date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2019/10/18
| 1,898
| 8,130
|
<issue_start>username_0: The professor asks this of every student. It's 2 points on an introductory assignment worth 10. Does anyone think this is bizarre? I'm against it to the point that I think it should not be allowed by the university.
**addendum**
It's an online class, by the way. A Senior Communications class is required that most have taken by now. Within that communications class it is required to upload a photo of yourself to the online university system which all classes can see, like in class rosters and private messaging. The professor also asked us to call him (it's explicitly advised at my university not to give your professor your phone number). What really annoyed me was when he then asked permission to share our email among the class. The class already has a messaging system and it can be tied into the university email. This instructor was too pathetic for me, so I dropped the course within a few days.
**addendum 2**
USA school. top 50 USNews. After seeing these comments I actually find them helpful, because the only reasons I see are to learn the students name, but in this case the professor already has photos of a strong majority of the students. What I'm getting at is the professor is really showing some incompetence and its annoying to a significant extent.<issue_comment>username_1: I would be interested to know why the professor wants these. I can suggest a completely innocent reason, even a reasonable one. But, I realize there are other possible interpretations. I wonder if you are brave enough to go and ask why.
But the innocent reason might be that the prof just needs a crutch to try to learn to match the names and faces of students to make interactions easier. A typical student only has a few professors so it is easy to remember names. But a professor might have tens or even hundreds of students. Some will try to remember the names and a picture can help.
To extend this, a professor might be thinking long term about students and might actually keep a file on each student, with notes about their accomplishments so that if the student asks for a LoR in the future there is something on record other than grades on which to base it. A picture in such a file could be a helpful reminder of who the student is, making such things easier.
I used to keep an index card for each of my students. No picture, though. But it served as a place to keep notes about that individual's needs and what I might need to do to serve them well. It also helped me keep track of who was asking and answering questions in class and who was more passive. Then, I could try to bring the passive ones more into the discussions.
Some professors, who teach large classes, assign specific seats to students and have a sheet of the names of the students, with pictures, in the same arrangement as the seats. Then if a hand goes up, the prof can address the student by name.
There are lots of possible positive reasons along with the ones you might be worried about. But you might want to ask. You could also, possibly, ask students who previously took classes from the prof. Or, you could go to the department office and express discomfort. You might learn the actual reason, and it might make the practice seem OK, or not.
The 2 points is immaterial (unless the max is 5). It is just a nudge. A bribe, perhaps.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: My mother, who is a teacher, does this. She uses it to build a document with the name and face of each of her students.
When you teach several large classes, it's virtually impossible to make the link between the student you see in the classroom and the names in the listings (unless you have a very good memory and are deeply dedicated to remember more than a hundred new names a year).
This document is archived for a few years, as long as she needs an archive of the reports she graded for a class, and then destroyed.
It is called a *trombinoscope* in French and is fairly common.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: **I agree with you.**
He should not be allowed to force students to submit their picture. It should be voluntary. Where I live it would legally not be possible to demand this.
**BUT**
I certainly understand why he would be asking for these pictures. We had a teacher ask if anyone was fine with him photographing the class, so he could learn everyone's name and seating. Everyone agreed to the photograph(s).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: There are a couple issues here.
1. It might not be allowed by privacy laws, or at least require explicit student consent. Personally I think it’s ok for the instructor to ask but not right to make this mandatory.
2. I strongly feel that it’s wrong to have part of your course evaluation (however small) tied to this; I fail to see the link between the academic performance in a course and submitting a picture.
Where I work students agree when the register in a course to give access to their student ID picture to the instructor of the course. I’m pretty sure there is an opt out feature but I could be wrong.
I usually use the picture roster to help me recognize students who send me emails or to whom I would like to speak at the start or the end of a class.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: There are several reasons photographs might be helpful to a professor:
1. **To try to learn your names.** This is a nice gesture, and you should be thankful that your professor is going to the effort
2. **To prevent cheating.** The professor can check the photographs of students match the person submitting the exam. This may not be obvious; the professor may recognize many students, but can double-check a few less familiar faces immediately after the exam is turned in.
3. **To track student interactions**. This actually seems like the most likely reason to me. While learning names a nice gesture, grading class participation, noting who is absent, and identifying problematic behaviors is crucial. The professor doesn't need to memorize your name for this, but does need to be able to go look up the name associated with a face under various circumstances.
**You shouldn't feel uncomfortable with this**; the professor already sees you regularly and many schools already provide student ID photographs with the roster. If anything, the fact that your professor doesn't already have your photograph is unusual.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: What this professor does would be illegal under EU GDPR regulations, but of course you did not specify if your University is in EU. It violates EU privacy regulation in so many ways that is impossible to describe, so I will point out just the most obvious:
1. Proportionality criteria. He/she does not need your pictures to enforce rules. He/she is fully entitled to ask any of the students for valid trustworthy personal ID when you sit the exam or join the lab (anything that involves grading) and refuse your participation if you don't provide one.
2. Securing the private data. Your image is very personal information. If the images are seen by default by other students (this implies, since this is electronic system, that they can be downloaded), this is serious breach. Additionally, to build even a database of such info, you need to have valid reason (see 1: you don't), and you need to secure it properly. Extremely high burden.
So in EU, if you report him/her to information commisioner (each country has his own) he/she will be found in violation of GDPR and University can incur heavy fine.
Now, my opinion is that the reason why he/she does this may be totally innocuous. Like the professor has prosopagnosia (difficulty in recognizing faces) and tries to remember the students faces this way. But I think it that behaviour is highly unusual and perhaps creepy (I am a man, and still creeps me out).
I do have big problems with recognizing students (and I don't have that many) but I simply require them to show me the ID card when I am unsure whether something fishy is going on. I always ask them to show their ID before I finalize their grade. Problem solved.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/10/19
| 1,790
| 7,662
|
<issue_start>username_0: This professor is not my official thesis supervisor. I have taken his class. I often discuss research with him and has sent him my work which he read and discussed with me in depth. So he is going to recommend me for PhD. The schools ask me to specify my relationship with him. I don't think "course instructor" or "research advisor" would be appropriate because the former may be interpreted as I only take courses with him and he does not know my research whilst the latter is not strictly speaking true because he is not actually my thesis supervisor and I don't have an official relationship with him as advisee and advisor. That said, I feel I have talked to him almost as often as I speak to my thesis advisor. I feel he is more like a "research mentor" but what is the right way to say it on an application?<issue_comment>username_1: I would be interested to know why the professor wants these. I can suggest a completely innocent reason, even a reasonable one. But, I realize there are other possible interpretations. I wonder if you are brave enough to go and ask why.
But the innocent reason might be that the prof just needs a crutch to try to learn to match the names and faces of students to make interactions easier. A typical student only has a few professors so it is easy to remember names. But a professor might have tens or even hundreds of students. Some will try to remember the names and a picture can help.
To extend this, a professor might be thinking long term about students and might actually keep a file on each student, with notes about their accomplishments so that if the student asks for a LoR in the future there is something on record other than grades on which to base it. A picture in such a file could be a helpful reminder of who the student is, making such things easier.
I used to keep an index card for each of my students. No picture, though. But it served as a place to keep notes about that individual's needs and what I might need to do to serve them well. It also helped me keep track of who was asking and answering questions in class and who was more passive. Then, I could try to bring the passive ones more into the discussions.
Some professors, who teach large classes, assign specific seats to students and have a sheet of the names of the students, with pictures, in the same arrangement as the seats. Then if a hand goes up, the prof can address the student by name.
There are lots of possible positive reasons along with the ones you might be worried about. But you might want to ask. You could also, possibly, ask students who previously took classes from the prof. Or, you could go to the department office and express discomfort. You might learn the actual reason, and it might make the practice seem OK, or not.
The 2 points is immaterial (unless the max is 5). It is just a nudge. A bribe, perhaps.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: My mother, who is a teacher, does this. She uses it to build a document with the name and face of each of her students.
When you teach several large classes, it's virtually impossible to make the link between the student you see in the classroom and the names in the listings (unless you have a very good memory and are deeply dedicated to remember more than a hundred new names a year).
This document is archived for a few years, as long as she needs an archive of the reports she graded for a class, and then destroyed.
It is called a *trombinoscope* in French and is fairly common.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: **I agree with you.**
He should not be allowed to force students to submit their picture. It should be voluntary. Where I live it would legally not be possible to demand this.
**BUT**
I certainly understand why he would be asking for these pictures. We had a teacher ask if anyone was fine with him photographing the class, so he could learn everyone's name and seating. Everyone agreed to the photograph(s).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: There are a couple issues here.
1. It might not be allowed by privacy laws, or at least require explicit student consent. Personally I think it’s ok for the instructor to ask but not right to make this mandatory.
2. I strongly feel that it’s wrong to have part of your course evaluation (however small) tied to this; I fail to see the link between the academic performance in a course and submitting a picture.
Where I work students agree when the register in a course to give access to their student ID picture to the instructor of the course. I’m pretty sure there is an opt out feature but I could be wrong.
I usually use the picture roster to help me recognize students who send me emails or to whom I would like to speak at the start or the end of a class.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: There are several reasons photographs might be helpful to a professor:
1. **To try to learn your names.** This is a nice gesture, and you should be thankful that your professor is going to the effort
2. **To prevent cheating.** The professor can check the photographs of students match the person submitting the exam. This may not be obvious; the professor may recognize many students, but can double-check a few less familiar faces immediately after the exam is turned in.
3. **To track student interactions**. This actually seems like the most likely reason to me. While learning names a nice gesture, grading class participation, noting who is absent, and identifying problematic behaviors is crucial. The professor doesn't need to memorize your name for this, but does need to be able to go look up the name associated with a face under various circumstances.
**You shouldn't feel uncomfortable with this**; the professor already sees you regularly and many schools already provide student ID photographs with the roster. If anything, the fact that your professor doesn't already have your photograph is unusual.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: What this professor does would be illegal under EU GDPR regulations, but of course you did not specify if your University is in EU. It violates EU privacy regulation in so many ways that is impossible to describe, so I will point out just the most obvious:
1. Proportionality criteria. He/she does not need your pictures to enforce rules. He/she is fully entitled to ask any of the students for valid trustworthy personal ID when you sit the exam or join the lab (anything that involves grading) and refuse your participation if you don't provide one.
2. Securing the private data. Your image is very personal information. If the images are seen by default by other students (this implies, since this is electronic system, that they can be downloaded), this is serious breach. Additionally, to build even a database of such info, you need to have valid reason (see 1: you don't), and you need to secure it properly. Extremely high burden.
So in EU, if you report him/her to information commisioner (each country has his own) he/she will be found in violation of GDPR and University can incur heavy fine.
Now, my opinion is that the reason why he/she does this may be totally innocuous. Like the professor has prosopagnosia (difficulty in recognizing faces) and tries to remember the students faces this way. But I think it that behaviour is highly unusual and perhaps creepy (I am a man, and still creeps me out).
I do have big problems with recognizing students (and I don't have that many) but I simply require them to show me the ID card when I am unsure whether something fishy is going on. I always ask them to show their ID before I finalize their grade. Problem solved.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/10/19
| 890
| 3,447
|
<issue_start>username_0: I had dropped out of a masters program because of depression in **2015**. I free-lanced for a few years, co-founded a tech. startup and my depression diminished, but then I met with an accident in **2017** which gave me chronic back pain. Bed-ridden for months, I converted my full-time work to part-time, and also started working on my Masters thesis. I defended it successfully a few months back (i.e., in **2019**). My back pain also has now decreased significantly. As an aside, my back pain was found to have a correlation with my mental health. It started alleviating after I stopped all medication and started living a normal life, with regular exercise routine.
Now, I wish to go back to academia and am applying for Masters/PhD programs. In my Statement-of-purpose, I would have to mention some reason for dropping out of my previous masters program, because it would be glaringly visible.
