANY* and all inventions are the sole property of *COMPANY*." Obviously that would prevent you from starting a new company with a product in that product space, but might save you a lot of time enumerating a bunch of other work you've done.
If you've worked in the space before you are really just going to need to sit-down and write out the list. Or decline the job offer.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I work at an R&D company that has a pretty similar clause in its contract, and in fact most R&D companies will.
The core reason is that things change quickly in R&D, so an area that the company has no interest in today may be a big part of their in business in 5-10 years. Moreover, employees like you are likely to be the ones who create new business areas like that, and if they don't put in a very broad clause, there's nothing to stop you from taking work you've done at the company to a competitor or spinning off your own company (see, for example [the fights going on over self-driving tech](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Levandowski)).
So, what should you do? Well, it really depends on the reason for your objection.
* If you've got moral objections to IP being controlled by companies, don't work in commercial R&D.
* If you want to keep contributing to existing free and open software projects, put that down as a general reservation in the "prior inventions" section. Most reasonable R&D organizations will accept that in some form (though it may take a bit of back and forth on the wording), since for most companies that's never going to be their competition.
* If you want to be able to pursue new side projects: **embrace the clause!** Don't think of it as *"the company wants to steal my ideas"* but instead as *"the company might want to **pay me** to do my side projects"*. In a healthy R&D organization, what you do with a potentially commercially interesting side project is essentially give them "right of first refusal" -- and if they don't want to support it, then it's yours.
Now, unhealthy organizations are a whole different story, of course, but there's lots of better reasons you wouldn't want to work for one of them in any case.
---
Adding in a clarifying note based on the comments:
While we can't know for sure without seeing the full statement, what has been shared, however, doesn't actually say the company is claiming all prior works. Instead, it appears to follow the usual practice of clarifying which IP the company agrees *cannot* be claimed, due to their origins in prior works. Prior works not listed, if they come into dispute, just have to have their origin established in other ways (e.g., scientific publication, date-stamps in metadata).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> I've been negotiating a contract with this commercial company [...]. It's been a negative experience overall [...]
>
>
>
I wouldn't expect things to get better once you're hired. I'd keep **looking for other jobs instead**.
PS. This should be in workspace.se since this is not a question related to academia per se.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> My question is about how to deal with this situation, or perhaps - how indignant I should be about it.
>
>
>
I suggest that you start by simply bringing it up for discussion with the hiring representative, and explain your point of view and what kind of leeway you are looking for in terms of freedom to work on side projects, whether academic or related to open source projects, that are unrelated to your regular company work. Good communication is your best bet in my opinion - if they have a good understanding of what you’re asking to change in the contract and why you’re asking to change it, I’d think they’ll be more inclined to make concessions. And if they still won’t, maybe the place is just not a good fit for you.
Some additional thoughts:
1. You ask how indignant you should be. IMO an emotion like indignation doesn’t belong in this situation. Somebody offered you a contract with certain terms, you are free to negotiate or ultimately refuse to accept the offer. It may be frustrating, but I don’t think these terms are unfair or immoral ones.
2. Another thing I think you shouldn’t do (certainly not in your discussions with the company, and perhaps not even on this forum which is after all public and easily associated with your name) is make dismissive claims about how the company didn’t give the contract serious thought, or are careless about their contracts, or that even the lawyer who wrote the thing “didn’t seriously read it afterwards”. At least the part that you quoted proves nothing of the sort. Based on the information you gave us, to me it seems possible that the contract says precisely what they want it to say, even if it is objectionable to you. So basically what I’m saying is, when you raise your objections with them I suggest doing it in a respectful, emotionally neutral way that doesn’t imply the people you’re dealing with are stupid, careless or incompetent.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Typically -- despite the "acknowledge that such list is complete" language -- failing to list something on the Exhibit does *not* mean that your prior inventions are assigned to the Company.
The actual language of the assignment clause governs what Inventions the company is claiming. Usually that clause will cover all Inventions which are conceived, discovered, reduced to practice "in the course of your employment" (or sometimes the broader "while I am employed by the company") and so would not cover prior inventions. The exhibit is provided as a way for you to very clearly exclude things you've done previously from the agreement and is particularly useful when you've created inventions in the past which are similar or in the same line of work as you'll be doing for the company. If you don't include it on the list, but you've invented it in the past, the invention probably does not belong to the company although you might end up in a situation where you have to *prove* that you invented it earlier (with, e.g., lab notebooks, emails, patent applications, other contemporaneous evidence dated before you started work). If an invention is on the list, then you can probably avoid that whole issue of proving you invented it earlier, so it's good to list things you think might be related to what you'll be doing for the company.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I often encounter boilerplate (template) contracts with clauses that are a problem. Usually you can work around them.
In this case they want a list of work that i claim for myself. *So that's exactly what I'd do*. I would aim to be reasonable and my goal would be to let *them* have the problem instead. Which is fair, its their contract after all. I answer it as best I can, and then shrug, I can't answer it any better.
So my own approach would be, to boldly add to the bottom of my own list, like this:
>
> [Item of work]
>
>
> [Item of work]
>
>
> [Item of work]
>
>
> Any works or ideas which I have conceived, worked on, undertaken preparatory work for, or been involved in, prior to commencing this employment, and to which I retain any ownership or rights at this time.
>
>
> Any works or ideas undertaken outside this employment, or in other previous employments or capacities, or undertaken as a result of my own personal choice and not as part of my work duties, or arising after this employment ends, or to which I retain any ownership or rights at this time.
>
>
>
They will probably object, and I'd shrug and say, *"You asked what I claim, I can't provide an absolute list. I'm a PhD in Computer Science with X years experience and a ton of hobbyist and other work.* [Optional: I do coding and creative ideas 18 hours a day, 365 days a year, since I was a kid. That's what you're hiring me for.] *I must have worked on tens of thousands of ideas in that time. If you need me to waive or sign over rights to certain specified agreed works, such as works in the course of my duties, I can do that. But I can't possibly list all I've already done, every last item, in my entire life, so if you ask for what I claim that's the honest best I can do."*
They might not engage you. But most likely they'll scratch their heads and consult internally, and see the problem (which is a real one, and of their own making since its their own contract). Maybe they'll suggest a way around it if faced with an actual honest answer.
You actually have a quite serious second problem, that *you might not know what you own rights to, or which ideas are yours, and should be claimed*. That's because typically any previous employer will have broad terms about ideas you invented while there, or related to.work. Unless each of the possible wisps and creations of hours during your working life is tested in a courtroom, you have no idea for most of them, if they are indeed still yours to be claimed, or legally belong to some past employer. The scope to certify incorrectly is huge - and you may accidentally certify things you cant or shouldn't. To be honest, these kinds of clauses might be universal, but this particular variety that says to list anything claimed, and claims the rest, is unanswerable as written. You might well need to accept that.
They might decide not to engage you, or try and pressure you. But if they see the problem but insist on a list of specifics only, that you know you can't do, then its an impossible contract for you to sign anyway, so no loss.
Upvotes: -1
|
2019/08/27
| 1,834
| 8,486
|
<issue_start>username_0: A paper is eligible for publishing in reputable journals in general if it satisfies the criteria objectivity, reproducibility and (optionally) novelty.
But why are they not considering Explainability as a criterion? Although the model proposed in the paper satisfies the above mentioned three metrics but not explainability, then how can it be considered as a contribution to field?
PS: Low "explainability" means proving something works without explaining how it works. See also "[Interpretability](https://christophm.github.io/interpretable-ml-book/interpretability.html)"<issue_comment>username_1: Papers are evaluated on a variety of criteria, including accessibility and the contribution to the field of research.
Now papers that not only report findings, but analyze findings and provide root causes for effects observed in the paper are obviously more valuable and are more likely to be accepted.
But from a scientific point of view, *requiring* that papers have this property would not be a good idea. Quite often, the root cause of an observed phenomenon is not known. Not being able to publish papers without finding the root cause would mean that information stays "unknown" until the person making a discovery also finds out the reason for an observed phenomenon, which could mean that it is never found out. For instance, if Mendel with his discovery that traits are inherited until the DNA was found,
that would have been quite a loss.
In computer science, you need to distinguish between pure theoretical computer and the rest. While in the former, the proofs provide all the reason you need, in the applied fields, at least part of the argument is some utility of the finding. There are many subfields in which algorithms are published that work well in practice despite not giving theoretical guarantees that they always work. Finding out why certain algorithms work well in practice would require to define exactly what "practice" means, which changes over time. Machine learning is a good example: we know that many machine learning algorithms can get stuck in local optima, and we have some ideas on how to prevent that (in many interesting cases). And then there is some theory that tries to capture this. But ultimately, the reason for why many of the approaches work are that the models to be learned are easy enough and the algorithm is good enough, which is very difficult to impossible to formalize to a level that it would be acceptable in a scientific paper. And then requiring an in-depth explanation of why a new approach works would essentially mean that there will be almost no publications of practical relevance.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm not sure what you mean exactly by explainability and it cannot be a scientific metric if it doesn't exist in a dictionary.
So I conclude what you are thinking about is that the content of an article has to explain something: an not well understood process, a new method, a new theory.
Different fields have different standards and metrics. I'm sure there are different for publishing a new physical theory vs. an optimization of a machine learning algorithm for image recognition. But this is normally covered by the novelty and significance metric by a journal.
From a philosophy of science point of view you also should see or inspect what the modus operandi of researchers in your field is. For example, in particle physics or cosmology researchers try to falsify the scientific paradigm/theory, especially if there are too many flaws in a currently used theory. I know some of the basics of machine learning theory and that many of it is based on mathematical methods developed in quantum physics. This is a bullet-proof theory pretty much, no one has falsified it until this day and physicists still try. But in engineering and even in applied physics depending on the topic/resarch question rather a positivistic modus operandi is used by researchers, e.g. optimizing/enhancing/backing up a machine learning algorithm without substantial questioning or falsification underlying theories. And for minor incremental improvements an explanation in the sense of why rather then how may be not necessary in your field and therefore no general metric if the underlying theories are not really touched. As soon as you question a theory or common measurement process, at least in physics, you need to input a good explanation in your article, why and how you do this. What is the motivation, why it is more accurate to describe something.
When you say in the comment "proving something works without how it works", I think this is what sometimes in industrial machine learning happens, input - black box - output. But if you can neither explain how or why your algorithm works (better), in the best case you can call it smart engineering but not science that can/should be published ;-)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Coming especially from a biomedical sciences perspective,
>
> I mean proving something works without explaining how it works.
>
>
>
(from a comment describing what is meant by 'explainability')
this would be an absolute disaster for science. Many results are not explainable according to that criteria; many treatments are known to be successful without being explained (some examples: anesthesia, paracetamol, anti-depressants). If we waited until findings were understood before publishing, science would move a lot more slowly.
If you had a black-box image processing algorithm that, for example, beat the state of the art in tumor detection in processing MRI images, that result would be very interesting and publishable without being able to explain the black-box. In fact, it would likely be unethical to *not* publish such a finding.
However, that also doesn't mean that everything that is published is "true" and definitive: further confirmation by repeated studies, applying a consistent algorithm to new/independent data sources, etc is necessary to build consensus. Those aspects need not present a *barrier* to initial publication, however. To the contrary, it's important to publish even negative results to facilitate future meta analyses.
Certainly, a paper which can explain some phenomenon has a lot of merit and value, and is better than work that cannot provide such an explanation, it's just that "explainability" cannot be a *required criterion*.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Explanations are maybe not always as useful as you are probably thinking.