My question is: How ethical would it be to not mention my depression at all, and instead substitute it with my accident which caused the back pain? That is, **if I mention that I met with the accident in *2015* instead of *2017*, which caused me to drop out, would it be "right"?**
I am thinking of this because as per [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/107062/mentioning-my-clinical-depression-in-a-statement-of-purpose), [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/32112/how-much-detail-about-mental-health-issues-should-one-include-in-special-circum) and [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/31855/should-a-postdoc-talk-about-his-depression-with-his-mentor) Academia.SE posts, sharing your depression (to your prospective supervisors) is usually not a good idea. And in my case, while the depression lingers beneath and raises its head once in a while, it is usually not present. So, if I am free of depression (but, definitely still *"prone"*), then should the history be mentioned?<issue_comment>username_1: You are under no obligation to share your medical history in an application, but you *are* under obligation to be truthful -- so no lying about the date of your accident.
It seems like you actually made the best out of your decision to drop out of the program back then. It's legitimate to say, in an application, that you felt at the time that the program was not the right fit for you, and that you wanted to pursue other opportunities -- which you could then describe by saying that you founded a start-up and worked on your MSc project on the side. If you phrase this right, it actually looks quite good, and it's not even a lie: You did leave to pursue other opportunities.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It is a mistake to *hide* things, but you have no obligation to reveal everything. Make any application entirely positive, showing why they should consider you to be a good candidate for success in your degree and in your field.
If you are asked about any gaps or why you left the earlier program, just say that there were health issues that made continuing impossible. You don't need to explain more or go into any details. If you are sure that you have managed the problems, then you can honestly say that they were in the past and are no longer an issue.
In many places it would be improper for people to press this issue further.
And note that *health* issues is probably easier for people to understand than *personal* issues.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/10/19
| 750
| 3,298
|
<issue_start>username_0: Recently, a professor answered my email for a graduate position. He asked me to tell him *to what extent I am aware of his research*. I have a background research experience in his research area, I can understand his papers generally but I can't talk about them in detail. Since he **asked me to answer this question in detail**, please help me to how can I talk about his research area?
Moreover, he asked me to tell him about a *specific direction that interests me for my future studies and the way I can make a contribution to his research*.
Answering this question is hard for me because I don't know how to define a specific direction that doesn't make me limited and lose the opportunity of working with him.
Please help me if you have any ideas.
Thanks in advance.<issue_comment>username_1: Depending on where you are, he could be asking for more than is reasonable. But, do the best you can. Mention the papers you have read. But don't overstate your understanding of them. If you have questions about those papers, then some of those questions might represent lack of understanding but others might indicate unformed ideas about future possible research.
The second question about a specific direction is also difficult. It might be enough to indicate one (or two) of the *recent* papers that you find especially interesting, and why.
I see two possibilities. The worst is that he is trying to find someone who will be easy to advise and won't take any particular effort. The best is that he is just trying to weed out those who say they are interested but haven't done any prior work to understand what his research trajectory and would take too much time and effort to bring along. I suspect that it is more the latter case, but can't know.
But if it is the former case then you probably should look to someone else to advise you.
With that in mind, it might be good not to be too definite about your answers and not too confident in expressing your understanding. If he thinks you are unready, then, on his terms, you probably are. But only for this one professor. You otherwise seem to be well prepared.
Close with "hoping for the opportunity to discuss this further with you" or similar.
---
Note that such questions of a student would seem more extreme in the US than in, say, Germany, where students normally have a more concentrated program at that point.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Answering this question is hard for me because I don't know how to define a specific direction that doesn't make me limited and lose the opportunity of working with him.
>
>
>
This is a thoughtful response on his part. He is not asking for you to send him a dissertation proposal, but maybe something four or five times as broad. Maybe something like "I'm interested in interventions to support learning in recent immigrants to [your country]," rather than "The effect of *X* intervention on mathematical learning on late teenage refugees to [your country] who did not receive formal education in their home country."
**It's not a quiz** to see if you come up with a good enough one and "lose" the opportunity to work with him (unless he's a nasty person). More of a determination whether you two are a good scientific fit.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/10/19
| 878
| 3,621
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently in the last year (aka 3rd - 2019/2020) of my bachelor's degree, and I'm planning to apply for a PhD in the US, just after earning my degree.
Assuming everything goes nicely for me, then I'll expect graduate in September/October 2020 (this is the fastest I can do here in Italy). Let's also assume that I can fill all the PhD's prerequisites (recommendation letters, TOEFL, ...) during this period.
At that point, I would be ready to apply, but the application would be for the **next year**. If I do get admitted I would start my PhD in the 2021-2022 fall! An entire year would be basically wasted.
* Am I arriving too late? Is the fall of the 3rd year the "proper" time to apply?
* Is there anything useful I can do during this period? Should I start a master's degree in the meantime? Maybe I can convert some classes to the PhD program?
I apologize for the naive questions, but I couldn't find anything on the internet, and I don't know really have experience with the admission process /timeline in the US.
I hope you can help me and maybe even report your experience. Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: Depending on where you are, he could be asking for more than is reasonable. But, do the best you can. Mention the papers you have read. But don't overstate your understanding of them. If you have questions about those papers, then some of those questions might represent lack of understanding but others might indicate unformed ideas about future possible research.
The second question about a specific direction is also difficult. It might be enough to indicate one (or two) of the *recent* papers that you find especially interesting, and why.
I see two possibilities. The worst is that he is trying to find someone who will be easy to advise and won't take any particular effort. The best is that he is just trying to weed out those who say they are interested but haven't done any prior work to understand what his research trajectory and would take too much time and effort to bring along. I suspect that it is more the latter case, but can't know.
But if it is the former case then you probably should look to someone else to advise you.
With that in mind, it might be good not to be too definite about your answers and not too confident in expressing your understanding. If he thinks you are unready, then, on his terms, you probably are. But only for this one professor. You otherwise seem to be well prepared.
Close with "hoping for the opportunity to discuss this further with you" or similar.
---
Note that such questions of a student would seem more extreme in the US than in, say, Germany, where students normally have a more concentrated program at that point.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Answering this question is hard for me because I don't know how to define a specific direction that doesn't make me limited and lose the opportunity of working with him.
>
>
>
This is a thoughtful response on his part. He is not asking for you to send him a dissertation proposal, but maybe something four or five times as broad. Maybe something like "I'm interested in interventions to support learning in recent immigrants to [your country]," rather than "The effect of *X* intervention on mathematical learning on late teenage refugees to [your country] who did not receive formal education in their home country."
**It's not a quiz** to see if you come up with a good enough one and "lose" the opportunity to work with him (unless he's a nasty person). More of a determination whether you two are a good scientific fit.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/10/19
| 651
| 2,664
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a university professor in an operating systems class who point blank told me in writing that in the linux operating system, kernel race conditions cant/dont happen. After pressing him he changed his answer. Do you find this significant? Do you feel that given other similar occurances its enough to speak with the department chair or is this a lesser offense more appropriate for the student/professor evaluation at the end of the semester?
I kid you not i felt he used a racial slur in the lecture and he followed it up with a one on one question concerning "race conditions" and he gave me such an answer, even in writing.<issue_comment>username_1: While I don't know anything about computer science (?), if a human answers one question wrong, this is almost never significant enough to raise a complaint, especially if this person changed their answer. Mistakes can happen. If the person turns out to be generally incompentent, you could consider complaining (maybe do some research before if the department chair is actually able/willing to do something about this). (I cannot judge if their wrong answer is af all connected to the class.)
I'n not quite sure if I understood your last paragraph. If the professor did use a racical slur, document this and do complain (again, if possible, do research beforehand what the possible consequences could be. In some countries, certain racial slurs are unfortunately accepted and you may be the one facing consequences).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: As others have pointed out, there are two separate issues here.
**Answering a technical question incorrectly** is really not an issue at all. I seriously doubt that your professor is incompetent -- it is likely that he misspoke or tried to oversimply something. Unless this is a pattern, I wouldn't take any further action.
**Using a racial slur** is a very serious accusation. If he really did this, you should complain.
**I would also consider the possibility that you misjudged the situation.** Within the past couple of days, you have described being [isolated after nine years in college](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/138735/ive-been-at-university-one-and-off-but-for-9-years) and have raised concerns about [another professor](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/138732/is-it-bizarre-that-a-professor-asks-every-student-for-a-3-inch-by-5-inch-photogr) with (in my view) little justification. Of course I do not know the real situation, but I can imagine that isolation and a long tenure in college might cause one to take an unnecessarily adversarial view toward the faculty.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/10/19
| 1,747
| 7,173
|
<issue_start>username_0: I want to study biotechnology and become an engineer. I'm a straight A's student and as the eldest daughter I'm quite disciplined. However, my parents don't want me to study that career and are forcing me to study instead finances. Reasons are that I have the "obligation" to continue the family's business, and that studying biotechnology on a nearby city would be too expensive even thought it's a public university.
I have already talked with my mom and just expressed her my feelings and wishes but she told me I was being ungrateful and selfish, and that I wouldn't last long on the cruel outside world so I should probably stick with a career that already has for me a planned success.
The thing is that no matter how good it sounds to stay I just feel miserable about it. I wish to become a scientist, to create new things and help others with my knowledge, to make history, and, forgive me if this sounds cocky, I know I have the potential to do so much more than just stay on an office.
I told her that I was considering just leaving and live on my own if the economical burden was a problem but she then started to scold me for having such a naive and foolish thought. That she knows best for me and that I shouldn't do something so stupid out of whim. That between all my sisters I was the best "shot" they had to push this family up to riches.
I'm considering now moving out as soon as I finish high school but the thought of me being wrong just crawls on me every night, what should I do?<issue_comment>username_1: You are presumably an adult, you should not do something so important to your life as studying only for your parents wishes. Guilt-tripping children is very bad parenting, you should not feel ashamed to do your own thing.
However, before you start doing your own thing, think about what the consequences could be. Can you afford studying without your parents help? Can you afford being at war with your family? Is there some sort of compromise you can find with your parents? Those questions only you can answer, and you (unfortunately) have to consider them. But never feel ashamed for studying what you want to.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Though possibly somewhat out of scope for this site, as I assume it relates to undergraduate studies, here are my two cents anyway, as I sympathize with your dilemma, and have, sadly, seen it time and time again.
First of all, going into university studies without having your heart in it, is rarely a good idea. This is a common source of burn-out for students - if you don't have an inner drive, it can be quite difficult to become a successful student. Keeping that in mind, my first suggestion would be to try and convince your parents that biotechnology can be a good idea. But how?
They seem to be quite keen that earning potential for your future career is important - well, biotechnology is exactly that. Biotech-engineers in industry can potentially rake in quite sizeable salaries, and since stuff like personalized medicine is only going one way - up - this is likely to continue. Try and find the average salaries of graduates from the program you want to enlist in, and show this to your parents. If you don't know where to look, try and write to the admissions office.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: As an undergraduate, you will likely have to take prerequisites. You can buy yourself time on the issue by taking the prerequisites common to both majors. As an example, Calculus is needed for most finance/science related majors.
Would have commented, but I don’t have enough rep.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Your parents don't owe you any support after you are 18. You don't owe them obedience either.
My advice is to either work things out, or just do your own thing. If they are paying for school (or living expenses) than it is reasonable for them to dictate what they spend on.
P.s. Finance is actually not that bad. Pretty useful and portable across different industries (to include pharma).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Many of the answers respond from a Western perspective. Western culture (generally speaking) values individual freedom and personal autonomy. As you can see, many Western people here are horrified at the thought that your parents would have any say in your life, once you turn 18. (Indeed, if you're coming from a Western culture, I'd be inclined to agree with them!)
If on the other hand you are coming from a non-Western culture, I would guess that you are being tugged in two different directions, to be loyal and obedient to your parents from your home culture, and to be a free and autonomous individual, perhaps based in part on the pull from Western culture (and, perhaps, based on the idealized version of Western culture presented in Western media!).
As a person, you'll need to think carefully about how to proceed. There is no right and wrong answer. If you're coming from a non-Western culture, I would just caution that you be sensitive to the consequences of any decisions you take. A common trope in Western fiction is that the protagonist succeeds immediately once she begins to believe in herself (for a recent example, see *Captain Marvel*). But life is not a movie—even in the West it's an overly simplistic approach to the way the world works.
If you would like to learn more about the pluses and minuses of various cultural values, I think that the work of [<NAME> and <NAME>](https://geerthofstede.com/) does a very good job of presenting an even-handed analysis (especially their book *Cultures and Organizations*). You could also watch movies about immigrants and the children of immigrants (such as *My Big Fat Greek Wedding* or *The Joy Luck Club*) as a way to think about how other people navigate between two cultural worlds.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I'm going to approach this from a different angle.
### Why do you parents think the family business is a guaranteed success, and what do they think a finance degree will contribute?
There is a long, long list of well-established businesses which fail because the person (or people) in charge don't run it well. Presumably it is currently successful because your father is good at running it. There is no guarantee that you would be any good at all at it.
In any case, the techniques you would learn in a finance degree are incredibly unlikely to be applicable to any business which is not a multi-billion-dollar multinational corporation. In a small business, simple life experience is more likely to be useful, and that you should learn on the job by shadowing your father.
If she thinks you can't survive in the outside world, you aren't the right person to run the company anyway. There is no job more stressful than being responsible for an entire company. If she doesn't think you're tough enough to survive a uni course, you're not the right person to run a company.
And if you can, and you can prove you're a success with your own ideas, perhaps with a degree under your belt you might be more inclined to try working in the family business.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/10/20
| 1,101
| 4,667
|
<issue_start>username_0: Our paper in the computer science area has been accepted to a well-known conference and we are getting ready to submit our final draft. This is our first publication and I'm an undergraduate student.
The first author of this paper added 2 extra random people to the co-authors list for revising and proof checking the paper. I'm the second author and I wasn't made aware of this at all and I found it as I was getting ready to edit the paper. They didn't make a significant contribution to the content/material of the paper. Before the 2 people were added, we already had 6 people on the list: 3 students and 3 professors.
Now there are 8 authors and I'm concerned whether my work and the effort I put in will be diluted because of more authors. I don't want it to cheapen the paper. I talked to the first author and he's being stubborn that they deserve to be on the list and isn't interested in changing the list. Should I discuss it with our professors or is it not worth the time and effort? I'm interested in obtaining a PhD and I don't want the additional authors to negatively affect the way my contribution is seen by graduate schools.<issue_comment>username_1: There are a lot of different issues here so let me try and unpack them a bit.
First of all, it is not ok for your coauthor to add others to the paper without your consent (or that of everyone involved for that matter). This is especially true if the paper has already been accepted for publication. In fact, some conferences expressly forbid this practice as it can lead to very bad behavior on the authors’ side as was noted in the comments. I would check the conference submission guidelines to make sure your coauthor isn’t violating them.
Should you consult your fellow coauthors on this? I think so. The criteria for coauthorship can vary widely across disciplines and labs. My personal view is that proofreading doesn’t warrant it, but that may depend on its extent. I honestly doubt that two people had so much to contribute that they had to be added as coauthors in the last minute, but I could be wrong (it is very weird though).
What can you do about it? Your options are are basically getting other coauthors to support your claim, and having a conversation about the new authors’ addition. Your nuclear option is to contact the conference chairs and inform them. This alternative, however, has a very good chance of having the paper withdrawn from the conference altogether. If you’re interested in joining graduate school then this is not a good idea (though it is arguably the ethical thing to do). Remember, you could also just flat out say that you’re not willing to have the paper published with their names on it (if one coauthor objects the paper can’t be published), but you’ll be burning bridges if the professors on the papers don’t have your back.
What should you do? If you want to get into graduate school then swallowing this ethical pill is your best bet. I’m guessing this was something your coauthor banked on when they pulled this stunt. Try to chat with your professors and see what they think, maybe you can figure it out.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: To the extent your concern is about impact on the perceived dilution of your contribution, I would not worry about it. That impact will be nil: authorship norms vary by subdiscipline, by individual lab/department in some cases, and a lot is up to the discretion of the P.I. (As an aside, these differences are a perennial headache for those of us who do multidisciplinary work).
Anyone reading your CV will accurately decode that as 2nd author of *n*>2 you presumably made a significant contribution to the work, but were not the P.I./lead writer nor the supervisor/funder. Whether *n*=8 or 6 will make little difference; it is not that you get *1/n* credit. Someone who wants to understand your contribution in more detail will ask you what it was, or have given you the opportunity to explain it already.
To the extent you are concerned about fairness or even skulduggery, that may be another story. But the Occam's Razor explanation is that your 1st author is for whatever reason -- actual relevant norms, his/her background -- just taking a very inclusive approach to authorship. If she/he is experienced in the field, I'd assume they knew what they were doing; if not experienced, worth more of a check with one of the more senior authors just in case they haven't been paying attention and 1st author is out to lunch. Regardless yes, he/she should have discussed this openly with the authorship group, but that in itself need not be your cross to bear.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/10/20
| 794
| 3,327
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a masters student in an Asian country and I am looking for applying for PHD Position in Europe in pure mathematics.
During my masters in my Institute I had a lot of applied maths courses and in some ( almost half) of applied maths courses I got 6 or 7 grade ( out of 10) despite the fact that I tried to study. But In pure mathematics courses I have very good grades and also the branch I wanted to do phd is not offered in my university. I studied it myself and did one internship and I am confident in that particular branch and I am really interested in it. ( so, studying a different topic also took considerable time from applied courses. )
My question is -- how to write this effectively in Cv and Whether it's right to right as I am not trying to give an excuse so that my chances of admission are not hampered.
Please guide .<issue_comment>username_1: My general advice in such situations is to stress the positive in any application. Show the reviewer that you are a good candidate for success both in background and in work habits. Don't focus on explaining things that aren't positive but be prepared to respond when/if asked about them.
While the competition for a slot in a good university is very strong, nobody is perfect. And you won't know how competitive you are until you apply.
If you have a fairly narrow focus you intend to follow in graduate studies, focus on that and how you are *especially* well prepared to work in that field. Be enthusiastic, not apologetic.
---
Caveat. I don't know how your grades are interpreted by your own university, not how they will be seen when you apply. But focus on the *good stuff*, not the bad.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'm not a mathematician, so take this answer with a grain of salt, *but* ...
I strongly recommend not framing your grades as *"I was not interested in these courses so I did badly in them"* (assuming that 6/10 is indeed not good - I have no idea how the read this grading scale correctly).
As a hiring committee member, my mind goes immediately into envisioning you as a student who is only able or willing to put the work in on things that directly interest you. This is generally not a desirable property in a graduate student, as no student ever gets to do only things they love. Even in grad school, and assuming that your project actually is of high interest to you, there will likely be aspects that aren't. Maybe it's the course you are teaching, maybe it's part of the coursework you have to do, maybe it's something completely different - not all of these are crucial to your success, but most advisors would rather not see you fail in any of these aspects. Further, most of us have seen too many students (temporarily) fall out of love with their research subject (remember that grad school can be quite a marathon), and during these times it is crucial for students to be able to soldier on.
---
You can of course write that your lack of interest in these subjects was holding you back, but I encourage you to also give an indication that you understand that this isn't a good excuse. What is done is done, but you need to convince the committee that you are *not* going to do badly in every task in grad school that's outside of your core interest.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/10/20
| 1,383
| 5,671
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am soon to defend my PhD thesis in computational materials science. I have just two publications, which I believe is the most important reason for getting no response from postdoc applications. The lack of publications is majorly due to my initial slow productivity and subsequent delays from my advisor in manuscript corrections.
Earlier this year, my advisor said that if I am unable to find a postdoc position then I can remain as a postdoc in the lab after my PhD for 6 months and work on a different projects and publish the remaining papers. She also offered that alternatively, I can extend my PhD to next semester (till April) and look for positions in between (it's cheaper to pay for a PhD than a postdoc). I have already spent 5 years 2 months on my PhD. I don't want to extend it anymore.
Now, it's already November and I have no offers or responses. I am trying hard for any position. I am not sure if I will get one.
I want to ask my advisor for a postdoc position and want to let her know that I am desperate for an immediate position so that I can improve my CV.
Will that look bad?<issue_comment>username_1: First of all, your advisor of all people really should not be somebody who you need to play games with regarding the state of your career (academic or otherwise). They really can only do their job (advising you, also in questions of career development) if you are being honest with them. In that sense, it shouldn't really matter if it "looks bad" - if your situation *is* bad they should know.
Further, your advisor already offered you a temporary job, and presumably they did so under the assumption that it would only be a fallback if you did not find a more permanent next career step. Now this situation has arisen - why would it be bad to take them up on their offer in exactly the situation that the offer was made for?
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: My interpretation of the question: You want to pursue an academic career. You are considering taking the offered postdoctoral position in your PhD supervisor's lab. You want to know the implications of doing this for your long-term career.
Doing a PhD and postdoc in the same lab does look desperate, and it is harmful to your career.
I recommend figuring out what job you want. Identify people who have that job. Read their CVs. Then do better than what they did.
If you're seeking an academic job in computational materials science, you are right that having two publications at the end of your PhD will be a problem.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: I fully agree with [username_1's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/138812/4249) in that you have nothing to be ashamed of in front of your supervisor - especially since she has already offered.
On the other hand, when talking about whether this will look *desperate* or *impact your career prospects (in academia) negatively*, I'd like to offer a different perspective from [Anonymus Physicist's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/138827/4249).
From my experience, and the experience of the people around me, what hurts your academic career the most is **having a long period without a (research) position** after your PhD. (But I've also noticed that nobody even notices short gaps of a couple of months). So while it would have been better if you could move away to a new lab straight away, it would be worse if you had no arrangements at all. I actually found it **fairly common amongst my academic peers** to take a short position with their PhD advisers, and all of them went on to have successful careers (some in academia and some in industry).
This practice might be more common in countries and programmes like mine in France where the workload is very high after submitting the thesis manuscript and while preparing the viva, and somewhat less common when the workload after the thesis submission is low, or the funding typically lasts only until the manuscript submission and not the viva (like the UK), but it is not unheard of in a European academic setting.
I took a 4-month position with my PhD adviser after my PhD, as the viva preparations were overwhelming and I did not have time to look for another position earlier (or sleep, really). The only "consequence" I saw when applying with that information on a CV is that **the short position was considered an extension of my PhD work, and not as a standalone postdoctoral experience**. But, as long as it is just a *short* position (up to 6 months I'd say), you can see it as a time to improve your CV and publication list while applying for your *first "proper" postdoctoral position*.
I never aspired to end up in Oxbridge or Ivy league, but I am currently being considered for faculty positions at some good and some excellent Universities (in my opinion). *It all went quite according to plan for me.* **I do not feel that my success in my current faculty applications, or my academic career, was in any way affected, negatively or positively, but a 4-month postdoc with my PhD adviser.**
---
**One more exception on when it is okay to accept a position in the same lab after the PhD** (which does not apply to your case but I am mentioning it for completeness) that I have seen (in the UK) **is obtaining postdoc funding** (for oneself) **through a Fellowship**, to which one can apply while finishing their PhD. Since obtaining a Fellowship means you are self-funded (and the funds were awarded to you by name), having successfully secured research funding will become the strongest line on your CV and the institution where you chose to do it will become less important.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/10/20
| 2,414
| 10,793
|
<issue_start>username_0: I received a major revision decision. But it is a strange one:
* Reviewer 1 loved my article, called it excellent and recommended publication with very, very minor comments against it.
* Reviewer 2 believes that my article's scope is too narrow and wants me to take on much more research, which would yield a different article with the same structure but longer. R2 has no other major problems with the idea or content of the article, in fact I believe that R2 liked the idea and that what R2 wants me to do is enlarging the article to provide additional support for what it countenances.
To take on all the additional research and writing for a much longer article would take time away from my current PhD research. Should I tell the editor that my article's scope is what it is and that I think it does a good job whitin that scope?<issue_comment>username_1: Just say no. It is normal to have to constrain research and even to write up "what was done so far" when funding runs out. As long as you are honest, then it is fine. IF not, then just move to another journal.
Note: I would be VERY resistant to doing extra experiments. It's one thing if there is a questionable interpretation or the like. But extra work? No. Be like Nancy Reagan. Just move on if needed. Don't even waste much time.
You need to dig in your heels on changing actual scope. Provided you don't oversell the interpretation, almost any reasonable set of experiments can be written up and reported on. I have literally (and not how the millenials use that word) reported, in the lit, good journal, and included comment that a sample was missing as it was dropped on the floor. If anything the ballsy honesty surprised them and my papers went through without revision. But if not...just boogie.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I interpret the totality of the response is that your article is probably just about right as is, but you have the opportunity for a follow up. I would make the changes you feel are warranted and send in the revised version with a note that you will consider another article to follow that will address R2.