On the one hand, say, a mathematical proof why this machine learning approach behaves the way it does is fine. As long as the proof is correct, this type of explanation will never become wrong (only maybe outdated).
On the other hand, consider complex systems as you encounter them in the life sciences. An explanation in a paper would often really not be at the level of a mathematical proof (that level of certainty is *impossible* to obtain in the natural sciences), it would be a plausible hypothesis in line with the experimental findings.
The catch is: had the experimental findings been different, very often (sufficiently complex system) plausible "explanations" could be formulated which would be contradictory to the plausible explanation formulated for the findings actually at hand.
In that sense, explanations (hypotheses fitted retrospectively) are a dime a dozen.
Personally, I think it more important to limit the claims to what the data in the paper can actually support. Iff you bring good data that shows your model successfully deals with the situation at hand, that's fine. And coming from an experimental field, I'd still ask for a proper and honest experimental support (which is more than a quick verification with a few not-so-independent cases\*) alongside any explanation.
And: Just as validation may be wrong in that a major influencing factor was overlooked/unknown at the time of the study, wrong/mistaken explanations have been known as well.
All that being said, this may be too much for a single paper - so IMHO it's fine to publish "advances in theory" and "experimental findings for this application" papers (as long as each of the papers has sufficient substance on its own).
---
\* if you take the time a well designed validation study with, say, 3000 patients needs to work towards a deeper mathematical/theoretical understanding, you may get quite far in that respect as well...
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/08/27
| 979
| 4,050
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a PS undergrad with a minor in CS that's 22 credit hours and covers most, if not all, masters pre-reqs that I've seen. The only issue I forsee is that I will only be taking one semester of calculus.
I'm only a sophomore, but I have a 3.78 GPA and I believe I will maintain it at minimum above a 3.5.
I go to a school with an incredibly strong engineering program (where CS is housed), and although I've realized I want to pursue research in CS and/or work as a programmer, it's incredibly difficult to switch into engineering at my school if you did not start in it.
So, with a major in PS and a 22 hour minor in CS covering most essential topics, what can I do to stand out from other non-CS applicants?<issue_comment>username_1: In the US this should not be a problem, provided that your studies will continue here. The undergraduate program is always very general and you have taken enough courses to be able to make a serious claim that you can be successful. Taking a bit more math might be helpful, but discrete math or statistics might be as big a help as more calculus. Maybe even better.
And, I hope that your CS courses go beyond just programming. I assume that it does since the school has a designated minor.
I think you will be in pretty good shape. Just build up a reputation for success and hard work. Make contact with a few professors/mentors so that you get good letters of recommendation by people who can predict your future success.
Switching fields of interest after a BS/BA is very common in the US, so is more likely to be accepted and properly evaluated.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: In my experience, those who come from non-CS undegraduates to CS grad studies are often missing some key things, and having those things will definitely help you succeed:
* Know graphs back and forth. Make sure you're comfortable with the main terminology (edge, path, degree, connected-component, bfs, dfs, cycle, etc.) and the main operations on them. They are literally everywhere in CS. Other discrete math will help (especially sets and relations), but graphs really are key.
* Make sure you're comfortable with induction. A discrete math class might help with this, but even if you don't know number theory or combinatorics or relations, induction pops up everywhere in CS, and knowing it will help.
* Make sure you've taken a Systems class. Concurrency, threading, interrupts, caching, memory management, etc. These are hard concepts to wrap your head around, and they can pop up in many places. Knowing these could save you weeks of debugging slow or incorrect parallel code, and in this day and age you're probably going to have to do *something* in parallel.
* Make sure you know basic software engineering. I've seen plenty of people who can write correct code, but it is terrible to read. Learn about functions, classes, modules, etc. Learn to document your code. Learn to separate your code into functions and modules, so that you can share it and maintain it.
* Knowing a bunch of languages isn't the most important thing, but I'd make sure you know the basics of at least two languages from different *programming paradigms*. For me, the main paradigms are **Typed Imperative** (C, C++, Java, Go, C#), **Untyped Imperative** (Python, Ruby, JavaScript, PHP), **Typed Functional** (Haskell, ML, Elm, F#), **Untyped Functional** (LISP, Scheme, Racket, Clojure, Elixr), and **Logic** (Prolog, Datalog, Mercury, miniKanren). Basically, you want to avoid going into grad studies thinking there's only one way to program. Once you've got two significantly different languages, picking up more shouldn't be that hard.
More "practically oriented" classes are tempting, because they seem, well, practical. They have fun hands-on projects with flashy results. But knowing the fundamentals will make it possible for you to teach yourself things in graduate studies, and once you're into grad studies, you will be teaching yourself new things every single day.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2019/08/27
| 276
| 1,215
|
<issue_start>username_0: Suppose **hypothetically** I download certain new research articles from sci-hub which I read and eventually liked. Now if I contact the authors for follow up question/discussion, then is it a good idea to tell them that I read their papers through scihub (if they ask me how did I get I came across his paper).<issue_comment>username_1: I cannot tell you what authors would care in general, but I can tell you that most authors I know would not care at all. No one gets a dime from a paper anyway.
I advise you however to not mention such a detail: it's actually irrelevant in that context, because you would be writing to discuss the *content* of the paper, not the ways to get access. When you write to someone, especially someone you don't know, avoid irrelevant details: people are busy.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: If an author were actually curious about how you accessed their article, they would probably ask. I would suggest simply not mentioning it (since they probably don't care).
As an aside, one way to access articles behind a paywall is to contact the author directly. Many journals provide authors with links which give free access to the article.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/08/28
| 3,003
| 12,718
|
<issue_start>username_0: A few months back I received a request from a reputed journal to review an article. The article was in a fast-track mode because of its assumed importance. I did review it, and found that it makes some improvement over the existing models, and hence does not rate high on the novelty axis. Moreover, there were serious problems in the article both conceptual and mathematical. Lastly, the English used was erroneous. I wrote these things to the editor, and he made it a regular article and asked the authors to revise it.
They did, and the manuscript came back to me. Unfortunately, the mathematical problems were simply ignored by them, and only cosmetic changes were done. I wrote back to the editor about this, and requested him to ask another review with all the clarifications/modifications. But after that journal did not communicate with me. Today, I was surprised to see that the paper has already been published! I went through it, and found that some minor changes that I had suggested (like changes to a figure to make it more informative) have been done, but the main issues that I had raised have been pushed under the carpet. I find this to be a complete insult to the reviewer, and also a kind of scientific dishonesty. I thought of writing to the editor, but I just want to know if something like this is regular, and if it has happened to anyone. If yes, how should I proceed from here? Just shut my mouth and carry on?<issue_comment>username_1: This probably isn't something to fight over. Possibilities abound:
* Perhaps you [misunderstood something](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/5865/what-to-do-if-reviewers-reject-a-paper-without-understanding-the-content).
* Perhaps the other reviewers were positive on the paper.
* Perhaps the authors provided arguments that your rejection reasons aren't applicable, and the editor found them convincing.
* Perhaps the editor thinks it's better to accept a potentially bad paper than to reject a potentially good one.
* Perhaps the authors said they cannot fix the issues (e.g. funding ran out, one of the lead experimenters graduated and is no longer in the group, etc) and the editor made the judgment call to accept anyway.
* Perhaps the journal is short on papers to fill its issues and so is accepting borderline papers.
* Perhaps the editor simply [made a mistake](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/105065/what-should-i-do-when-my-accepted-paper-is-subsequently-rejected/105071#105071), but since the paper is already accepted, decided to stick with accept instead of rescind the decision.
Ultimately journals are going to publish whatever their editors think are acceptable. Reviewers do not "give permission" to publish something; they only offer recommendations. In the same way if there is a backlash against the journal for publishing this paper, it's the editors who take the heat, not the reviewers. So even if your objections are correct, it's probably still not something to fight over.
If it really bothers you, you could email the editor asking why they accepted the article in spite of your comments. If the response they give isn't satisfactory, you could refuse to review for and/or publish in this journal in the future. If it really bothers you *and* you feel taking retributive action against the journal is justified, you could try [denouncing the paper on social media](http://rrresearch.fieldofscience.com/2011/03/is-this-claim-of-bacteria-in-meteorite.html) ([high-level summary of what happened](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journal_of_Cosmology#Hoover_paper)), but be psychologically prepared for the drama that might follow.
Alternatively, you could view the entire episode positively - hey, I can now write a paper arguing why this paper is wrong!
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: EDIT: The question has been changed since this was written.
Your key misconception is that the editor needs reviewers' permission to publish a paper. Actually, the decision to publish rests solely with the editor.
In this case, you disagree with the editor, but we do not have enough information to tell who is correct. If you think the errors in the paper are important, then once the paper is published you may be able to submit a comment to the journal. Do not do that before the paper is published, because for most journals you must maintain the confidentiality of peer review.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: This isn't something to fight over. The editor made an editorial decision based upon your review, other reviews, and whatever the editorial policies and goals of the journal are. This is the proper editorial role.
As to what you can do -- you have the option of doing nothing, you can counter the problems in the paper in a paper of your own, if it's appropriate to do so, you can write a letter to the editor (I'd recommend doing this in the role of a reader of the paper, and not a referee, which would be inappropriate) -- in other words, you would do exactly what you would do if you had nothing to do with the reviewing process and read a paper you had issues with.
Lastly, if you were really offended by the process, you might consider whether or not you'd accept review request from that journal or that particular editor ever again. There's certainly a "cut-off-your-nose-to-spite-your-face" aspect to effectively taking your ball and going home that might negatively impact you in the long run to turning down reviews, especially if you make the reason for that action known to the editor, but it might help you make your point.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: tl;dr: **You may want to send an email to the editor about this.** Although it will not change anything about this paper, it will be a good lesson for the editor to engage in more constructive correspondence with referees who are spending a lot of effort for free to enable the existence of the journal itself, as well as to be more responsible in his/her decisions next time.
--
This is something that can and does happen in reputable and even prestigious journals. We do not have the full picture, only what you wrote, but based on my experience, I tend to believe you are correct, and the editor made a judgment that takes into account non-scientific factors such as:
* Efficiency. He/She does not have time to deal with the details too much. He/she needs to make a fast decision and it's safest to let the paper in because it was on a fast pace track anyway.
* Politics/Importance/Perceived-importance of papers/author. Since it was on a fast track the paper was probably important for some reason to the journal/editorial board. Maybe it gives them some prestige? Or whatever reason. The editor knew there is a reason for concern, but went with publishing it because he/she decided to ignore what they perceive as "details" that "do not take into account the whole picture", or something like that.
* Possibly, the editor did a genuine decision, believing the paper merits acceptance, and that "you are just picking on the details". They may have a different view than yours, they may think that details are unimportant.
Overall, I tend to agree with your view: details are extremely important and decisions should be made based on objective merits solely as much as possible. Unfortunately, that is not how the system works.
**Conclusions**: **You may want to fight *a bit* over it**. I don't see it as harmful. Simply send an email to the editor to inform them that you think they made a wrong decision as long as the reviewers don't address your concerns. This will not change anything for the present paper, but for the next paper this editor will be more cautious I assume. He/she may be a bit pissed off by your email, but so be it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: As others have already said, it is up to the editor to decide if a paper gets published or not. That being said, I have been in the same situation before, and to be honest, it is extremely annoying to carefully write a review - I usually put more care into reviews where I recommend rejection than reviews of good papers - only to have it dismissed by the editor.