If it gets done, fine. Otherwise, don't worry about it.
Of course, the editor may suggest more, but I doubt you need to ask first. In general, the reviewers don't take ownership of your paper. It is still yours to update with the suggestions. You should *consider* all suggestions, but don't need to explicitly change anything based on them. But the editor still gets to decide.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: This is a very frustrating aspect about academic publishing. Reviewers are supposed to be referees who evaluate a paper's quality. But as acceptance rates for journals keep dropping, many reviewers seem to have branched out into becoming critics, program managers, or just the old guy at the bridge who demands you solve three riddles before you can cross.
However there are real reasons reviewers behave this way. Science fields today have widespread problems with reproducibility and publication bias. And the increase in submissions (which caused the acceptance rates to drop) also lead to pressuring people for reviews a lot more. So you very commonly get reviewers who clearly don't want to read your paper (making for a terrible test audience) and of course they are afraid to simply give you benefit of the doubt and recommend acceptance due to all the bad science going on out there.
Of course there are other reasons reviewers make their demands. But this is one you may be able to solve by addressing the above problems with the text. Assume they are not clear what you have done, so try to clarify it further; think of a better way to "market" the result in terms of a picture and description for a general audience. As they apparently do not think you have many (or really any) results, be very specific about emphasizing the results which are novel starting and emphasizing their value. Many authors tend to be overly-cautious about claiming novelty as you can never be sure what everyone else has done. You need to take the risk and claim what you think is there. Use "to our knowledge" as needed.
Don't just argue with the reviewer. Give a response that both clarifies to them what you have done and makes a case that you have plenty results and these results are important. *And* make significant changes to the text to communicate these same same clarifications for readers. Yes the manuscript already has text for this but rewrite it anyway, adding more if possible. Point out to the reviewer how you changed the text for them. I have done this and (somewhat to my surprise) reviewers have accepted it.
Another tactic is to hold back some results when you submit a manuscript. Then add these "new results" at revision time to placate demanding reviewers. It isn't what they asked for but hey here's more work just for them. Yes it's ridiculous.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: The answer of reviewer #2 as you describe it here doesn't make much sense. An article doesn't have to be long, and if your article would only become longer without different structure or arguments, this point rather to the fact that you didn't understand the reviewer or the reviewer has not much experience what is expected from him. In the latter case I would contact the editor to ask reviewer #2 to clarify to you.
In experimental fields, **it can be necessary to do extra experimental work and measurements** and without it likely no reviewer of any journal will accept your article (e.g. showing necessary but not sufficient results that you have produced a room temperature superconductor). Interpretation of data can be difficult and the reporter wants to see what he wants to report...
But either you or reviewer have not understood **originality and significance of scientific research, if you both argue about the length or scope of the article**. The scope fulfillment was partly made by the editor sending your paper to the reviewers. This varies among journals, for some the reviewers make a comment or even highlight the article in the journal, for some it is the job of the journal staff to decide if you article matches the scope of the journal. The reviewers have to testify the plausibility, the possible reproducibility of your results and the conclusions. **If extra work is demanded they have to clearly state why and what**, you are not submitting a book chapter or review where a gap of done work in community would be detrimental to the future reader. If you announced in abstract and introduction more answers to questions which are not appearing then in the manuscript, this could be a matter of missing content/scope
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I've been R2 a few times: I consider the paper's quality clearly below the standards of the journal (because of lack of detail, for instance, to the point where I can't fully understand the paper's methodology; or lack of sufficient evaluation), so that in principle I should just reject the paper outright. On the other hand, there is something about the underlying idea that has promise, and I don't want the authors to get so discouraged that they bury it by resubmitting the paper to some third-tier venue.
So I use Major Revisions as a kind of contract with the authors, laying out exactly the changes the authors would need to make in order for the paper to become acceptable, even if these changes are very extensive. The ball is now in their court: they can either take the time to make the required changes, with a high chance that the paper is then accepted, or, if they really don't want to spend the time, they can resubmit to a lower-tier conference or journal.
And of course, Major Revisions is also an easier recommendation for the editor to ignore than Reject, in case my views are not aligned with those of the other reviewers. In your case, it sounds like you only have two reviewers, who drastically disagree. You could submit only minor revisions, and hope that the editor agrees with R1 that the paper is acceptable without a lot of extra work. Or R1 might look at the revisions, and R2's review, and say to themselves, "oh, R2 is raising a lot of good points. They're right, this paper does need more detail to be understandable/reproducible!" The only way to know for sure is to submit a revision and see what happens, though one potentially useful piece of information: if the editor really did agree with R1 much more strongly than R2, they would have required minor instead of major revisions.
(PS: Writing up your research to a sufficient level of quality that it passes peer review does not "take away from your PhD research." It **is** your PhD research.)
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_6: Typically editors will want to see that you are being reasonably cooperative and that you gave due thought to each point the reviewers make. The strategy here will be to essentially argue the case you are making here in your supplemental letter. Obviously, diligently implement the minor points made by R1 and express your gratitude to R1 for these helpful points.
When it comes to R2: In your revisions, try to address any reasonably implementable points made by R2. Then, in your response letter, address each of the reviewer's points one by one. Wherever you have been able to make changes, point them out and be thankful to the reviewer for their excellent points. In all cases, acknowledge the reasonable kernel of truth in the reviewer's point. Then, in cases in which the reviewer is asking you to go way beyond the scope of the project, simply say so and explain briefly why you think so.
At that point, it's up to the editor to decide. If the editor rejects, move on to another journal and don't think twice about it.
EDIT: Also, I would reinforce from the comments that this is something you need to be getting advice from your PhD advisor on. It is absolutely part of their responsibilities to guide you through this process. I would forward the reviews in full to your advisor and strategize with them.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: What is the scope of the journal? Your supervisor and/or the Editor will be able to tell you what's going on here.
It can be that R2's desires fall completely out of the journal's interest --- only short papers accepted, theoretical vs practical, etc --- or that they exactly describe it. It was the Editor's job to make this somewhat clear to you (maybe unless it's a very well-known journal where it can be seen as understood), so contact them for clarification:
It saves the Editor time (and reviewer-goodwill, that limited commodity!) having to re-review your expanded version just to reject, if you're headed the wrong way anyhow.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/10/20
| 320
| 1,393
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm changing my major to philosophy from computer science in the middle of a semester, and I'm doing pretty poorly in one of my math classes. My advisor told me it would be a good idea to drop it since I'm changing my major. Would it have any impact in grad school admissions, especially if I want to go to a highly reputable school?<issue_comment>username_1: In general, no single thing like this would have much impact. In this case, I'd say even less. People aren't looking for small reasons to reject your application, but for evidence that you will be a success in your chosen field as well as in the program you apply to.
So, if you do well overall and do especially well in Philosophy then you should be fine. Good letters of recommendation will overcome a simple thing like a W.
But be prepared, if asked, to talk about why you wanted to switch. And make the reasons positive, about philosophy, not negative about math or CS.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: A "W" on your transcript typically comes with no explanation. A pessimist reading your application might conclude that you withdrew from the math course because you were failing the course. In comparison, a B or even a C in the course would look better.
Whether this would be a significant factor in an admissions decision depends a lot on the person reviewing your application.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/10/20
| 985
| 4,240
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am applying to a PhD program in a few weeks, and I am also going to give a presentation at an upcoming international academic conference. I heard that a group of researchers from my dream school is also going to present their work at the conference, and at least one of the researchers might be a member of the admissions panel. I would like to introduce myself to them, but I don't want them to think that I am trying to win their favor just to increase my chances of getting accepted.
I recently had an informal Skype meeting with a potential PhD advisor, and she agreed to supervise my research if I get officially accepted. She does not belong to the research group and she is probably not attending the conference.
Could you give me some advice on how to talk to them in an ethical and appropriate way? Would it be fine to let them know that one professor is already willing to accept me to their program? (The conference will take place before the deadline of the application.)
[EDIT]
Thank you @ReinstateMonica for your answer. As (s)he pointed out, there was inconsistency in what I wrote. My potential advisor is willing to take me in, but she is not the one who will make the final admission decision. (My understanding is that my application will be assessed by her and one or more other professors.)<issue_comment>username_1: That is called *networking* and it *is* about getting to know people and people getting to know you. It will increase your chances and that's exactly the point.
There is absolutely nothing wrong, immoral, or illegal with it, by the way, it is a necessary skill for all professional careers. Conferences usually have intermissions for that exact purpose, with snacks, refreshments, etc.
The "standard" way of doing that would be to walk over, politely introduce yourself (don't go all formal), from which school you are and briefly, *very briefly*, what you are working on. Don't be pushy, don't force the conversation. It is easier if a common acquaintance introduces you (for instance, another researcher that knows you and them). Bonus points if you are familiar with their work/field.
It's easier after they see your presentation, but that's not entirely necessary. The most 'busy' researchers don't usually attend the *whole* conference, so don't waste chances.
More importantly: forget *dream*, don't be starstruck. They are just people, it is a school, just like countless others. Something I saw people do wrong: don't get stuck talking shop, especially if you have more time (as in the formal dinner some conferences have). Again, professors/researchers are people, they do more with their lives than just research and certainly have some other interests.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Would it be fine to let them know that one professor is already willing to accept me to their program?
>
>
>
I see no ethical issue with your general desire to network with potential advisors and make a good impression. However, **be very careful** that you do not misrepresent what you have been told by that professor. In your previous sentence you say that "she agreed to supervise my research if I get officially accepted". That is not the same thing as saying she is *willing to accept you into the program*. Now, maybe you did not describe what she said properly the first time, but if you are changing the content like this, it may mean that you are not exactly clear on what she actually represented to you, and you should be very careful in recounting it to others.
There are certainly some ethical issues here, but the main practical issue is not to piss-off your potential advisors by misrepresenting conversations you have had with them. If you go to other staff and tell them that this professor has promised to accept you to the program, they will then go and ask that professor, and that professor will say, "No, that is not what I said", and then she will probably get the shits with you. That is just the kind of thing that could sink a promising PhD application.
So, be careful when you describe any assurance given to you by a potential supervisor --- make sure you do not accidentally misrepresent what you were promised.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/10/21
| 737
| 2,905
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a Ph.D student at the university. Every student has a favourite professor same as mine. I really care about and our student-teacher relationship growing stronger day by day. My professor really cares about my professional/academic growth.
But a few days sooner I heard that the professor has been gone for an extended period of time.I am very confused and don't have any idea how to contact my professor.
Mistakenly I used google and I realized that my professor loses his loved once.
I feel really ashamed to break my professor privacy. I know that express condolence is the best way to support your close one who is under deep pain.
I am more worried about to disrespect our teacher-student relationship.
I am really confused. Can anyone guide me any positive way to handle this situation?<issue_comment>username_1: If you found this information online then it’s hardly an invasion of privacy (unless of course you hacked his email or something). I wouldn’t worry about that.
If there is a public announcement (an obituary) of a religious service (eg a wake or a shiv’a), you can probably attend as these things are usually open to the public for exactly people like you- distant relatives or acquaintances who wish to comfort the grieving family. For example, if they’re Jewish, it’s customary to bring some simple baked goods (say, cookies) since the family is hosting a seven-day event. I’m not familiar with grieving customs in other religions but that should be easy enough to find out. In these situations your professor would most likely greatly appreciate your presence and the gesture.
If there’s no public announcement then wait for the professor to come back to the university and try to catch them in person to offer your condolences. Again, the gesture would be greatly appreciated I believe.
My condolences...
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: If there's no public announcement, then I don't think that you have violated the professor’s privacy.
I have just assumed it, but I am not sure. Since he hasn't told you anything that means he wouldn't like to talk with you about this. You need to respect his decision. Maybe my answer hurts you but you need to realize this truth. Moreover, your moral duty is to show your sustenance because he lost his trust on you once. [Show your sympathy](https://condolencemessage.org/condolence-messages/) in a sorrowful way.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> What is the best way to express my condolence to a professor?
>
>
>
You can say, ***my condolences for your loss***. That said, you needn't say anything; it depends on your relationship with the professor.
>
> I know that express[ing] condolence is the best way to [offer] support
>
>
>
You need to consider whether *your* support will be helpful; support isn't necessary from everyone (indeed it may become burdensome).
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/10/21
| 459
| 1,853
|
<issue_start>username_0: I would like to contact my supervisor after a long time and I do not know what to say to him, knowing that I have not finished the part that I am supposed to have finished.
indeed, because of personal problems (my father had an accident, I had health problems) I could not advance at the programmed rate.
I think I should contact my supervisor and tell him that I'm sorry for the delay and that I'm going to send him the work in 2 weeks but I do not know how to say that in a formal and professional way.
Help please<issue_comment>username_1: I agree with <NAME>, at this point formality might not be the most important concern here.
I just had a big break, and recently returned to work with my supervisors, my first email to my supervisors after months of radio silence was simply
>
> "Dear professor \*, hope you are well. I have recovered and am ready to
> resume my research, I'd like to schedule a supervision meeting soon to
> catch up and plan the next steps. Regards."
>
>
>
For your supervisor, the message is "the student is resuming" and that's it, save the details (reasons why you were away from your study) for a face to face meeting.
Remember your supervisor is always there to support you. Don't over think it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: "Dear Professor,
I am sorry to have to inform you that a number of personal problems have disrupted my work programme. I am now fully engaged again on my work [if that is true] and hope to send you [say what it will be] shortly. [ I advise you against giving a specific date: hostage to fortune]. I should be happy to explain in more detail and answer any questions that you may have."
The basic idea is to state clearly that there was a problem and what you are doing about it but without making too many promises.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2019/10/21
| 357
| 1,516
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been invited to submit a book chapter. The invitation email says:
>
> Due to your involvement in the field, and the research you published in your paper, 'X', publisher 'Y' invites you to extend your work and offer a more comprehensive overview of your studies. Contribute a chapter to 'Z', an upcoming Open Access book edited by Dr.'W'.
>
>
>
Surprisingly, paper 'X' is completely unrelated to the Book 'Z'. The book is edited by a renowned professor, the publisher is InTechOpen.
What to do in such case? Can I select any of my published papers in journal for this purpose? Will it not create any copyright problems?<issue_comment>username_1: Normally, when getting an invitation to submit a book chapter, the expectation is that you submit a *novel* piece of work, unless stated otherwise.
Submitting a paper already published will not satisfy this requirement. There are two problems with this: 1) you often give the copyright to a publisher after the acceptance of your paper for publication. For a republication, you would need the permission from the publisher then, which is unlikely to be granted. 2) This will look like you are trying to publish the same result twice, which is frowned upon.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: If they're sending you invitations to contribute to volumes that are completely unrelated to your work, the next step's simple: ignore the email. They're clearly not doing their research and are resorting to mass mailings.
Upvotes: 5
|
2019/10/21
| 3,181
| 13,209
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an MSc student and one future direction I have been thinking about is the potential of pursuing a professorship after I do a PhD. Why do I want to be a professor? I enjoy the back and forth of doing research - while at times it's frustrating to figure things out, I think it's a good proxy for workplace freedom (by my standards) and I know that I would enjoy teaching.
Where I don't think that I would entirely fit the mold of a professorship is that I am not so concerned with having the top publications or cranking out as many papers as I can, but that's not to say I anticipate producing one paper a year and then putting my feet up on my desk. Relative to others who are more concerned about having top publications or many papers, I would probably be the 'less preferred' candidate for the job - which is okay. I am in no hunt for accolades, awards, or praise.
But I think that approaching a professorship from a balanced and holistic approach where I can work on research, teach, and maintain a healthy work-life balance would be something that I could grow to love. However, my perspective and approach to a professorship might be naive, which would also be horrifying to find out when it's too late.
So do you think that it is possible to have a healthy work-life balance as a professor or is that approach to a professorship, at least early on, not realistic for the modern market place of academia?<issue_comment>username_1: Depends on the country, so maybe add a country tag (from your post history I would say Canada?). My answer below is mainly based on what I know about the system in Germany and what I have heard (here and in other places) about the system in the US, so make sure to double-check that it is the same in your country:
First of all, I think you won't get happy in research-heavy institutes with what you want to do. However, there are also a lot of positions with a focus on teaching, or an equal split between teaching and research (and thus not expecting top results that often), or positions where the research is less focused on top theoretical results that everyone will quote but rather on more practical problems like, for example
>
> The organization funding us was wondering if X is possible. We split the research into three bachelor and two master theses, looking at different aspects of X, and then joined the outcome into a final report. Furthermore, we joined forces with department A, who produced a running prototype based on our theoretical analysis.
>
>
>
Such a research might not be considered top level by some, but it still is research, and on top of that it allows to combine teaching (supervising bachelor/master theses) with the research; something that might not be possible if you are the leading expert (read: the only one with your skill level and knowledge) in a field.
Overall, I think it is totally possible to live a happy life as a professor, including good work/life balance, fun teaching young minds and interesting research without deadly pressure to publish all the time. One of the main reasons for me thinking that is that I hope to get such a position in a few years, so if you happen to be especially interested in the German system just let me know.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Well, being lazy and having work-life balance aren't the same thing. Being lazy, by the standards of your university isn't a path to success. At some places you do a lot of research and less teaching, advanced courses mostly. At some places you do a lot of teaching (and course prep) and need to spend a lot of time on it. It is a lot of work no matter what sort of place you are at.
At very low tier colleges you might be able to get by with little intellectual challenge, but still a lot of work dealing with students.
The one big advantage, I think, of a professorship is that you largely get to determine your own schedule. If you prefer to teach only in the mornings you can probably have that arrangement (most of the time). But for a position in a research focused university or even a somewhat less prestigious "comprehensive university" you will still have a lot of work of various kinds, though you can choose to do much of it when you like. So, you can probably trade evenings at the computer for week-ends off, or other such things.
But the professorate isn't a 40 hour a week (or 30 or whatever) proposition. Most people put in much longer hours. But that isn't, generally, because they have a manager pressing them. It is because they are driven by ideas and work on those ideas more or less continuously. The pressure to perform is primarily inner-driven rather than forced from others. If you don't have that inner drive, then a professorship probably isn't your best choice.
And, your word "relatively" scares me a bit. If there are two candidates for tenure and/or promotion and you are "relatively" lazy compared to the other, you probably won't have a good shot, other things being equal.
Lazy, no. Flexible, yes.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> I am in no hunt for accolades, awards, or praise.
>
>
>
My impression (from the US job market, at a mid-tier research university) is that to get a professorship, one must seek out accolades, awards, and praise. This is probably true, to varying degrees, at any university anywhere: they will receive hundreds of job applications and yours will need to stand out from the pile.
>
> I would probably be the 'less preferred' candidate for the job - which is okay.
>
>
>
As I said, universities get hundreds of job applications. If you are the #2 or #3 job candidate at many universities, then you are likely to get job offers. If you are their #20 candidate, you probably won't be interviewed.
The good news is that most username_3s I know seem to have a positive work-life balance, with various hobbies and interests, often families, and not all of them are workaholics. In my observation, this has been true for username_3s at all career stages.
Concerning the "rat race" -- once you've earned tenure, and to a limited extent once you've been hired to a permanent position, you can swear off of it if you choose. But, as a graduate student or postdoc, if you hope for username_3 employment then you must work hard to attract positive attention to yourself.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: To add to the existing answers:
>
> Can you be a (relatively) “lazy” professor and still hold a position?
>
>
>
Yes. Once you have a (tenured) position, you can probably be rather lazy and still hold onto it.
>
> So do you think that it is possible to have a healthy work-life balance as a professor or is that approach to a professorship, at least early on, not realistic for the modern market place of academia?
>
>
>
The part about *"at least early on"* is crucial here. While you can (and some do) gear back a bit once you have tenure, you don't generally get into this position by being lazy. Academia is very competitive (as other answers have indicated), and to end up on top of a hiring pile you will need to be considerably more accomplished than your peers. For most people, being more accomplished means that you will have to put in the hours (and even then there are no guarantees, of course).
Generally speaking, the description of how you envision the job indicates more interest in a teaching-focused, low-research position. This is perfectly appropriate. Competition for such jobs may be a bit lower than at the top research schools, but is (at least in most areas of the world) still high enough that a truly lazy person will not see any offers.
However, *and this is important*, it is my observation that professors at teaching-oriented schools do not actually work less than their counterparts at research schools. In teaching-oriented schools, the teaching load will evidently be (much) higher, and individual students may be weaker (meaning that they often need more time-consuming direct support). TAs are common in research schools, but often rare or completely unknown in teaching-oriented schools. All in all, from talking to colleagues at teaching-oriented schools, I got the impression that they are putting in at the very least comparable hours to me (often for lower status and salary). You should not fall into the trap of envisioning a teaching position as the same as a research-focused professorship, with the only difference being that nobody cares if you do research.
It is still possible to have a work-life balance (in both, research and teaching focused positions), but it will require some planning and working smart and dedicatedly. It is unlikely that you will manage to get tenure by actively being lazy.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_1: I chime in with another answer for the German system (as the one from the user with the exact same user name ).
I am a professor in Germany since some years and have been a junior professor in Germany. So I had to go through some evaluation of my research and my teaching to get tenure. I can assure you that it is possible to go through this with a good work-life balance. Maybe I have been fortunate with a supporting family and lucky with my publications, but for me it feels like a good life apart from the job is actually necessary for being productive in research and successful in teaching.
One rule I follow pretty strict is that I do not work after 5pm (and this includes answering any emails) and there are only two exceptions:
1. When there are extraordinary circumstances. These are, for example, grant deadlines or conference deadlines (but I know these deadlines in advance so I can give my family a heads up), or when there are urgent matters with students (oral exam is tomorrow, but something unexpected happened... (Beware: This is a slippery slope! When these extraordinary circumstances occur too often, I have to redefine what we extraordinary means or change something else).
2. When I actively decide to do so because I want to (you know, sometimes there are problems I would really like to solve and have fun trying...).
I followed this rule pretty strict and did neither miss any important deadlines nor got angry responses or complaints about not being responsive.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: It's hugely competitive--just look at the numbers. I don't think you will do going well into an academia career without a LOT of youthful "burn the candle at both ends and with a blowtorch in the middle" energy. It's just not the right choice if you already have a measured approach to work.
And I'm not making a value judgment...just saying the situation. You gotta be in the fight for this one. Both in grad school and as a pre-tenure prof.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: It's hard for me to imagine any job that would have an easier time establishing a "work-life" balance than being a professor. You're only actually teaching maybe 12-15 hours a week and after you've done it a couple of times, you shouldn't need much prep for it. Office hours? Okay, maybe another 6 hours or so but you're mostly free to do whatever you want during that time. That's barely part-time and with 3 months off out of the year and the option to take a 6 month vacation and declare it as a sabbatical (on top of the 6 figure salary and ridiculous benefits package), I'm having a hard time seeing your point.
Maybe the real question is a "work-life" balance in general since if you con't do it as a professor, I don't see how you can do it anywhere.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: As others have said: Academia is highly competitive. Working more helps in securing a job and is a must, if you aim to get a position at very good universities. But there are other factors that you might influence and that might allow you to secure a position without working too much.
First, if you are working on the right topics at the right time this might help. For example, around 2017 there were many jobs related to artificial intelligence / machine learning but relatively few well people with a strong background.
Second, you can benefit from working in a team. Academia encourages writing papers with multiple authors. It is better to have 2 publication with 2 authors than one as a single author. But there are limits, a hiring committee will very likely check if you are first author and even ask you about your contribution.
Third, choices with respect to your research projects and your way of working. While it is non-trivial to predict early on how a research paper will be perceived (peer review comes with a lot of randomness) "working smart" can certainly help. While you should follow your passion, getting too much hooked onto a project that is likely not bearing any fruits can be dangerous. For example, I have seen people working on follow up projects of papers that did not yield good outcomes in the first place. Though in the long run this might change (These papers might be just "too early" at the time of submission and later take-off). This is very risky. Also I have seen PhDs doing all kinds of things that are not contributing to any outcomes.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/10/21
| 569
| 2,524
|
<issue_start>username_0: Problem
=======
In one of the research internship programs I am applying for in Japan, the institution requires me to directly upload recommendation and, otherwise the application will not be reviewed. However, I think this is not quite appropriate since generally applicants should not know the contents of the recommendation. I contacted the admission administrators to discuss other options but they said it was that institution's policy.