My solution to the problem was simple. I stopped accepting referee requests from that journal, and submit my own work elsewhere. Since it is a well known mid-tier journal in my field, collaborators ask me why I don't want to submit there, and I tell them the story.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Although it is not specifically helpful here, remember that publishing is only the first stage in peer-review, broadly conceived.
You've done due diligence trying to fix things before they make it to the broader world (perhaps you should have argued for rejection initially?). But this isn't the only poorly done science out there: try not to amplify those signals by being careful about what you cite.
Ideally, every paper is perfect and sound in all ways. But, given a flawed paper, there is also a question of whether some subset of the paper --- the core idea, perhaps --- might have value to the community. What you saw is disqualifying mathematical issues may not have been the part of the work the editor saw as valuable.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: There is a slightly different scenario in which it may be useful to contact the editor, which is if it appears that your review was never even sent to the authors.
I know someone who reviewed a paper, she sent the review, but when the paper was accepted there was no evidence they had taken notice of it at all. She contacted the editor, who then found out that her review had never been sent to the authors in the first place. The editor profusely apologised to all parties involved, retracted the acceptance, asked the authors to revise taking into account her review, which they then did.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: I don't think it's worth fighting over this, in the sense that it's the editor's choice to disregard your comments and publish the article. And I don't think you should care -- if the article is bogus, it will be the author and the journal's problem, not yours.
I do think it is very disrespectful to ask for someone's time to review something, and then ignore their feedback without keeping them posted. No matter the merits of your comments, no matter all the good reasons there might be to overturn them, at the very least the journal should have informed you about their choice of publishing the article nevertheless. Sadly it is pretty common that reviewers don't hear back after sending reviews, but this does not make it acceptable.
If you feel upset about this, I would suggest writing to the editor and express your surprise about not being informed about the outcome of the feedback that you sent. I wouldn't argue about the article's quality (it's probably too late to debate this) but simply ask whether they believe it is OK to take someone's feedback and summarily ignore it. This gives the journal a chance to clear up possible problems (e.g., forgot to send your comments to the author, forgot to inform you, etc.), and to apologize if they screwed up.
And if you are not satisfied with the journal's handling of this, you can simply decline further invitations to review for them -- or even block them and not bother replying to them. Reviewing is volunteer work, so you are free to decide how and for whom you want to do it. Some people in your research community might pressure you about doing reviews for your community's venues, especially if you submit your work for publication there (see e.g. [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/122201/does-the-peer-review-reciprocity-principle-apply-globally-or-per-venue/122203)), so you might need to hold your ground. In my opinion, though, this is bogus, and allocating your review time to the right venues is a completely legitimate way to push academic practices in the right direction.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: As a reviewer, you are an advisor to the editor. You are NOT a gatekeeper. You are not the editor. Not the author of the paper. As an author, I may refuse to make a change that you advise. It is then up to the editor to decide if he will side with me or with you.
Even if you think you are right, you still have to allow the editor to make his own decisions. And realize some percentage of the time, you will disagree with them. It is his magazine. And it's the author's byline.
I advise not to get to over-invested in a particular publication incident. There are some questionable papers published. And there are some good papers that get stifled. It's not a perfect funnel.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/08/28
| 829
| 3,766
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am working on my research paper. I read a paper that is related to my works. But I cannot reproduce the results. The information provided in the paper is not sufficient for me. How can I ask him to share his simulation works with me.
Is there any specific email format for that?<issue_comment>username_1: As a general rule, you can ask anyone for anything. But they may not agree to give it, depending on quite a few factors.
I think the only rule is to ask politely and not make claims that you dispute their results. But asking for the code to replicate the results, and explore them more deeply, is appropriate. But there isn't any specific format.
If the other authors are honest then it is a bit more likely they will agree, but it isn't a given. There may be some aspects of their code that they want to keep private to avoid getting scooped.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: By order of what I consider "best practice", here are a few possible cases.
1. In the article, the authors point to a specific version of an open-source software or to an archive of their own code. They also provide all the parameters and the complete simulation procedure, ideally scripted for reproducibility. This is apparently not the case here.
2. In the article, the authors use a well documented method, with publicly available data and standard protocols. While they might not reply to you, other experts in the field should be able to reproduce their results with some effort.
3. The authors mention vaguely their methods or do not provide the necessary parameters. In this case, you are out of luck as only guess work can get you there. It happens often but you should, in principle, be able to work it out at a possibly large investment of time (and possibly of CPU time, etc).
There are several reasons for authors to keep their code private: publishing code takes time, they might think that their code is not "beautiful" enough, the code might provide them with a competitive advantage, etc.
Whatever the reasons, it is legitimate to request the code, data files and parameter files but the authors have no obligation to provide the files or even to reply to you. Sometimes, to motivate the authors it helps to provide a bit of context on your work.
Now, let us assume that the authors reply and attach a source file to their email. This is fine for study purposes but be aware that unless a proper license is provided with the program you cannot do much with the code.
The absence of code is frequent enough that there is a journal dedicated to replication studies in computational fields, [ReScience C](http://rescience.github.io/). Disclaimer: I am part of their editorial team.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Simply send the author(s) a non-confrontational email explaining why you would like access to their code, raw data, or what have you. The email should explain who you are, what specifically you are working on, and why you are interested in reproducing or building upon on their results. Most researchers would be happy to have someone interested in their work and willing to provide external validation.
I should also note that, in my opinion, you contacting the authors and them providing the requested materials creates a mutual (unspoken) agreement: if you find some issue, you will notify the author(s) before calling attention to the issue in a public way. This allows the authors the chance to issue a correction or retraction, which they are owed given their honest participation in the scientific process.
Also, this is a great way to make new contacts in your research area. I have met many friends and collaborators through email discussions started in this manner.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/28
| 1,933
| 8,571
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am very fortunate to have several sources of research fundings to run my lab. Like many other skills needed for running a lab, I have no background in accounting (?). Different funds come through different systems with different restrictions, and my institute does not provide a unified solution that fits my needs. I asked around, and some of my colleagues tell me that they do back of the envelop calculations and do not keep track of detailed expenditures. This is very stressful for me, and I would like to learn to manage grant monies like a pro.
To clarify, the grants management office does manage federal grants, but I also have other sources that they won't handle.
What are the best practices for managing heterogeneous sources of grant monies? Anybody willing to share their spread sheets and methods? Is there a software suitable for this purpose?
Some identified hurdles: (1) encumbered funds for hiring, (2) indirect cost calculations per category, (3) restricted/unrestricted funds, (4) students/staff partially paid by other sources, (5) general bureaucracy, (6) lack of accounting / human resources knowledge.
STEM field, R1 institute in USA.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> What are the best practices for managing heterogeneous sources of grant monies? Anybody willing to share their spread sheets and methods? Is there a
> software suitable for this purpose?
>
>
>
Manage your accounts as if they were for a business. Your lab is probably akin to a small business, so a spreadsheet should suffice. How that spreadsheet should be setup depends on your personal needs. (Unlike a business, you needn't comply with accounting regulations, so you can omit anything that isn't useful.) Your first sheet might include the following.
* *Account balance*, the amount of cash you have available in some account
* *Grants*, a sum of your total grants, possibly computed from another sheet which lists your grants
* *Incoming*, a sum of any incomings (e.g., consultancy work), computed from another sheet, possibly organised by grant
* *Outgoings*, a sum of any outgoings, computed from another sheet
* *Errors*, computed as (*grants* - *account balance*) - (*incomings* - *outgoings*)
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I find the other answer to be not so useful because it omits many of the practicalities of grants management. The reality, as I'm sure you've already found out, is substantially more complicated:
* Each grant has money in a variety of accounts (senior personnel salary, fringe, student salary, travel, equipment, etc) that have different rules and between which you can't move money. At the same time, if you have (say) a 3-year grant, it is largely up to you in which year you actually spend the money in a given category (as long as you can credibly explain why you didn't follow the original schedule, and as long as you make progress as promised in the proposal).
* For some kinds of grants, you can't even move money within one category from one year to another.
* If you have multiple grants, you have to explicitly say which grant you or a student is paid from for any given month -- your grants don't get pooled into one account.
* There are restrictions on money: For example, NSF will generally not allow you to pay yourself for more than two months per year from NSF grants (total, over all your NSF grants combined).
So it is complicated. In practice, it is made more complicated because if you have multiple grants, they typically don't run for the same length and the same number of years but one will end before another; in many cases, the budget years for each of these grants will even be different (one from September to August, another from January to December).
As a consequence, I don't actually know anyone who has more than a single, small grant, who would have a reasonable scheme to work the finances out rigorously. Over the past ten years, I've generally had 2-4 grants at any given time and my group has had a budget of $200-400k/year from which to pay myself, students, postdocs, and travel. Although I would like to say that I've figured this out after these years, the reality is that I haven't; yet, my finance people keep telling me that I'm better organized than almost anyone else in the department.
So how do I do it? Every few months, I sit together with my finance people and we talk about what and who needs to be paid, what accounts there are, which of these expire the earliest or have the most restrictions, and then we allocate costs to accounts. If a certain student or piece of equipment could reasonably be paid from different accounts, then I will generally try to allocate that cost to the account that expires first or that has the most restrictions -- because this protects money that I can carry forward the longest for future expenses, or that in some cases can be used more flexibly. Beyond these conversations and keeping a general overview of what moneys you have in my head, I can't say that I really know exactly what I'm doing. The university has a system that allows me to project into the future the current spending rate -- but because costs keep being allocated and re-allocated all the time, or are infrequent costs, I've found that these tools are not overly useful.
I'll end by noting that I've generally found it most difficult if I had only one or two grants at a given time because then you really don't have a lot of flexibility: If you've got a student that needs to be paid, you only have one account where that could come from and that account can't run out before the student is finished, nor should the student finish before the money runs out (because then you have to give money back). In some sense, it therefore becomes easier if you have multiple grants and multiple students. Except, of course, that then you also multiply the level of responsibility you have for others and towards the funding agencies.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Speaking as research administration staff at another R1 institution, here are a few things to think about.
For Sponsored Projects, Utilize Your Research Office
----------------------------------------------------
Many of the commenters noted this and it's great advice. For your external grant funds your institution's sponsored projects office will help you with the accounting. They will know exactly what you can and can't do with your grant funds and may have tools to help you manage them.
Staff Assistance
----------------
There are many kinds of funds that a sponsored projects office typically won't deal with. These could include internal funds (like start-up funds or departmental research), gifts, contracts, or other instruments. However, in most institutions I am familiar with your *department* should have accounting and finance staff who can help you manage those funds. If your department doesn't, ask an investigator who has been around your institution longer for advice. Maybe there is another department or organization who can help.
If there isn't, you should consider hiring someone. Although grant funds may be too restricted for this, your other funds may not be. A small or medium sized lab probably can't afford a full time accountant or grant administrator, but you may be able to buy the time of an existing staff member in another department.
Your research office could probably point you in the right direction, even if they don't provide the service themselves. Other researchers might have already discovered a solution and may tell you what they did.
Some Other Tips
---------------
Assuming you don't have help, here are some general tips:
* Review your expenditures, income, and balances on a regular basis. The grant administrators often do this monthly, but you can get away with less often if your funds aren't too dynamic.
* Encumbrances are your friend. If you encumber funds, you aren't likely to forget them when projecting future balances.
* If you have staff, remember to budget for payroll increases (both salary/wage increases as well as increases in benefits and tax liability).