Now I am wondering if I could ask for the professor's recommendation. Even though I think he will understand the situation and there are [examples](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/76192/professor-wrote-me-a-letter-of-recommendation-but-sent-it-to-both-me-and-the-in) that the professor voluntarily send students a copy of recommendation (i.e. the students receive the letter **passively**), I feel **actively** asking for the copy truly unprofessional and may make myself look bad in professor's eyes. This matters since he will provide recommendations to other institutions, where they follow the convention and accept recommendation through direct email with the professor.
Do anyone else have similar experiences and how do you do with that? Thank you in advance.<issue_comment>username_1: In spite of what you feel, follow their instructions.
I wrote a reference recently and sent it to the student... If the university wants to check, perhaps it looks tampered with, then they can contact the Academics dept or the faculty who wrote it. I have had phone calls in the past about what I wrote...
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Instead of asking the professor to give you the letter, tell him about your predicament. Mention that you checked with the internship program and were refused any alternative, and ask for advice. Be clear that you completely understand if the professor is not comfortable sharing the letter with you, and consequently would be unable to help you with this particular application.
If the professor is fine with you seeing the letter, he may offer it anyway. Even if he is not, it should not look bad on you, since you were left with no choice and were just trying to work around the program's requirement.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: This obviously depends on how the form is processed, etc., but perhaps you could offer to fill out the form fully, bring your laptop to the professor, and have him copy-paste his letter into the form and hit submit in your behalf?
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/10/22
| 2,896
| 12,578
|
<issue_start>username_0: My experience listening to talks (of all kinds - seminars, conference talks, even Masters/PhD defenses) is that they tend to be very difficult to understand. This happens even if they're within my own field or even subfield. Occasionally there are conceptually simple talks (projects that use machine learning are an example) that can be easily grasped, but most of the time the talks are too technical, or are the "blink and you will never understand the rest" kind. I estimate I rarely get more than 30% of what was said, even when I'm in the same field.
I certainly don't feel like I'm the only one who don't understand the talks, since I notice other listeners often get distracted by their laptops & mobile phones.
I personally think this is ridiculous, so when I give talks I try to simplify them to the point where someone with an undergraduate degree can understand it. For example one talk went:
* We're dealing with [technical term], which is analogous to [much-less technical term]
* This is what we want to measure, why we want to measure it, and what we expect to see
* After some very complicated mathematics (I literally used this phrase and skipped the details), this is what we get
I especially liked this talk since my family were able to grasp the gist of the work. However, the danger is that the talk might become too simplified. An actual expert would likely gain more by reading the paper during the talk instead of listening to it. Also, it seems some people think complicated language is the "[industry standard](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/110105/why-are-research-papers-written-in-language-thats-difficult-for-undergraduate-s)".
How can I tell if a talk has been simplified too much?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> How can I tell if a talk has been simplified too much?
>
>
>
When everyone understands everything!
Ultimately, to engage everyone, a talk (typically) needs to be too complicated for everyone to follow (otherwise some will understand everything), whilst being simple enough for everyone to learn something.
You need to know your audience and you need to make a judgement call on how much each will learn. E.g., everyone should understand the problem, most should understand why it is important, many should understand what you achieve, some should understand how you achieve it, and perhaps several should be able to replicate your results.
You need to ensure experts don't get distracted (with email, their thoughts, ...), so make sure they are listening when you are telling them something new, perhaps even explain this upfront. E.g., *I see the room is half full of experts in [technical term]. Parts of my talk will be uninteresting to them, but the other half need some background. So, I'll tell you when to disengage and I'll clap my hands when I need your attention.*
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I definitely hear where you are coming from.
In my modest opinion, a good conference talk is not necessarily the one that lets me understand the technical contribution (I can read the paper for that), but the one that lets me understand
* The importance and/or hardness of the problem studied
* What were the key new ideas
* Why they worked and when can I expect them to work
If I got this from the talk, I may be able to recall the result or the technique in the future when I have a need for it.
Of course I am not saying there should be no technical detail, the key idea may be the way a theorem was proved, but I believe any technical content should not be gratuitous.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: It's important to keep in mind that different talks have different audiences and goals. How much you should simplify depends heavily on what kind of talk it is:
* For a **job talk**, part of the goal is to convince the audience that your research is advanced and hard. Oversimplifying is very dangerous in this context - frankly, it's better if parts of the audience does not understand your talk than if everybody understands it and some people think it's very easy. Simplify the problem and the conclusions (this is the part that everybody should get - why do you do this and why does it matter?), but don't simplify the actual technical content.
* For a **public outreach talk**, i.e., any talk directed at a general audience, it's important that everybody can follow the talk, while they won't care in the slightest if your methods are really complicated. Simplify as much as you have to for your audience to follow (how much this is clearly depends on who exactly the audience is - at a developer conference not much simplification may be necessary, when you are talking at a "Science for Kids" event you will need to break it down considerably).
* For a **conference talk**, opinions vary. I have come to the same conclusion as username_2 (that a conference talk is ultimately more an advertisement for reading the paper), but not everybody shares this sentiment. Decide what *you* want to do with your talk, and simplify enough to achieve this goal.
Another angle of this discussion is also *which parts* you should simplify for which audiences. For instance, I do a lot of empirical work nowadays (e.g., interview or survey studies). Oftentimes, the subject of my studies are technically deep topics (so the subject itself is rather complex), and the methods are, well, not exactly complex, but they are often lengthy to explain properly and somewhat intricate. How much I go into the details of either of these two aspects strongly depends on who I give the talk to. A scientific audience may appreciate me talking for 5 full minutes about how subjects were sampled and how results were coded etc, but an industrial audience *will not care* - "we did a study and interviewed X developers" is all the detail they need to hear. Conversely, the scientific audience is often not particularly interested in the technical complexities of the study subject, but an industrial audience almost certainly is.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: I think that in almost all cases, people go to talks for *insight* not for details. If there is a reference/citation of a paper (or several) that provide the details, then the details needn't be in the talk itself. If you are at a conference with 300 listeners for your talk, then only half a dozen or so are likely to be interested in the pedantic details. But all are looking for the essential insights.
Some are also looking for ideas that they can expand themselves, of course. Students looking for important trends and interesting research possibilities. Even they don't need a complete, finished, product to make an informed decision. Insight triumphs.
But even in a formal lecture to students, which *is* expected to be quite detailed, you still expect the students to either have read the material before the lecture or to follow it up with readings and exercises afterwards.
The talk should say something about why the issues are important and about what the key, insight expanding, results were. It doesn't need to recapitulate the entire research process to do that.
If everyone understands it at some level it is a good thing. If a few want to follow up and go deeper it is also a good thing. Exhaust the audience with insight, not details.
As simple as possible, but not simpler.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I can definitely feel your point of view, I had the same concerns while I was preparing my bachelor and master thesis presentations.
My main approach was to keep simple the aspects that could be interesting to a more broad audience, like the explanation of the problem and qualities of the solution ( it is manageable, it is cheap, etc.).
Other aspects, like technologies involved, mathematical aspects of the solution and such, cannot really be simplified much but it should not matter because the information they convey is usually interesting only for the people able to understand it.
Also, if you have an experimental part (actual experiments, simulations etc), it is more useful to show them than to provide only cold numbers: show video of the experiments, create an animated version of the simulations and so on.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: Lots of good stuff in the responses here. As a (former) mathematician, I would add that a (colloquium | conference | job) talk can have a focus/understandability trajectory over its duration. Some of the best talks I have heard:
1. Started with an engaging but oversimplified example - of the question being posed and/or the answer, not necessarily just the latter.
2. Then they gave a framing of the relevance of the problem and its linkage to adjacent fields
3. Followed by an overview of the approach taken and insights gleaned
4. and finished with a few of the more gnarly but crucial details
Without trying to be overprecise about it, a (say) 40 min talk with 10 mins in each of these buckets should hit the sweet spot of everyone in the audience at one time or other, as well as then go (at least a bit) over their heads for the "knock their socks off" factor. You'll gradually lose everyone in the room except 2-3 people for the final 10 mins, but that's OK.
Don't be afraid to be understandable, as long as you also give a hint of depth. So few talks take the time to be accessible as well as grounded in the broader context that most audience members will be thankful you took the time rather than assume that your work is shallow!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: The other answers are excellent, especially username_4's.
One aspect that hasn't really been mentioned that I'd like to explore is the difference between how *simplified* something is, and how much *detail* is given. These are different concepts.
One of the common problems from many scientific presenters is not one of presenting ideas that are too difficult or complex, but rather an inability to reduce the level of detail. Don't think about "what would a reviewer ask on my paper", but rather "what is needed to tell the story that my audience cares about?". Unlike writing a journal article, you do *not* have to justify every single thing. As others have said, if people want more detail they will ask.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: Your talk needs to be pitched at the *demographic* makeup of your audience. A talk needs a completely different based on who will be attending.
* A general-audience talk for the public must explain *everything*, try to use everyday-life analogies, assume no mathematical background, avoid equations and gloss over technical details. Try to use images but avoid graphs unless they're very simple. It usually must spend a lot of time motivating why the subject is interesting at all.
* A student talk can usually assume the audience cares about the subject and knows some basic maths. You still need to explain all the jargon, use analogies to very well known problems and gloss over difficult details. Graphs and images are good for this audience. You probably still want to motivate why your specific topic is interesting.
* A broader-topic expert talk (say, a selection of professionals from an entire department) will *still* need explanations of jargon from your specific subfield. They will need to be told the context of your contribution, but will probably understand the need for your subfield generally. Now is the time to add the difficult technical details, which will be understood only by a few people, so expect to spend time on them. Now you can add in the equations and difficult graphs.
* A subfield expert talk (say, for a conference on your subfield) should omit almost all the background or just include enough to establish which notation you're using. Emphasize things like why your method is superior to previously understood methods and be prepared to field hostile questions from competitors.
You should always know the demographics of your audience before you write the talk. If you are unsure, ask the organizers. A talk written for the wrong audience is going to bomb regardless of whether it would have been a good talk for a different audience.
Don't worry too much about how bad your colleagues' talks are. Academic communication is really difficult, and a lot of academics are just terrible at it.
Also don't worry about who's using their phone or laptop. Allocation of attention is a personal problem, and you're not their mother. (If you are their mother, simply end the talk early and send them to bed.)
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/10/22
| 1,424
| 6,157
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently received a request to referee a manuscript for a journal and, while doing so, I pointed out a crucial mistake undermining most of the calculations. After two unsuccessful answers on the part of the authors (where they addressed other concerns of mine, but basically ignored the mistake I was pointing out), I recommended the journal reject the paper and they did so.
Very recently, and within a couple of weeks after this rejection, the authors have openly posted their article on arXiv, without correcting their mistake. While I understand that manuscripts from arXiv should be taken with a grain of salt, as it is not peer reviewed, making a clearly incorrect result public seems wrong to me, both from an ethical standpoint and from a practical one as it might mislead researchers.
I am unsure how to proceed. Should I ignore it or take some measures such as publishing a reply/correction? If the latter, is there any way to do it for arXiv submissions? Is it possible to do it anonymously?<issue_comment>username_1: I think it is commendable of you to care, but it would be best for you to keep anonymity with respect to the authors.
A good middle ground would be writing someone who knows your identity already, and is known by the authors: for example the editor in charge of the paper for the journal you reviewed for. Typically this editor is known to the authors, and they could pass on your comments without disclosing your identity.
In any case, the editor should be able to at least give you a qualified opinion on how to proceed.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: **Maybe** the authors wanted to secure their authorship of the idea, are working on the correction, or uploaded it so that they can send it to another expert in the field to help them with the corrections. There are many plausible reasons, so I wouldn't jump to conclusions.
Contact the authors first. Since they made the preprint public, obviously anyone could react to it. Just send them an email pointing out the error and asking for their thoughts on it. Be careful not to use the exact same phrases from your review!