A major part of fund accounting is determining what pool of money can pay for what resource. Think critically about what source of funding for different kinds of purchases.
Lastly, it's great that you are interested in the financial health and stability of your lab. But don't let it consume you. If you regularly review your expenses and fund balances, and keep an eye on where your money goes, you will probably be fine.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/08/28
| 2,169
| 8,917
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm reading about the [Grievance Studies affair](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grievance_Studies_affair) and there's one thing I don't understand. Portland State University (PSU) initiated a a research misconduct inquiry against Boghossian for conducting a research on human subjects without IRB approval. I assume that PSU considered the hoax as a research project, the human subjects being reviewers which received the papers.
It's not clear to me why such an approval would be needed in this case. What exactly makes such a project subject to IRB approval:
* actions classified as "research", as in "contribution to generalizable knowledge"?
* project funded by the university or the government? (AFAIK not the case)
* being paid by the university while the project is under way?
* publications or plans to publish? (again, AFAIK no official research papers were published)
* affiliation with the university?
* something else?
As an extreme example, if a university professor tells their colleagues a joke and counts how many people laugh, and later writes a post about it in social media, do they risk similar sanctions if the university doesn't like their post?<issue_comment>username_1: [This article in NYMag answers pretty clearly most of your questions.](https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/01/is-peter-boghossian-getting-railroaded-for-his-hoax.html) I won't quote it all, you can read it on your own. Here are relevant excerpts.
>
> For the purposes of <NAME>’s case, three facts about IRBs matter a great deal: “study” is defined rather broadly in the federal guidelines; possible risks to humans — even ones that non-IRB nerds may view as negligible — are taken very seriously; and IRBs tend to look especially closely at studies involving deception. [...]
>
>
> First, the definition of “study”: As PSU explained to Boghossian in a document it sent him December 17, the university determined that his work met the definition of “study” as defined by the Department of Health and Human Services in language that reads — this isn’t included in the letter itself — “a systematic investigation, including research development, testing and evaluation, designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge.” [...]
>
>
> Crucially, it does not matter that the hoaxsters didn’t attempt to publish their final results in a peer-reviewed journal. “Publishing in a magazine that’s not peer reviewed doesn’t matter if they’re reporting on their research,” said <NAME>, director of the Fordham University Center for Ethics Education. All that matters is that Boghossian is an employee at PSU, and that he conducted what the university deemed to be human-subjects research based on a plain reading of how that term is normally defined for this purpose.
>
>
> [...] First of all, “if they believed that this was not human-subjects research, the process would have been to submit to the IRB an application that says I believe this research that I’m doing is exempt,” said Fisher. “And the IRB makes the determination if it’s not human-subject.” It’s not their call, in other words — it’s still the IRB’s. [...]
>
>
> In the case of the grievance-studies hoax, the potential for harm came in the form of reputational damage and humiliation to journal editors and reviewers. And one decision the hoaxsters made — allowing accepted papers to actually be published rather than notifying the journals so they could be yanked before they were out in the world — neatly captures the sorts of ethical discussions often spurred by IRBs. [...]
>
>
> Finally, as a so-called audit study [...] Boghossian, Lindsay, and Pluckrose’s scheme was more likely than a non-deception study to raise IRB eyebrows. “All audit studies require deception, and many social scientists who would like to see only a limited role for IRBs still consider IRB review appropriate when deception is required,” said Schrag. Deception is simply seen as an ethically fraught tactic, so even IRB critics aren’t necessarily in favor of them backing off entirely in situations where deception is involved. [...]
>
>
> Pluckrose at one point mentions the impossibility of getting informed consent from journal reviewers — the implication being that to do so would be to blow the cover of the experiment. Again, though, that’s the point of an IRB: to gain permission to deceive, or to come up with some sort of work-around. The choice isn’t necessarily between obtaining informed consent in a manner that would blow the experiment and not running the experiment at all — plenty of IRBs have approved plenty of audit studies. [...]
>
>
>
The article was not particularly difficult to find (it was linked in one of the Wikipedia articles), and the way you phrased your questions casts some doubt about your good faith (it sounds like you have already attained a conclusion and only wanted validation, especially your last hypothetical question), but still, I think this deserved a good-faith answer. Now as for your hypothetical:
>
> As an extreme example, if a university professor tells their colleagues a joke and counts how many people laugh, and later writes a post about it in social media, do they risk similar sanctions if the university doesn't like their post?
>
>
>
This is a systematic (albeit small scale) investigation designed to contribute to generalizable knowledge and the professor reported on it. It involves human subjects. If the professor doesn't inform the participants that their reactions are recorded and will be posted online, it also involves deception. I will let you reach your own conclusions as to whether it would require IRB approval. It sounds like you understood extremely well what especially was problematic with Boghossian's study, as you were able to construct a completely different hypothetical scenario that still presents the same three red flags.
You may find all this overblown or too cautious. But it isn't up to you (or a researcher carrying out an experiment with ethical ramifications) to decide. A researcher has a conflict of interest: it is in their interest that the study is carried out and completed. It is the role of the IRB to offer an external evaluation of this, to remove the conflict of interest. If the experiment is truly worth the risks, it will be approved.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In general, there's large variation in what IRBs consider necessary between university to university. As a rule of thumb, if there's any contact with humans at all, a research project should at least have contact with the IRB committee. This can of course lead to problems since some locations have committees which are way too lenient and others which are way too strict (see for example this somewhat [famous essay about an IRB in a hospital environment](https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/08/29/my-irb-nightmare/)). But whether one agrees or not with how IRBs are run in general, the idea that what constitutes a study should be broadly construed is a popular one among both the IRBs themselves and the university administration. In this particular case, while not a study in the classical sense, there was a clear attempt to gain information which would be relevant in an academic context. Part of what I suspect happened here is that overly strict IRBs are seen as a problem in the more, for lack of a better term, "traditional" parts of academia, which are the same ones more inclined to run this sort of hoax.
Now, to the actual question, why investigate? Well, if someone had made a complaint about needing an IRB approval which it didn't have, and it isn't obviously ridiculous (e.g. claiming they needed consent from numbers to test their primality), a university is going to run an investigation, at minimum to cover their asses. And since some universities have policies which explicitly include studies in a broad sense(and the federal guidlines support that), and since in this case there's an actual argument of harm that isn't unreasonable (harm to the journal editors in terms of embarrassment or career issues), running such an investigation makes sense to a university administration.
The other thing to note here is essentially pragmatic: if someone does something controversial, the probability that someone is going to try to use some bureaucratic or administrative aspect to get back at them is very high. That's a fact of life, and occurs regardless of the politics in question. To use one example that's on what is normally considered the left, look at the [Ward Churchill case](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ward_Churchill#Research_misconduct_investigation). It is likely that similar levels of plagiarism or misreporting as that situation occur with others, but if their work isn't as controversial, no one starts pushing the gears of administration to look at them.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/08/28
| 2,037
| 8,503
|
<issue_start>username_0: **Main Question:**
I am an undergraduate student who just attended my first conference and gave a podium talk on my research from last summer. I tried talking with a researcher who is well-known in the field about his views and he was rather dismissive. I am not sure how I should have handled the situation at the time or in reflection.
On one hand, his view is likely shared by only a small minority of people in the field, the view that no machine learning should be used in healthcare unless it is explainable (as opposed to "black box" deep learning models). He proposes we should use methods such as symbolic logic AI instead (what he did most of his career).
On the other hand, I am just an undergraduate in the field and he is a very established researcher. I would expect him to be more correct than me.
1. How should I view the interaction? Should I assume I am probably wrong? Should I assume that he is wrong? Another option...?
2. In the future, should I press the debate more rather than only asking a few questions and thanking him for the info? Would this be impolite at a conference? Would it be an unwise career move?
**Supplementary Info/Thoughts:**
I find this balance of overconfidence vs underconfidence confusing in general for academics. Ranking myself compared to my peers is rather easy (I view myself near the top, but not an outlier). But comparing myself to people older than me is more difficult, particularly in situations where "wrongness" cannot be definitively proven.
Should I raise my disagreement when this occurs? How long should I debate the issue if we don't agree? If we don't agree in the end should I assume I'm wrong? It seems like senior researchers are likely to be correct. I am just not sure what to do/think when I disagree with established, senior researchers in fields such as health informatics.
If anyone would be interested in discussing symbolic AI vs ML in healthcare I would be glad to do it (in the chat). I currently feel unresolved since I could not do it during the conference and would like to know what points I am failing to see.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> 1) How should I view the interaction? Should I assume I am probably wrong? Should I assume that he is wrong? Another option...?
>
>
>
**Researchers should have differing opinions on topics** such as whether non-explainable machine learning techniques should be used in healthcare.
>
> 2) In the future, should I press the debate more rather than only asking a few questions and thanking him for the info? Would this be impolite at a conference? Would it be an unwise career move?
>
>
>
**Such opinions should be debated**, that's how research advances, and such debate should be encouraged, at conferences and elsewhere. Some researchers will be less willing to accept your opinion than others, only you can decide whether you want to engage with such researchers.
>
> Should I raise my disagreement when this occurs?
>
>
>
If you want to.
>
> How long should I debate the issue if we don't agree?
>
>
>
As long as the conversation lasts.
>
> If we don't agree in the end should I assume I'm wrong?
>
>
>
No. There doesn't seem to be any right and wrong here, just opinions.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: xedg, there seems to be two issues here which seems to complicate your mixed feelings. One issue is around status, which you alluded to, with your first author publications and strong academic record. The second issue is around where is the best environment to debate and clarify the pros and cons around the role of machine learning.
The first issue around status is quite unfair as you positioned the professor as being disrespectful or "dismissive". First conference presentations are usually always given great courtesy especially in question time. So what you interpreted as dismissive, may possibly be respectful distance. You are also not in a PhD program or have not finished your PhD, so experts will always back off and not put you in difficult spots out of respect of your position despite your accomplished publication record - [common conference etiquette blog](https://danirabaiotti.wordpress.com/2017/05/15/academic-etiquette-tips-on-conducting-yourself-at-an-academic-conference/) Remember having a bad experience at a conference will look bad for the conference and may also discourage people who may want to do a PhD. Attacking junior researchers will also diminish the professor in the eyes of other senior experts. Making junior presenters cry has been a subject of discussion among experts and does not look good at all. So all these factors may explain why debating an undergrad is poor form at a conference question time post-presentation. The other possible issue is around familiarity. As you attend more conferences and become a familiar face, people will be far more comfortable debating and clarifying complex issues with you compared to your first conference.
The second issue is what is the most appropriate format for this debate. If you want to flesh out "the role of machine learning in healthcare" at a conference, the short question time post-presentation is definitely not an appropriate timeslot for such a complex discussion. Symposiums or panel discussions are far more a satisfying format with the appropriate adjudication and moderation for this to occur. A senior mathematician would have a very different perspective than a clinician for example, but in a panel format, all the views would be respected rather than just your narrow focus on what is "right or correct" as implied in your question.
A review article examining the pros and cons of symbolic logic AI as the dominant approach in healthcare then be more appropriate in an extended article, rather than at a conference? To expect an expert to synthesize his academic focus and all the publications in a field is unproductive and not representative in a short question timeslot post-presentation.
I liked this [Indian Hills presentation](http://www.indianhills.edu/_myhills/courses/ENG106/documents/lu09_argue.pdf) on how not to be argumentative might be helpful. Although you might not be overly argumentative, it always pays to move away from the "correct vs wrong" mentality in the academic realm. Most things are "more right" and "more wrong" depending on the scenario and circumstance.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: There is another issue here that hasn't yet been raised. It is an ethical issue. I don't think it is, in the present day, a small minority of people who believe, on ethical grounds, that it is improper to apply medical procedures to people if they can't be explained. It is actually experimentation that has fairly strict protocols around it. Even before you can begin an experiment on humans you need some "reason" that the procedure might be effective and strong reasons that it won't be harmful.
So, the population that holds this view might not be those doing "black box" machine learning, but it is pretty strong among medical people and ethicists. FWIW, I'm closer to your field than his.
I think that was the message being conveyed. And even I would convey it, though I'm certainly not an expert in clinical methods.
Oddly, however, lots of things that are done in medicine have a historical basis that leads to standard practice that has never been explained to the standards *of this time*. Yes, ten thousand years ago, people tried things (herbs, say) and if they seemed to work, they were used again, even if, in reality they had no real effect. But we aren't in those times anymore. Scientific medicine requires a cause-effect reasoning path. Shall we try some ground up rhinoceros horn as a cure for that? Ivermectin?
There are many known flaws in black-box ML. The results are no better than the data, and might be worse. The data can be bad because of poor sampling (inadequate, biased, ...) techniques.
I don't see your interaction of one of expert vs novice so much as pointing out to you the ethical considerations required in medicine. That isn't a reason to stop what you are doing, but it is a reason to situate it properly in the world of medical ethics.
A similar experience in a field without such strong ethical considerations might be completely different. The more experienced person may not always be correct in any case, but a novice should listen carefully and try to take the right lesson from it.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/08/28
| 1,408
| 6,035
|
<issue_start>username_0: The question is divided into two parts and related to the situation like:
Committee gets PhD thesis to read through/give comments/report on it.
Thesis is written based on several publications.
1. What is the chance that Committee members are going through the papers as well as the thesis? For the purpose of comparing/so on...?
2.I am wondering because if they would find that some information which was published looks different in your thesis (reevaluated or even corrected because in the paper there was not-fully-correct data)...how will defense then go and how to turn it to a safe ground?
(P.S. corrections which do not change the main idea and conclusions are still the same. As an example it can be like you corrected the background of your signal in one way for publication,then you realized that it was rather stupid and corrected it in different way. Signal is still there, interpreted the same, but qualitatively Figure looks different.)
Thank you for your answers!<issue_comment>username_1: >
> 1. What is the chance that Committee members are going through the papers as well as the thesis?
>
>
>
This of course depends on the specific committee members...some may take their jobs more seriously and read in a lot of depth; others may mostly trust the thesis advisor to do that job and simply verify that enough effort has been put in to grant the degree.
>
> As an example it can be like you corrected the background of your signal in one way for publication,then you realized that it was rather stupid and corrected it in different way. Signal is still there, interpreted the same, but qualitatively Figure looks different.)
>
>
>
You should be prepared to explain differences like this at your defense. I might not suggest calling your work "stupid" (although, I would have felt completely comfortable describing it as such to the people on my own committee who were somehow both excellent scientists and living human beings) but research is typically an iterative process. If you changed part of your process at some time during your work, hopefully you did so for a good reason, and you are (hopefully) the best expert in your own work, and you understand and can explain your reasoning better than anyone else.
Adding in the appropriate details:
>
> Signal is still there, interpreted the same, but qualitatively Figure looks different.
>
>
>
is exactly the type of explanation your committee will want to hear at a defense.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I think that many, though not all, committee members will try to do a good job, but they may fail. My perspective is mathematics in which a dissertation is very arcane (or can be, anyway) and few people in the world are as well versed in the particular tiny research area as the author, and, perhaps, the advisor. It may be a bit different in some other fields and perhaps wildly different in dissimilar fields.
But people are also busy with their own work and don't have the time or the inclination to learn every part of the background of a given (math) thesis. Many will try to read it, but will get stuck at some point. Questions from those people are likely to be to ask for some explanation of what is going on at the point that they got stuck. If you know your work well, these are fairly easy to answer, though it is possible to give an unsatisfactory, overly pedantic, answer. If you can provide insight about how to continue then you get a win.
But many people, being busy, will just defer to your advisor. This is especially the case if your advisor is a well respected mathematician. A couple of days (maybe hours) before the oral exam, they will go the the advisor and ask: "This is ok, right?". The advisor will assure them that all is well and so they have the confidence to sign off on your work. Proof by Authority, I suppose.
If you think this is cynical, then ask around. I know that it happens, both from being a student and from being an advisor. I won't admit, of course, to that behavior when I was another committee member.
However, as username_1 says, things differ. You may get an eager committee member who has examined your work in detail. If they disagree with it or have a certain sort of personality, you might get uncomfortable questions. You need to give reasonable answers, of course, but you can, I hope also depend on your advisor to serve as your shield from overly critical things. You won't be required to give a perfect answer to every question, but need to demonstrate mastery of the ideas in the thesis and the surrounding micro-field.
But, in particular, you can't be expected to give snap answers to questions that require study and reflection to properly answer. If someone has seen a paper that you don't know about and it seems to say something different from what you have written, then it may take a lot of analysis to see (a) whether there really is a difference and (b) why the different results arose.
My committee was something like the following. My advisor knew everything that I did and he supported the work. Another faculty member was in the same research group and understood it well, but had few questions. But he had the background to follow it without a lot of detail. Another one, I think, just deferred to my advisor. Another who didn't ask questions in the "defense" came to me afterwards and admitted that he couldn't understand it very well (his sub field was different) but he found a few typos and gave me a list.
On the other hand, I heard of a case at the time, possibly apocryphal, in which a candidate in chemistry was denied a degree because the talk mentioned *ph* throughout. In that place, an external (out of field) examiner was required and that person asked for a lay-person's explanation of ph. The candidate froze up and couldn't answer, though it is a subject studied in first year chemistry. But, the fact that such a story was remembered (or made up) points out how rare such things really are.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/29
| 1,762
| 7,277
|
<issue_start>username_0: As an instructor at a large university, you will sooner or later have a waitlist for your class. Is it better (for you) to admit those students into your class or do you better keep the enrollment limit firm?
I favor the latter because it reduces my work, however marginally. What's more, it might improve the attitude of your students towards your class if there is more demand to take your class than you offer.
Is there a different perspective or a refinement of the above?<issue_comment>username_1: It depends on how many people are already enrolled in class, how many TAs you have and if the course is mandatory/important for the students from your department (I suppose it is not a gen ed class)
>
> I favor the latter because it reduces my work, however marginally.
>
>
>
If this is a mandatory/important class, that reasoning is worrisome. You should talk to the department, get more TAs the following year and put the "marginal" workload and some more to them. If you are teaching using slides and having more people in class just changes the amount of grading you have to do, get a grader (TA), it usually can be done even after the semester has begun. If you have a gen ed or that focus on student from other departments (if it is not mandatory for those students), then you could probably stick to the student limit without a problem.
>
> What's more, it might improve the attitude of your students towards your class if there is more demand to take your class than you offer.
>
>
>
If your class is mandatory, people will plan ahead to enroll in it and you will still get all sorts of students. If it is not mandatory, people usually have a sincere interest in the subject and you will just be limiting the number of people learning (through your class) the subject.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> I favor the latter because it reduces my work, however marginally.
>
>
>
This reasoning is selfish - you're doing what's marginally better for you, but can have significant negative effects on the student, especially if they e.g. end up having to delay graduation.
>
> What's more, it might improve the attitude of your students towards your class if there is more demand to take your class than you offer.
>
>
>
I don't know about others, but in my undergraduate experience, if I'm unable to take an elective class because of limited spots, I take some other elective instead. The next semester, I don't go back to take the original elective and move on to more advanced electives. If most students act thusly, this might not have as much impact as you would like - your students don't come back the next year.
On the other hand if it's a core class, then this shouldn't change anything since everyone has to take your class anyway.
*Should* you do it? That is a question about your personal moral values. Me, I'd take on as many students as I can until I hit capacity. Once every student's experience (or my other responsibilities) starts to suffer, that's the time to stop taking more students. Your values might differ: e.g. you could argue that the objection in the first paragraph above is invalid because if one accepts it, it would also be an argument to donate $10 to a charity such as Médecins Sans Frontières, since the impact on oneself is marginal but it can seriously impact the life of someone in a third-world country.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In my department for lower level courses I have no control over the enrollment of my classes. For upper levels, it's rare the the capacity maxes out but here's a general way I would look at it from an instructor and/or administrator.
1. *How frequently is the course offered?*
There's a huge difference between a course only offered every year or two, and every single semester.
2. *Is the course required for graduation?*
If not, there's far less reason to give the override. If so, why stand in the way of someone's graduation (particularly if they're a senior)?
3. *Are the other sections of the course full?*
If the course has multiple sections, why don't they take one of those? If there is a legitimate reason they can't (a required course at the same time) I might be more inclined, if not, they can take it the other one if they really want it.
4. *Whose student is it?*
My department has one to let majors and minors always take the classes, but those who are not in our department will only get it in exigent circumstances (must have course to graduate). This is because we are penalized if our majors don't graduate on time and we need to always make any marginal spots available first and foremost to them.
5. *Is there a general policy?*
Your department may have a policy for this. If so, use that.
I don't think that there is any benefit to intentionally reducing numbers to increase demand later on. If your class is required, people will take it because they have to, not because it's popular (your department has created an artificial demand). If your class is not required, then students will just find a different class and not bother with yours another semester. The demand for a non-required class only tends to go up if it has the reputation of being easy, fun, relevant to other majors, or some combination thereof.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: In my experience, a fair amount of enrolled students never show up at all, or the stop showing up after a while. So if you have some more on the list, admit them, in the end it will be better to have some people sitting there and listening, than talking to one or two who still attend.
In my experience a waiting list is only needed if you have to organize rooms with limited capacity. The rest will sort itself out.
And in the end, it's your job to teach, the more people you teach, the more people will know your topic. That should be the incentive of a teacher. Not the amount of work. But that might be my take on the issue.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Regardless on the number of alumni the work doesn't change much since you can automate much of it.
Example: In my country, first semester classes can have 60+ students and the teacher have no control over that, but later classes often have 'listener' students, which ask the professor to come in and be a part of the class even if they are not enrolled with said professor.
It comes down on how to consider such in your big life and career plan.
**Advantages of accepting more students:**
* Grateful students give better reviews.
* More students raise your profile and status in large as a teacher capable of tutoring many.
* More chances you'll be considered for project coordination or
tutoring, which leads to possibility of grants
* Chance to use the students as test subjects for research (bigger study population)
* Chance to get the students to help create extra materials that can be
used for future courses, reducing your work.
* More experience
**Cons :**
* More work at first until you automate things
* More responsibility to alumni
* Could cause bad sentiment with other staff that feel you are 'stealing' heir prospect students
**General suggestion:**
Take as many students as you can and make the best of it.
Upvotes: -1
|
2019/08/29
| 3,145
| 13,343
|
<issue_start>username_0: For context, I've been a postdoc in computer science for about 3 years. I recently wrote a grant and was awarded a fellowship for 2 years.
I've heard from multiple sources that if I don't get a tenure-track position in the next two years it will become very difficult for me to have an academic research career. But I don't need the kind of job security that allows me to get paid if I stop working—I just need some kind of agreement that I can keep my job while I'm productive. This is pretty common in other jobs, so why in this case am I being told that it's basically tenure or nothing?<issue_comment>username_1: The reason is simply that possessing a tenure-track faculty position (and then obtaining tenure) is the primary performance indicator for long-term careers at most institutes where research is the primary responsibility.