If the authors won't answer, or will try to avoid the problem in another way, *then* you can write a short note and post it to arXiv as well. What the authors and the community will do next is up to them.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: You're completely correct that what they've done is wrong and you're right to be upset about it, but that doesn't mean there's anything you can or should do about it now. You already did your duty as a referee by pointing out the error. If you ever have a role evaluating these people (as an editor, on a hiring committee, as a tenure letter writer, etc.) you can remember that they don't care about the accuracy of their papers or about their reputation as a scientist. But currently you don't have any power here and it's not your responsibility. If this were a major result in the field, then perhaps it would be appropriate, after further consultation with experts and with the authors, to post something explaining why the result is incorrect. But assuming this is a minor result that people aren't really paying attention to, posting a rebuttal would be an overreaction. Hopefully future referees will also be careful and reject the paper, and if not you can consider contacting the journal where it's published down the line to try to get it retracted (though this can be difficult). I don't think the arxiv has the time or the resources to investigate technical errors in papers like this, so I wouldn't be inclined to try to get it taken down from the arxiv.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: ~~My understanding is that if you put something on arxiv and never publish it, it has minimal impact on the scientific community (with some well-known exceptions), especially if it is wrong.~~ I would wait to see if it gets published somewhere else. If it does, then submit a comment on the paper. If it doesn't, it is hard to see what else you can do.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Unless the paper could do real harm (e.g., public health policy), I wouldn't encourage you to moralize over the the ethics of someone posting a paper to the arXiv that wasn't accepted by you for publication. Spend your time on something constructive.
If you are certain that the paper is flawed **and** certain that explaining the fault would shed light on important issues in the field, it could be worthwhile to write a comment on the topic.
If, on the other hand, highlighting the fault in the paper doesn't lead to any greater conceptual understanding of the issue, reverse any widely-held approaches or attitudes to the issue, or prevent an erroneous result becoming important in the field, I see no real benefit of any further action. In fact, most colleagues won't have time to examine the details, and may just be left with the impression that you are argumentative, and like telling other people that they're wrong and you're right. So it's probably not a good move.
Lastly, for completion, let me address your questions about the arXiv. I don't think there is an 'official way to submit comments on the other papers to the arXiv - they are just ordinary submissions. Anonymous submissions are not allowed on the arXiv - see <https://arxiv.org/help/registerhelp> and [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/88928/anonymous-submission-on-arxiv). The relevant part of the arXiv registration policy is that:
>
> It is a violation of our policies to misrepresent your identity or
> organizational affiliation. Claimed affiliation should be current in
> the conventional sense: e.g., physical presence, funding, e-mail
> address, etc. Misrepresentation of identity or affiliation, for any
> reason, is possible grounds for immediate and permanent suspension.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: When something gets published in a journal and you have some disagreement over the contents, it's common to publish a rebuttal. Why not put a rebuttal on the arXiv if the authors won't respond to your contact with them?
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/10/22
| 452
| 2,024
|
<issue_start>username_0: I finished a PhD in Earth Science 10 months ago and now work as a software engineer. I haven’t done any research or published in these 10 months. Is it too late for me to go for a postdoc and have a realistic shot at tenure track? My PhD is from a good school in our field and I have a good publication record in top journals in our field.<issue_comment>username_1: You should be getting advice about such things from your advisor and/or other experienced colleagues within your academic field. It’s hard for anyone here to make predictions about whether you can get a postdoc based on so little information.
In general though, I would say 10 months isn’t such a long time, so if you were in a good position to get a postdoc 10 months ago then it shouldn’t be very different now, assuming you are on good terms with your advisor and other people who can write you letters. And who knows, the skills you developed in your software engineering job might even come in handy in academic research. Good luck!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You have focused on a single thing and that alone gives no real indication of possible success. While having a publication would be better, there are other things that will also be taken into consideration in any application.
You say you already have a good publication record. You will need good letters of recommendation. You will need some ideas about the research you intend to do, and may be involved in currently. There are lots of things that can help you.
In any application, stress the positive. Why is it that you are a good candidate for this position and are highly likely to succeed. If you can show that, then individual factors will have less negative importance.
But it would be good to start thinking about what you can do to get a publication, or the background research, going so that this state doesn't continue. Work so that you can write a good Statement of Purpose for the future, with some evidence to back it up.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/10/22
| 427
| 1,736
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm writing a math paper using TexShop that is almost entirely original but I got help with a trig proof; I found a formula in a book that I improved upon, and then got help finding a number series that completed my improvement. I would like to cite the help I got and at least one book but I don't know the proper place to put citations, inline or at the end of the paper. Do I do
1) statement....
citation
more statements
or
2)Topic
statements....statements
topic
statements
last statement of paper
all citations<issue_comment>username_1: While the details are dependent on the venue where you are publishing, most mathematical papers will put the full citations at the end but reference them in the midst of the text (e.g., via a citation number).
You can format these automatically if you use LaTeX, and the [AMS provides widely used packages for formatting](http://www.ams.org/publications/authors/tex/amslatex).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Consult the style guide of the journal in question.
===================================================
Different style guides have different requirements on how different types of citations are to be performed. Harvard is different to IEEE which is in turn different to APA.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> I found a formula in a book that I improved upon
>
>
>
When you introduce the formula, cite the book, e.g., *the following formula is proposed by Author X [1]*:
>
> and then got help finding a number series
>
>
>
Presumably you *got help* from someone. You can acknowledge that help at the end of your main body in an *acknowledgements* section. (Use `\section*{Acknowledgements}`.)
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2019/10/23
| 563
| 2,584
|
<issue_start>username_0: It is the usual practice that researchers re-implement others' work for the purpose of comparison or result verification. If for instance researcher A re-implements researcher B's paper and improves it. Is it acceptable to make his re-implementation files of researcher B's paper available as a supplementary file with his published paper?<issue_comment>username_1: Science is all about reproducibility. You *should* reimplement others work and make it available to third parties, just like the original author made his work and results public so that others can learn from it. (They may not have made any software available, but they did describe what exactly they did, after all.)
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Overall, this is a net positive for the field: people are more likely to try a new method if good code is available. If someone publishes a paper about a method, they expect (and hope) that it will inspire the reader to use it.
Two caveats:
1. When you make your code available, include a README note stating that this is a clean re-implementation. (if your method makes slightly different choices, and gives different results, be clear that this is not the exact code used by the original authors)
2. In rare cases, the paper might contain large sections of source code, or refer to protected IP / datasets. In that case, be sure to make your code compatible with the required licensing terms.
Examples: if you copy-paste sample code that is GPL licensed, or if the package depends on sensitive patient data, these things could affect what or how you redistribute. For a pure method paper, this usually isn't a big problem.
As for how to make the code available- hopefully your journal makes it easy to share code! If your journal still thinks that supporting info means "ugly PDF", services like Zenodo allow you to publish github repositories (or other artifacts) as separate citable resources. See: <https://guides.github.com/activities/citable-code/>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: This is very much acceptable nad I encourage doing so. If you have reproduced someone else's work, it is also very appropriate and helps document your effort and further validate the original author's work if you publish your implementation of it.
In fact, there is actually a scientific journal with the explicit purpose of publishing reproduced work like you describe. The journal is [ReScience](http://rescience.github.io/) (and I should mention that I am also associate editor for signal processing there).
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/10/23
| 446
| 2,023
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a senior undergraduate student and looking to apply to PhD programs. I am doubtful whether I should put my working papers on my CV alongside the already published works. I don't want to exclude them because I think my work in progress are more important than the published works. Will listing a separate section for working papers, with a side note on where do I intend to submit them be good?<issue_comment>username_1: Work in progress can be a good indicator of both interest and ability. I wouldn't exclude them and a separate section for it would be good. I doubt that a lot of undergraduates are in this position, though my perspective is the US.
Saying where you intend to submit/publish them is a bit speculative unless you have already published in those venues. But it is more likely to help than hurt as it shows you have a plan.
But in general, giving your work in progress shows an active research trajectory that might be carried directly into grad school if the circumstances are right.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I think this can be appropriate, especially as a student. When I was recently applying for academic jobs I listed a paper in my CV that was not yet published (or submitted at that time) because it was the main result of my dissertation.
Under my Research articles section I had two subsections: Publications, which listed papers actually published and Manuscripts in preparation. This allowed me to highlight some of my current and recent research.
I would advise you to keep the papers "in preparation" to at maximum a couple; I didn't include the half finished paper I wasn't going to submit for 6 months, or the ideas which I've written an abstract for, use this only for papers that are at least conceptually done. The reason for this is that you want to highlight them, and if someone asks about them they will be able to tell pretty quickly if the paper is still at the "idea" stage which would seem like you were padding your CV.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/10/23
| 1,814
| 7,579
|
<issue_start>username_0: Long story short: I got a PhD a few years ago (let's say, in numerical methods for nonlinear PDEs). I've since gotten experience with a couple post-docs and a variety of collaborators, but I'm not really satisfied with what I'm doing. I feel out of place.
Earlier in life, I made a tough decision between science and humanities-- my other passion has always been, let's say, east Asian languages. If my bachelors program had had better language courses or options for "hybrid" fields like computational linguistics, I probably would have gone that route, instead of fully focusing on math.
I've sought out collaborations that might help me bridge the gap between math and languages; I've also looked at postdocs to help make the transition. I've reached out to leaders at research groups who do stuff I'm really interested in. The common denominator is: I'd need a PhD in some kind of linguistics to research seriously what I want. So...
**What key things should I take into consideration when pursuing a doctorate, given that I have a doctorate in an unrelated field?**
Please consider the question within the following context: I'm **not** asking whether having two PhDs is good or bad (I frankly don't care), how to needlessly pad my name with titles, or how to get two PhDs simultaneously. (That is all to say: [this post](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/17232/is-doing-two-phds-a-good-path/17245#17245) doesn't answer my question.) I'm asking about what to expect when changing careers, specifically, if the source career is in one academic field and the target career is in another, unrelated field. Assume I've 100% decided to leave my current field and pursue this second doctorate, for the purpose of changing careers. Assume also that I already have substantial content knowledge in the target field, as I have a bachelors degree in it already, and it's been an avid hobby for most of my life.
Some sub-questions that don't need to be specifically answered, but I think help narrow the question: in what way could my current PhD be a hindrance in getting into a new program? Will my supervisors and colleagues see my past PhD as an asset, or as weird-looking mole they will try to politely ignore? What are other questions should I ask myself to prepare for such a non-traditional career path?
*Note: I've edited this question multiple times in a vain attempt to get the duplicate label removed. If you agree, please vote.*<issue_comment>username_1: In my experience, nonstandard paths like what you propose are initially viewed with surprise, and with varying degrees of suspicion. That includes admission committees, potential supervisors, fellow students, etc. However, that comes from uncertainty and unfamiliarity and can be shaped by the narrative you supply, and how you follow through.
Basically, people will probably have 3 archetypes in mind when you first contact them. The most positive one is that you are some sort of polymath genius. The most negative one is that you are a serial fail-to-deploy-in-life perpetual student, a model everyone in academia has encountered. And the 3rd is that you want to do research in some unexpected interesting intersection of your old and new field (which you've said is not the case). You therefore need to replace that narrative with a truer, credible, if possibly slightly airbrushed one, something like: you've always been interested in both X and Y, initially pursued interesting topics in X leading to a Ph.D. and start of a promising career, but are increasingly passionate about Y and want to refocus on that. I would be open that you don't expect to directly harness your expertise in X, but that you do expect that your background will help you be a very effective student in Y.
And then you need to back that up with your actions! Your Ph.D. is a credential indicating you have demonstrated the ability to advance the state of the art of knowledge in *some* field, and that you have learned sufficient academic "tradecraft" to be an independent researcher, at least from a competence point of view. (Footnote: The at-best only partial independence of a post-doc, and indeed the whole post-doc position, is more a reflection of funding realities than of a junior academic's presumed research abilities). So if someone with a Ph.D. and post-docs would approach me, I would expect them to be able to motor through the usual initial stages of a Ph.D. much more quickly than a "new" graduate student. I would expect that they will have done a fair amount of foundational reading in the field already -- that's something that hardly needs an advisor, though an advisor will be helpful in helping identify important strands that may be nonobvious from the outside. And I would expect them to arrive with some well-developed thoughts on potential research topic, though of course we might well adjust it together.