There are some exceptions - some universities offer a research professor position: you pay your salary from grants you secure, and as long as you do that you can continue working there.
You can also work as a lab manager/research scientist in a university, which is a term contract that is extended based on merit.
Some private research institutes (Google/Facebook/Amazon etc.) offer research positions (that are highly competitive and well-paid), but there are also many other private research laboratories that offer a similar deal to what you describe (though in that case your research needs to be focused on what these institutes care about, and is not entirely up to you).
I'd also mention that tenured professors are still expected to be productive and get grants. Though it is more difficult to fire them, becoming completely inactive for no reason is probably not going to be good for your long-term career. In other words, to some extent tenure track faculty face the same agreement, especially when they're not tenured yet.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Strictly speaking, there are no limitations on the number of postdocs that you work in. The limitations tend to be external and implied in the contracts or regulations around the issue of postdocs.
[In France](https://www.sciencemag.org/careers/2015/04/time-limit-postdoctoral-contracts-french-experience), there is a law against ongoing contracts if there is evidence of continuous employment and work for five years. So this would impact postdocs in France. I am not sure about other states.
Another example is the limitations of the short-term US visa or J-1s being limited to 5 years - [Quora article](https://www.quora.com/Why-do-so-many-postdoctoral-programs-limit-eligibility-to-within-5-years-after-PhD-conferral)
The other possible relevant angle is the granting institution of your postdocs have a 5 year limitation as well. Some institutions that grant post-docs nationally or states have time-limits. It might be worthwhile emailing or checking your current and previous post-docs to see whether there is a time limitation if you do decide to keep going with post-docs.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: If I understand your question, it seems that you ask whether you can secure postdoc jobs that will allow you to continue your research, as long as you are productive, forever. That is, without getting a tenure-track position or a permanent position.
The answer is most probably: "**No**" (for CS in North America). If you are not on a tenure track/permanent post after about five years of PhD, then even if you are productive you will find it very hard to find postdoc positions. Until you will get none, hence ending your research career in approximately less than 10 years after PhD completion, regardless of your productivity.
There are few rare *exceptions*: there are never-ending postdocs (research assistants of some sort) that go with their postdoc host for decades. But this is rare, and this is not a good position to be in (money wise, and independent research wise). On the other hand, if you find these positions good for you (no admin, no teaching though low salary and no ability to form your own group), you may like such deals.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Funding and institutional policies are the major barriers to your plan.
There are a fairly large number of fellowships available for newly-minted PhDs looking to start a postdoc. These are often only open to people who graduated within the last 1-2 years. A number of other fellowships have slightly longer cut-offs: the Burrows-Wellcome Fund CASI award cuts off at 60 months post-PhD, and the NIH's K99 program is also limited to people within 4-5 years of their degree, and all training grants cut off at ~7 years. At the same time, many places also prevent non-"permanent" staff from applying for pure research grants, on the grounds that you're a) committing the university to do years of work but b) might not have a funded position then. (Yes, this seems to apply even when the grant contains funding for that very position. No, they don't seem to see the Catch-22).
At the same time, you're also getting more expensive. My institution has a 5 year "term limit" for postdocs, after which you have to become a "Research Associate" or "Research Assistant." This title change requires a slightly higher (though still objectively low) salary and more benefits (retirement, etc). The interaction between you a) costing more and b) definitely requiring money from a research grant, leads many lab heads to prefer younger applicants who cost less and could get their own money soon. **To be clear, I think this is a totally ridiculous, wasteful, and possibly discriminatory—situation**, and these policies ought to be reworked to avoid it. Nevertheless, it's going to be tough until they are.
The solution is to make sure that you're a good value for the money. Along with producing solid research on your own, take an active role in helping out with other projects in the group. Look for money where you can. Some foundations don't care much about career stage. You can also look for funding opportunities where you'll have a major role, even if you're not the formal PI. There are a very few staff scientist funding programs too. The NIH has an R50 "Research Specialist" grant that supports similar jobs (though with some restrictions on the person and environment), as does the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative.
Finally, you can lobby funders and agencies to reconsider their time-based eligibility limits. The NIH recently extended some K99 windows from 4 to 5 years for under-represented applicants, and I think the Wellcome Trust is removing all time considerations from some programs (though not CASI, which is probably the most relevant to a computer scientist).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Large employers typically have some degree of standardization of compensation across hires. Most large employers offer health care coverage as part of the standard compensation package, most large employers offer standard retirement packages as part of their standard compensation package. You can't just tell Microsoft that you don't want a 401k or you want to opt out of the possibility of ever using their health care coverage. Most large employers have rules about the salary ranges for employees based on type of position and level of experience. You can't just tell Google "I want a job running a large team, but I want the job to be at T3 instead T6." Bonuses are part of the standard package at many finance companies, and you can't just say when you're hired "I want to opt out of the bonus system." At many law firms in order to do a certain level of work you need to be a partner in the firm, and many firms will not allow you to stay as an associate beyond a certain point.
Of course in all of these situations you could argue that if an employee wants to be compensated less than other employees in the same role, why shouldn't the company just take them up on that? But again and again most professions don't decide to work this way. It's bad for company morale. It's expensive for HR to keep track of weird bespoke contracts. Compensation well below the median is bad for retaining employees, since if the employee is valuable another company will hire them away with the standard package.
In academia in the United States, tenure is part of the standard package of compensation. Positions without tenure for mid-career academics are unusual. If a school wanted to start offering positions without tenure, they would either have to significantly increase compensation in some other way, or they would end up in a situation where all their good employees left. If they hired some people with tenure and some without tenure to do the same job it would be difficult to maintain a conducive working environment.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: In the United States, at least, there are a lot more non-tenure research positions than is often perceived.
Even if we ignore the (vast) number of positions in which one can do fundamental scientific research outside of universities, there are lots of non-tenure-track research positions at universities as well. Sometimes these positions are associated with individual grants (["soft money"](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/30621/what-is-a-soft-money-research-position) positions), but the longer term ones are more often with various "centers" and "institutes", all of which tend to exist outside of traditional departments. Some examples I'm personally familiar with include [Harvard's Wyss Institute](https://wyss.harvard.edu/), [BU's Hariri Institute](https://www.bu.edu/hic/), the [MIT Broad Institute](https://www.broadinstitute.org/), and the [Texas Advanced Computing Center](https://www.tacc.utexas.edu/). These all involve complex mixes of faculty and non-faculty researchers in various complex arrangements, and can readily support long-term academic research careers past the "post-doc" phase.
For people at smaller institutions or stuck in a department-centric mindset, however, it's easy to overlook or discount these "non-traditional" careers. Likewise, once people choose one path or the other, it's relatively rare to switch, though by no means unheard of.
This may be why you are being told "now or never" by various people. You don't say what country you are from, so it also might be that things are different in your country. To the best of my knowledge, however, most other developed countries are much the same as the USA in having a large academic research "demi-monde", though the particular mechanisms and and organizations differ greatly.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: Define “productive”.
Getting some form of job security is quite desirable so normally qualified candidates will eventually get offered tenure so that professors can enter longer term projects such as supervising students, and can tackle longer term problems without the fear of loosing your position because of decreased productivity over the short term.
Possibly the best example of such a long term endeavour was <NAME>’ proof of Fermat’s last theorem, which took 6 years to complete, something unthinkable to attack unless you have tenure. Of course while the research of *most* tenured professors is not conducted over so many years in such quasi-secret as Wiles, it would be wrong to suggest most stop tenured faculty working/being productive once they are tenured.
Tenure also plays an important role in protecting academic freedom: tenured professors can undertake (and publish) research on or discuss controversial issues without fear of retribution (in principle), and can likewise criticize others (including administrators) usually with no consequence on their employment (provided some limits of civility is maintained).
Overall, I venture to say that good tenured professors are the backbone of most academic systems, and universities know this. Granting them tenure is a mark of confidence which reflects the commitment of the institution to the candidate: if you are *not* tenured after many years, people (read: students and funding agencies) will suspect something’s not right with the professor.
One can not deny that some abuse the system and the privilege of tenure, but thankfully these are not the majority.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: >
> I don't need the kind of job security that allows me to get paid if I stop working—I just need some kind of agreement that I can keep my job while I'm productive.
>
>
>
You're misunderstanding tenure. Tenure is much closer to what you said you want. Professors don't actually keep their jobs if they just sit around and do nothing - and their employment agreements don't say that they have this entitlement.\*\* Tenure is about not getting fired without good cause\*\*. Effectively, it's about not getting fired when you are (at least moderately) productive; and not being in a continual rat-race of having to please and impress people to maintain your position.
Also, post-doc employment conditions are terrible, but in a sense that's a different problem; i.e. I believe academic staff unions should make *temporary* and *fixed-term* positions at least as expensive per hour to institutions than permanent positions, if not more, to discourage them from artificially preferring temporaries.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/08/29
| 3,712
| 15,290
|
<issue_start>username_0: I faced the following situation a few days back. I am doing my teaching assistance work under a professor.
I attended one of his classes as a TA during which he was teaching some technically wrong stuff, which he assumed as true. Since most of the class were students of the course, they do not know which statements are correct and hence are not in position to rectify the professor's mistakes.
There are more than five other TAs but no one pointed out the problem. I don't know whether the TAs know what is correct.
I stayed silent and observed whether anyone would point out the mistake but the class ended without anyone realizing the professor's mistake. The reason for my silence is this question.
Is it offensive to the professor to point out such mistakes? My question boils down to: **Is it proper etiquette to point out mistakes that a professor makes during their lecture?**<issue_comment>username_1: Indeed an embarrassing situation and public rectification must be avoided, at least in environments where discussion is not a part of the game. This is my experience.
Talk to the teacher and s/he will fix that.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You know your professor better than we do, but I have only experienced professors who were thankful when their mistakes were pointed out (also by TAs).
It's not bad etiquette:
* it helps everyone involved to learn something new.
* you point out the mistake in a friendly and factual manner, so they can save their face.
Everyone makes mistakes and can err, even a professor. It's not embarrassing, but a wrong reaction might be. But my respect for someone being glad about their mistakes being corrected always just grew. This especially shows that they care about teaching their students.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: It depends on the type of mistake. All mistakes must get fixed to make sure the students don't learn anything wrong. However, how to best fix the mistake depends on the situation.
If it is a small mistake that can be fixed easily (e.g. a missing minus sign) I would recommend bringing it up on the spot. The 'cost' to the teacher and impact on the lecture is minimal but the benefit is potentially significant.
For more serious problems in a derivation/ argument like the one you described I think the cost benefit analysis often comes down in favor of waiting until the end of the lecture and informing the professor then. Then the professor can prepar a correction lecture explaining clearly what the mistake was and what the fix is. Trying to fix a mistake like the one you described on the fly can easily end up in a very chaotic lecture in which nothing is clear anymore and the students get very confused.
In general, don't worry too much about politeness and etiquette but more about what's best for the students. Your job is to be the best teacher!
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: I recommend not pointing out the error during class time. I would follow up with the professor in the privacy of their office. No one wants to look stupid but everyone makes mistakes. I would have all of your supporting evidence in hand and then ask about it in a private situation. If the instructor was indeed mistaken this will allow them to offer a retraction and correction in the next class period.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I spotted an error with a professor's example and, having checked and confirmed my work over the weekend. I went to his office the next week with the example and showed him. He was happy with the correct example.
My surprise was that he presented the corrected example clearly stating I had sorted it **to the whole class** - nearly fell off my chair!
So, go for it and be polite. Any good professor will be pleased.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: My practice was to always point out a mistake (politely) and I prefer my TA or students to call me out. I am only human.
However, I know some faculty could take that the wrong way. If you are working with a professor who you think might not react well to being called out in front of the class, then try pointing out an error or outdated information after class (in private).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: I was a TA for class being given by a respected visiting professor. I attended the lectures because it was my first time being a TA for this class and I'd only gotten a B when I'd taken it the previous year!
He made mistakes, generally a few each lecture. Sometimes I would ask a question about it and he would fix it. Sometimes I would get a friend of mine to ask. I kept very complete notes and would hand out errata/corrections in lab every week.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: **Check with the professor outside of class time; find out what their preferences are**. They may want all corrections publicly and immediately, or all corrections privately and later, or they may ask you to make a judgement call as in @username_3's answer ("how important is this correction? can it easily be fixed on the fly?"). Make sure to be diplomatic, qualifying your comments by saying that you might be mistaken (even if you're pretty sure you're right).
* you might actually be mistaken (consider double-checking your concerns with some of the other TAs before going to the instructor)
* this might be a low-level course where the instructor has decided to sacrifice some technical correctness for the sake of clarity
* maybe the instructor would rather not interrupt the flow of class/would rather correct mistakes later or in a different venue (e.g. posting corrections on the class web site); this presents obvious problems with students spending more time being confused, or absorbing incorrect material before seeing the corrections, but it's the instructor's decision about how to run the class.
* maybe the instructor is an insecure jerk and doesn't want to be corrected at all, unlike many of the site members who have commented or answered here saying they'd always want to be corrected. In that case you should do whatever you can to fix the problems in a separate channel (e.g. in lab or tutorial sections); you can even (quietly!) organize your fellow TAs so that you're all presenting the corrections (as in @username_7's answer). You should still be diplomatic (and make sure that you don't mess the students up, e.g. make sure that they know what the "correct" answers will be for testing purposes)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_9: **Yes, it’s usually good to point it out, but be polite and careful about how you do so.**
Some good ways to point something out:
* “Should that *f(x)* in the last equation be *f(y)*?”
* “For the third step, should we be assuming that the marginal cost is positive?” [when your suspected mistake is a missing assumption]
* “I’m confused; you said that ZFC is a complete theory, but I thought that because of Gödel’s incompleteness theorem we believe it’s not complete. Am I misunderstanding something?”
Some important general principles to bear in mind:
* Make sure you don’t embarrass the lecturer. So, phrase it as to suggest the mistake was more like a typo or oversight, or your own possible misunderstanding, not their stupidity or ignorance.
* Make sure you don’t embarrass yourself, if it turns out you’re wrong. So always phrase it with some uncertainty/questioning, never as a bald un-hedged statement.
* If the lecturer doesn’t agree about the mistake, leave further discussion until after the class. Arguing it out in class will embarrass at least one of you, and waste everyone’s time.
* Minimise the disruption to the lecture. Try to phrase it clearly and concisely, and give it at a good moment — soon enough that it’s still fresh in everyone’s mind, but wait a little for a “paragraph break” if necessary rather than interrupting the flow.
* If you’ve previously corrected mistakes and the lecturer accepted them but seemed annoyed, check with them before doing so further. They may feel that e.g. you’re nitpicking unnecessarily about unimportant details, in a way that’s not worth the time or disruption. Whether they’re right or wrong, that’s a pedagogical judgement call that you should probably respect.
* In the end, remember that the buck stops with the lecturer, not with you. A good lecturer should gracefully and gratefully accept useful corrections. If they don’t, and mistakes recur, then you won’t be able to single-handedly rescue their lecture course, and trying will probably make things more confusing for students, not better. So accept that you can’t fix this course, file it away as a useful lesson for your own future teaching, and (if the mistakes are really serious) discuss it with some other experienced faculty member(s) to see if it’s possibly worth reporting.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_10: This so depends on the personality of the professor and is not really abpout etiquette but rather about personal relations.
At one postgraduate pure mathematics class I attended in Cambridge, the lecturer wrote down a theorem and one of the students immediately said out loud 'that theorem cannot be true: consider the counter-example of...'. To most of us, it seemed he had a good point.
That lecturer, a Fellow of the Royal Society, and noted for self-possession, was able to explain kindly why the supposed counter-example was not relevant - something that was far from obvious. But I can readily imagine that a less self-confident professor, not good at thinking on their feet, would have been thrown by such an intervention. Not all professors have complete mastery of the subjects that they are teaching.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: The TA shouldn't correct the instructor during the lecture. It undermines the instructor's authority and distracts the students.
Write down the mistakes and let the instructor know afterwards. The instructor can then choose to remedy this by sending an email to the class, correcting himself in the next lecture, etc. He will also have the option of asking you to correct him during the lecture next time, if he is fine with that. On the other hand, from his tone you may discover that he is uninterested in the corrections to begin with - a discovery better made in private than in front of a class.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_12: I've had both. In one case I proposed a 3rd option that was within the rules he put forth and it worked, and in one case I approached after the class and discussed my confusion/questions.
In the former even though I had proof of something (I'd worked it out because, you know, thinking outside of the box) I was unable to get him to acknowledge it. It was unfortunate, because mine was creative AND 'cheaper' to implement.
In the latter, the professor listened, stared at the drawing, laughed, and said "In the 15 years I've been teaching this class, no one has pointed that out. You're right- it's wrong".
So...
I would never consider pointing out something in class as there may have been liberties taken with the example/material to make it simpler to present. An after class discussion is most useful. And showing that you have strong interest in the topic for further diving, assuming said Prof is devotee of the material, will lessen any negative impacts of 'nit-picking'.
However you may still have a Prof that is a complete and utter .... pr\*ck. It happens. In that case, just let it go. And you may have to determine what you want to do on an examination where the correct answer is what you know and the correct answer is what he knows... and they don't agree. .... but you didn't ask that ;P
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_13: Step 1: **Do not assume that you are correct.** Approach the situation with humility, not assertiveness.
---
First, review the lecture and notes and try your hardest to figure out why the professor presented what they did. Ask other TAs to better explain the misunderstood portion. Do not claim that the professor said something wrong but rather present your confusion.
**IF** you cannot justify the professor's explanation then approach the professor and ask them to lead you through the explanation according to your notes. The hope is that they see their mistake and will say "Are you sure I said that during lecture?" to which you can reply "Yes, I am certain but I did not want to detract from the lesson at hand."
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_14: ### Ask a non-assertive question rather than pointing out errors
I agree with [username_3's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/135398/7319), but will refine it a bit:
When relevant Instead of saying something like
>
> Professor, I think you were wrong to state that X, it's actually Y because Z.
>
>
>
try:
>
> Professor, can you elaborate a bit on how X agrees with Z?
>
>
>
this way - if you got it wrong, they'll explain it (and it would still help other students, who might have the same misconception as you); and if you got it right, there's a good chance the response would be "Oh, Z? It should be Y, sorry" - and then the Professor has corrected his/herself.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_15: As a student, when I believe the professor has made a mistake (big or small) I always frame it as a question. Like if I see the professor accidentally left out a minus sign, I will just politely ask why the minus sign went away from that term.
Often times the professor did make a mistake, but often times they didn't as well and I accidentally missed a step that they did. This saves the potential embarrassment of trying to correct the professor and being wrong, as well as being a learning opportunity if I missed something.
Keep in mind the possibility that the professor was not wrong and that you missed something.
I imagine you could do the same as a TA. Since it's after the fact now, I would ask during office hours.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_16: Tell him after class. There will be some profs that don't care but others who would be annoyed with an in class interjection. This is a simple safe default.
And it's not just about putting the prof on the spot but that lecture is a sort of participatory conversation between the students and lecturing prof. You are interjecting yourself into that dynamic. Again, some won't care...but a few would prefer that students either rise to correct (or not). In addition, in the case that you're mistaken, it will definitely be derailing for the class in a way that a mistaken correction by a student (the real participant/recipient of the lecture) would not.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_17: In my classes, there was a culture of "don't cause the professors embarrassment". The best way to avoid this was to, after class or in an e-mail, ask the professor:
"Hey, so the you were talking about *x* being *y way*, but I read somewhere else that *x* was *z-way*. Could you please clarify this with me?"
Since you're a TA, that should mean that you have ample time, even face-to-face, to talk to your professor about that.
Asking in the middle of class interrupts the flow of the class, however asking the professor separately, then them correcting it at the beginning of their next class allows them to let it flow a little bit better.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/29
| 3,870
| 16,035
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've been involved in a collaboration project for the past year or so (the collaborator was the one who approached me and they were leading the project), the problem is that the progress from the collaborator side was slow and sometimes clumsy (they would often call for meetings without all things figured out, they would be late in meetings, talk on the phone during meetings and would act as if I had to do part of the project for them [this specific part is already published, so I offered to train the collaborator instead of repeating my whole project, but they refused to learn and said that I should be the one running the experiments since it was my expertise]).
Since I'm at the end of my studies and am managing 2 completely different projects at the same time, my supervisor thought it was best to call off this collaboration. I wasn't too keen on doing so because I knew it would look bad on me, but my supervisor thought it was for the best and also said that they would sort things out with the collaborator.
Turns out that my supervisor corresponded to the collaborator saying that I did not want to continue on the project because I was too busy at the moment (which is true, but not a great way of parting ways). Needless to say, I was embarrassed beyond words, and am feeling like this is going to taint my reputation with the other group that I was working with.
How bad is this situation gonna look for me, professionally? Is it normal in academia to pull out contributions from projects that one feels that is most likely going nowhere? Was my judgement in regards to the attitudes of the collaborator unfair?<issue_comment>username_1: Indeed an embarrassing situation and public rectification must be avoided, at least in environments where discussion is not a part of the game. This is my experience.
Talk to the teacher and s/he will fix that.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You know your professor better than we do, but I have only experienced professors who were thankful when their mistakes were pointed out (also by TAs).
It's not bad etiquette:
* it helps everyone involved to learn something new.
* you point out the mistake in a friendly and factual manner, so they can save their face.
Everyone makes mistakes and can err, even a professor. It's not embarrassing, but a wrong reaction might be. But my respect for someone being glad about their mistakes being corrected always just grew. This especially shows that they care about teaching their students.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: It depends on the type of mistake. All mistakes must get fixed to make sure the students don't learn anything wrong. However, how to best fix the mistake depends on the situation.
If it is a small mistake that can be fixed easily (e.g. a missing minus sign) I would recommend bringing it up on the spot. The 'cost' to the teacher and impact on the lecture is minimal but the benefit is potentially significant.
For more serious problems in a derivation/ argument like the one you described I think the cost benefit analysis often comes down in favor of waiting until the end of the lecture and informing the professor then. Then the professor can prepar a correction lecture explaining clearly what the mistake was and what the fix is. Trying to fix a mistake like the one you described on the fly can easily end up in a very chaotic lecture in which nothing is clear anymore and the students get very confused.
In general, don't worry too much about politeness and etiquette but more about what's best for the students. Your job is to be the best teacher!
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: I recommend not pointing out the error during class time. I would follow up with the professor in the privacy of their office. No one wants to look stupid but everyone makes mistakes. I would have all of your supporting evidence in hand and then ask about it in a private situation. If the instructor was indeed mistaken this will allow them to offer a retraction and correction in the next class period.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I spotted an error with a professor's example and, having checked and confirmed my work over the weekend. I went to his office the next week with the example and showed him. He was happy with the correct example.
My surprise was that he presented the corrected example clearly stating I had sorted it **to the whole class** - nearly fell off my chair!
So, go for it and be polite. Any good professor will be pleased.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: My practice was to always point out a mistake (politely) and I prefer my TA or students to call me out. I am only human.
However, I know some faculty could take that the wrong way. If you are working with a professor who you think might not react well to being called out in front of the class, then try pointing out an error or outdated information after class (in private).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: I was a TA for class being given by a respected visiting professor. I attended the lectures because it was my first time being a TA for this class and I'd only gotten a B when I'd taken it the previous year!
He made mistakes, generally a few each lecture. Sometimes I would ask a question about it and he would fix it. Sometimes I would get a friend of mine to ask. I kept very complete notes and would hand out errata/corrections in lab every week.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: **Check with the professor outside of class time; find out what their preferences are**. They may want all corrections publicly and immediately, or all corrections privately and later, or they may ask you to make a judgement call as in @username_3's answer ("how important is this correction? can it easily be fixed on the fly?"). Make sure to be diplomatic, qualifying your comments by saying that you might be mistaken (even if you're pretty sure you're right).
* you might actually be mistaken (consider double-checking your concerns with some of the other TAs before going to the instructor)
* this might be a low-level course where the instructor has decided to sacrifice some technical correctness for the sake of clarity
* maybe the instructor would rather not interrupt the flow of class/would rather correct mistakes later or in a different venue (e.g. posting corrections on the class web site); this presents obvious problems with students spending more time being confused, or absorbing incorrect material before seeing the corrections, but it's the instructor's decision about how to run the class.
* maybe the instructor is an insecure jerk and doesn't want to be corrected at all, unlike many of the site members who have commented or answered here saying they'd always want to be corrected. In that case you should do whatever you can to fix the problems in a separate channel (e.g. in lab or tutorial sections); you can even (quietly!) organize your fellow TAs so that you're all presenting the corrections (as in @username_7's answer). You should still be diplomatic (and make sure that you don't mess the students up, e.g. make sure that they know what the "correct" answers will be for testing purposes)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_9: **Yes, it’s usually good to point it out, but be polite and careful about how you do so.**
Some good ways to point something out:
* “Should that *f(x)* in the last equation be *f(y)*?”
* “For the third step, should we be assuming that the marginal cost is positive?” [when your suspected mistake is a missing assumption]
* “I’m confused; you said that ZFC is a complete theory, but I thought that because of Gödel’s incompleteness theorem we believe it’s not complete. Am I misunderstanding something?”
Some important general principles to bear in mind:
* Make sure you don’t embarrass the lecturer. So, phrase it as to suggest the mistake was more like a typo or oversight, or your own possible misunderstanding, not their stupidity or ignorance.
* Make sure you don’t embarrass yourself, if it turns out you’re wrong. So always phrase it with some uncertainty/questioning, never as a bald un-hedged statement.
* If the lecturer doesn’t agree about the mistake, leave further discussion until after the class. Arguing it out in class will embarrass at least one of you, and waste everyone’s time.
* Minimise the disruption to the lecture. Try to phrase it clearly and concisely, and give it at a good moment — soon enough that it’s still fresh in everyone’s mind, but wait a little for a “paragraph break” if necessary rather than interrupting the flow.
* If you’ve previously corrected mistakes and the lecturer accepted them but seemed annoyed, check with them before doing so further. They may feel that e.g. you’re nitpicking unnecessarily about unimportant details, in a way that’s not worth the time or disruption. Whether they’re right or wrong, that’s a pedagogical judgement call that you should probably respect.
* In the end, remember that the buck stops with the lecturer, not with you. A good lecturer should gracefully and gratefully accept useful corrections. If they don’t, and mistakes recur, then you won’t be able to single-handedly rescue their lecture course, and trying will probably make things more confusing for students, not better. So accept that you can’t fix this course, file it away as a useful lesson for your own future teaching, and (if the mistakes are really serious) discuss it with some other experienced faculty member(s) to see if it’s possibly worth reporting.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_10: This so depends on the personality of the professor and is not really abpout etiquette but rather about personal relations.
At one postgraduate pure mathematics class I attended in Cambridge, the lecturer wrote down a theorem and one of the students immediately said out loud 'that theorem cannot be true: consider the counter-example of...'. To most of us, it seemed he had a good point.
That lecturer, a Fellow of the Royal Society, and noted for self-possession, was able to explain kindly why the supposed counter-example was not relevant - something that was far from obvious. But I can readily imagine that a less self-confident professor, not good at thinking on their feet, would have been thrown by such an intervention. Not all professors have complete mastery of the subjects that they are teaching.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: The TA shouldn't correct the instructor during the lecture. It undermines the instructor's authority and distracts the students.
Write down the mistakes and let the instructor know afterwards. The instructor can then choose to remedy this by sending an email to the class, correcting himself in the next lecture, etc. He will also have the option of asking you to correct him during the lecture next time, if he is fine with that. On the other hand, from his tone you may discover that he is uninterested in the corrections to begin with - a discovery better made in private than in front of a class.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_12: I've had both. In one case I proposed a 3rd option that was within the rules he put forth and it worked, and in one case I approached after the class and discussed my confusion/questions.
In the former even though I had proof of something (I'd worked it out because, you know, thinking outside of the box) I was unable to get him to acknowledge it. It was unfortunate, because mine was creative AND 'cheaper' to implement.
In the latter, the professor listened, stared at the drawing, laughed, and said "In the 15 years I've been teaching this class, no one has pointed that out. You're right- it's wrong".
So...
I would never consider pointing out something in class as there may have been liberties taken with the example/material to make it simpler to present. An after class discussion is most useful. And showing that you have strong interest in the topic for further diving, assuming said Prof is devotee of the material, will lessen any negative impacts of 'nit-picking'.
However you may still have a Prof that is a complete and utter .... pr\*ck. It happens. In that case, just let it go. And you may have to determine what you want to do on an examination where the correct answer is what you know and the correct answer is what he knows... and they don't agree. .... but you didn't ask that ;P
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_13: Step 1: **Do not assume that you are correct.** Approach the situation with humility, not assertiveness.
---
First, review the lecture and notes and try your hardest to figure out why the professor presented what they did. Ask other TAs to better explain the misunderstood portion. Do not claim that the professor said something wrong but rather present your confusion.
**IF** you cannot justify the professor's explanation then approach the professor and ask them to lead you through the explanation according to your notes. The hope is that they see their mistake and will say "Are you sure I said that during lecture?" to which you can reply "Yes, I am certain but I did not want to detract from the lesson at hand."
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_14: ### Ask a non-assertive question rather than pointing out errors
I agree with [username_3's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/135398/7319), but will refine it a bit:
When relevant Instead of saying something like
>
> Professor, I think you were wrong to state that X, it's actually Y because Z.
>
>
>
try:
>
> Professor, can you elaborate a bit on how X agrees with Z?
>
>
>
this way - if you got it wrong, they'll explain it (and it would still help other students, who might have the same misconception as you); and if you got it right, there's a good chance the response would be "Oh, Z? It should be Y, sorry" - and then the Professor has corrected his/herself.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_15: As a student, when I believe the professor has made a mistake (big or small) I always frame it as a question. Like if I see the professor accidentally left out a minus sign, I will just politely ask why the minus sign went away from that term.
Often times the professor did make a mistake, but often times they didn't as well and I accidentally missed a step that they did. This saves the potential embarrassment of trying to correct the professor and being wrong, as well as being a learning opportunity if I missed something.
Keep in mind the possibility that the professor was not wrong and that you missed something.
I imagine you could do the same as a TA. Since it's after the fact now, I would ask during office hours.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_16: Tell him after class. There will be some profs that don't care but others who would be annoyed with an in class interjection. This is a simple safe default.
And it's not just about putting the prof on the spot but that lecture is a sort of participatory conversation between the students and lecturing prof. You are interjecting yourself into that dynamic. Again, some won't care...but a few would prefer that students either rise to correct (or not). In addition, in the case that you're mistaken, it will definitely be derailing for the class in a way that a mistaken correction by a student (the real participant/recipient of the lecture) would not.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_17: In my classes, there was a culture of "don't cause the professors embarrassment". The best way to avoid this was to, after class or in an e-mail, ask the professor:
"Hey, so the you were talking about *x* being *y way*, but I read somewhere else that *x* was *z-way*. Could you please clarify this with me?"
Since you're a TA, that should mean that you have ample time, even face-to-face, to talk to your professor about that.
Asking in the middle of class interrupts the flow of the class, however asking the professor separately, then them correcting it at the beginning of their next class allows them to let it flow a little bit better.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/08/29
| 829
| 3,488
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am post-doc from biological sciences writing a grant proposal. One of the sections of the application is dedicated to risk assessment of the given project. There were no further instructions.
I can think of very general risks and their solutions. For example:
>
> 1. Experiment failed. → Troubleshoot; try alternative method.
> 2. Manuscript publication delayed. → Get help from supervisor or grants office.
> 3. Insignificant results. → Discuss with experts; try again!
>
>
>
Is this the kind of risk assessment funding agencies (like NIH, Welcome Trust, or EU) are looking for? Can you suggest some extra points (research or managerial) which I can consider here?<issue_comment>username_1: I would suggest you to use the risk-assessment methodology of the PMI (Project Management Institute): [<NAME>. & <NAME>. (2008). Risk analysis and management: a vital key to effective project management](https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/risk-analysis-project-management-7070).
It's widely accepted in business directly and in academia as reference since it's a paper and proven methodology. More importantly, there are various other tools you can use to organize, estimate, and present the risk, and it has all the nice graphics and tables that academics love to see any proposal.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: There are two classes of risks that are typically considered in grant-writing:
1. Programmatic risks that the money will be wasted because something doesn't go as you hoped.
2. Safety and ethics risks based on the specific contents on your research.
The second is generally covered under a checklist of declarations regarding specific topics (e.g., "human subjects research," "dual-use agents of concern," "vertebrate animal research"), rather than general "risks", so I'm going to write my answer addressing the first class.
With regards to programmatic risks, the big issue here is research always involves the unexpected, most often emerging in the form of things not working as well as you thought they would. Progress might be slow, effects might be small, vital supplies might become unavailable, things just might not work, etc.
What grant reviewers are generally looking for here, then, is evidence of clear thinking about how to handle setbacks of this sort. You really don't want to give money to somebody with no "plan B", and then 3 months into the project something goes wrong and they end up just frittering away the rest of the money banging their head against the same wall.
How I recommend assessing risks, then, is to sit down with a your project plan and asking yourself the following questions:
* For each step in the plan, what materials/people/facilities/information is needed before I can begin the step? What happens if they aren't available as expected?
* For each step in the plan, what does "failure" look like? How many different ways can it fail?
* Which of these problems are most likely to endanger the overall goals of the proposal?
* For all of the "important" problems, what is the plan B for how to ensure money is spent in a worthwhile manner if they are encountered?
Doing this assessment may also cause you to reorganize your plan: sponsors often like to see the most "critical path" or high-risk work up front, so that the most significant and productive problems can be encountered sooner rather than later (and the project terminated if necessary).
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|