If you were to come with this type of pre-preparation, I'd consider you a lower-risk admit -- as a committee member or prospective advisor -- than someone whose basic skilset is unproven. Conversely, if you were to arrive, with the background you describe, with the typical keen-but-blank-slate mindset a fresh-out-of-undergrad student usually brings, then I would be more worried you belong to the serial-failure-to-deploy archetype instead.
Second, I would suggest you be very open about discussing your financial expectations. Do you need/expect funding (and is it usual in your target field)? Or can you fund yourself by continuing to work in your current field part-time? Or do you have enough saved up from a well-paid science/tech job (and academics in the humanities/social sciences tend to assume all science/tech jobs are well paid....) that you will be self-supporting? All of those are acceptable, just avoid unpleasant surprises from failing to bring up the topic.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It's very difficult to give a general answer, since so many things depend on the specifics of the field, the location, and various other factors.
* Chances of being accepted: that completely depends on where you apply and whether your background matches the requirements for a particular PhD programme and/or a particular supervisor/topic.
* Already having a PhD is definitely not standard. I would imagine that some supervisors will see it as an asset: in some respects, they would get a postdoc for the price of a PhD student. I would imagine that supervisors who are looking for a PhD student who does exactly what they want would prefer a "virgin" PhD student.
* You should primarily ask yourself whether you can afford and are ready to spend a good few more years living on a PhD stipend. You should also be ready to give up on any little academic freedom you have as a postdoc.
A couple more remarks:
* For the record, the field of Computational Linguistics (CL; and its twin field Natural Language Processing, NLP) existed a long time before deep learning became a thing. It's true that it is some kind of hybrid field, but in my experience the vast majority of the research done nowadays is on the technical side (more computer science than linguistics).
* This is why the context described in the link "double doctorate" in your question strikes me as very different: the author did a second PhD which consisted in "writing a monograph on a long-forgotten Scottish intellectual". In my experience PhDs in CL/NLP are rarely this kind of book writing exercise that can be done as a hobby.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/10/23
| 2,086
| 9,014
|
<issue_start>username_0: A quick qualification: I usually associate failures in a class with it being my fault, like a lack of studying and such.
Background: I am on the last few courses of my degree. I work full time and have a job that requires me to think a fair amount, so these days I usually limit my class load to 1-2 courses a semester. It can be difficult to have the brain power to study after a long day of work, but I try to shift things around at work to have easier tasks on days leading up to an exam...etc.
Issue: This semester I am taking a course on DSP (Digital Signal Processing). I have had this professor before, and while he was a little disorganized previously I was able to get a good understanding of the previous courses material and get a B in the course. I feel the previous course was more technical and difficult mathematics wise, but I am struggling this semester. I feel like I understand the lectures, which if I had to estimate I'd say I'm 90% confident in. However, when it comes to the actual use of the material, I'm more like 20% confident. The source of issues this semester are:
* No syllabus. I'm used to a syllabus at least containing tentative scheduling, this semester the "syllabus" is just a copy and paste of the ABET requirements.
* Professor doesn't appear to have any known plans for how many exams we'll have, when we will have them, or how exactly the material will be split up among the exams.
* We have projects. Initially the projects were supposed to be due at the end of the semester. He then randomly changed his mind and made a project due with only a few days noticed. The projects can be completed in a day or two, but that is assuming I can immediately respond to a change in schedule.
* Similar issue with the exams, he'll randomly tell us we will have an exam a week before.
* There was initially some review homework problem assignments for background material, but since then there have been no homeworks.
* We have lecture notes we can view, but they're a bit disorganized. Even worse, I didn't take many notes in class because he said they were available online. Some were, but he waited until after the first exam to release some of the notes, some of which were required for the first exam.
* He has no grader this semester, so what is graded has no feedback. I did poorly on my first exam, partly because I didn't know exactly what I needed to study, but all of the "feedback" I got was my grade. We submitted the exam online, so I don't get any feedback for what I missed. For me it's quite helpful to know at least where I went wrong, was my error a small error that cascaded out? Things like that help me learn and improve. The feedback I received for my last project was "50/100 output incorrect"... which of course I knew by the fact that the output didn't work, so it didn't assist me in knowing how it was incorrect or where I went wrong.
* He has provided his past exams, but no solutions to the exams. Since I have no feedback from anything else, such solutions can assist in me attempting the problems, knowing where I have an issue, and looking at the solutions to understand what and where so that I can resolve my misunderstandings. He previously stated that he held back solutions as he felt it would hurt those studying (how I am not sure), but stated he would upload them since I asked... he has yet to upload them and I have an exam tomorrow.
* The provided past exams only vaguely match the given exams. No direction is given as to what will be on the exams, like what class of problems...etc. Last he said in class is, "It's difficult to give information on what to study for the exam since it's cumulative." Which I understand, but a class of potential problems to study would be quite helpful. If I practice those but lack the needed cumulative knowledge, I can proceed to brush up on that knowledge before I continue. For the first exams I was relegated to printing out the past exams and marking problems that sounded familiar or something I should know, so that I could study those.
* He mentions that the past exams won't match our new exams anyways since he is trying to incorporate more Matlab. Which is fine, but I feel he doesn't cover Matlab enough to give us an exam on it. We've only covered Matlab material in two lectures, and the feedback from the projects is too lacking to be of use as a study aid.
In summary, I feel like there is a lack of organization leading to me feeling lost on what to study, how to study, how to improve on things I missed, and in general feel more lost than if I were doing an MIT OCW class and teaching myself.
It has been suggested to me to complain or report the professor, since I paid for this course and feel like I am not getting much, if any, support. However, I am not a person that likes to do this, and on top of that, normally I prefer to blame myself for my lacking achievements rather than the professor. I see a lot of people blame professors for their own failings, and I try to avoid doing the same. Though, his last emails wording suggests that he is getting frustrated with the class as well and annoyed that "very few" (out of an 8 person class) failed to get the project working.
Some extenuating circumstances, maybe. He mentioned that he had to cancel class one day due to an unexpected medical appointment, for a place that is a few hours away. Normally you don't do this unless you're visiting a specialists in my opinion. Recently he canceled two other classes, and assigned another project and said we'll have another exam ("take home", which I'll simply do at work during what would be normal class hours). Though he didn't provide a reason for this absence, I'd guess perhaps the same reason.
Bottom line, do my grievances seem legitimate, or are some of my expectations out of line?<issue_comment>username_1: This sounds like the professor has issues going on in his personal life, which happens to all of us from time to time. If possible, you might go to office hours or talk to him after class. Don't address his problems, but instead tell him you are struggling with the presentation and ask for his suggestions on how to do better. Ultimately, that's the goal, whether the root problem lies with you or with him.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There are some things that the professor should improve and there are other things that you should improve. I think it is a shared responsibility in this situation.
There might be some reasons, medical and other, for a certain lack of organization, but it certainly doesn't seem ideal. Even if he is trying to mutate the course into something more modern (matlab) it would account for some disorganization.
But the biggest problem that is the responsibility of the prof, is the lack of assignments and feedback. Students need reinforcement of the ideas in a course (assignments) and they need feedback on their attempts.
But much of the rest of it is up to you. He seems to be doing some things well, in my opinion, making lectures available online, for example. Even having new exams quite different from old ones is a good thing. The old exams can give you practice even if they are unrelated to what will be asked now. But you need some feedback on your attempts. But note that having an answer key to the old exams is not really appropriate feedback. Working toward a known answer is not the same as working out an answer unaided. He is even warning you that the new exams will be different.
He should, however, find a way to get you feedback. If there are issues that prevent him from doing it himself, he should be at least trying to work out some way for that feedback to come from somewhere. If you are at a large place, then a TA could be employed. If at a smallish place, then a senior student might also be given a grading task.
But, as for your own responsibility, you need to practice more, even if there is no way to really get feedback. If you have a book, or could acquire one, that has exercises, you can do them even when not assigned. I once learned a lot in a certain course by creating my own examples and problems and exploring solutions. I was able, however, to verify my solutions even without feedback. The practice alone did me good and I got a deep understanding of a small part of the course and insight that served me well overall.
Don't depend on remembering or learning from lectures. You say you don't take notes. That is a serious issue. Taking notes (by hand - on paper) is a reinforcement mechanism that will serve you well. It will also help you see what isn't there and what you need to explore in questions or in outside reading. Take a lot of notes. Spend some time summarizing them.
Seeing isn't learning. Only work that reinforces it will lead to learning. You need to do that, of course, even when the prof is extremely organized and provides the feedback. But, he should be providing that, of course.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/10/23
| 1,070
| 4,476
|
<issue_start>username_0: Most academic ethics (indeed, most professional ethics in general) are heavily focused on [Kantian/Deontological](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deontological_ethics) principles. For academics, the basic rules are blatantly Deontological - don't plagiarize, don't falsify data, don't cheat on exams, don't abuse research subjects, don't divert grant funds to unauthorized activities, don't engage in discrimination, etc. Is there a place in Academia for [Utilitarian](https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/glossary/utilitarianism) "greatest good for the greatest number of people" ethics? At first this seems absurd - that anything worth doing is worth doing *right*, and that the damage done by violating ethical principles simply can't be quantified in any meaningful manner.
There are plenty of [examples](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/31116/58912) of *post-facto* ethical issues with respect to using past data obtained through problematic methods, but I'm asking about present day research. Can someone give an example of a scenario where an ethics committee, IRB, or other social establishment in academia might *advise* a researcher to go ahead and commit what would normally be misconduct because the likely benefits are just too great to pass up? For example, "This research is so important and so urgent that you need to do anything you can to finish it as soon as possible. Take restricted funds from other departments, bribe government officials, look the other way while your co-researchers sexually harass their grad students, inflate your own students' grades in exchange for extra work hours from them, do whatever you have to to finish it. Once you publish it will truly all be worth it as it will save countless millions from impending doom, balance the national budget, and restore Order to the Galaxy."
Note that I'm *not* asking about any specific scenario, but about whether utilitarian ethics even *apply* - that is, if having the basic rules (don't plagiarize, don't falsify, etc.) is normally just the most efficient way to do research (e.g. unfalsified data is worth much more than falsified data, a subordinate who is not being sexually harassed is less likely to quit in the middle of a big project and much less likely to sue, etc.), or if they are truly indispensable in all cases. I also recognize that the cases I am talking about are somewhat rare, probably more at home in a bad sci-fi movie than a real-life university, and that most people probably won't encounter them.
While "Nazi data" can be considered an example of this, I want to concentrate on other things that are less politically charged - say, deciding not to censure a professor for sexual harassment because of the importance of his current research, or falsifying a minor paper in order to qualify for grant money that you intend to use to do much more good than the harm caused by the falsified paper.<issue_comment>username_1: Deontological and utilitarian ethics usually lead to the same course of action, so the premise of the question is incorrect. Usually, both forms of ethics "have a place."
Your examples of utilitarian courses of action that break the rules are not actually the best way to achieve the desired result. They are not utilitarian.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, but not in the way you're thinking.
========================================
No, covering up a given researcher's misdeeds because their research is so important isn't acceptable under academic ethics, both under deontological ethics, but also under utilitarian ethics: almost all research is incremental in nature, with the potential direct human benefit being very small. Things like curing cancer or solving world hunger are very large, very difficult problems, that would require far more than a single researcher to solve, no matter how brilliant they might be. Further, by covering up a given researcher's misdeeds, you're creating an incentive (or, rather, removing a disincentive) that would act to increase other individuals to commit similar harms in the future.
However, there is a very important area where utilitarian ethics have a place in academia: the prioritization of research, through mechanisms like grant applications. When a grant committee is evaluating a grant application, they are carrying out a utilitarian calculation, comparing the benefits and costs of the research and thereby evaluating its utility.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/10/23
| 794
| 3,565
|
<issue_start>username_0: I submitted my manuscript to two journals online (not at the same time). During the process of submissions I was asked to determine the editor and I selected the same editor in both journals. Need to say, the editor whom I selected is a specialist in my field word (mathematics). Unfortunately, in both journals, my manuscript was rejected. In the first journal, I received no report about rejection, that is why I submitted to the second one. The second journal rejected my article with a report on the technical reason of rejection including some reasoning. Now I have already tried to solve the errors and prepared a new version of that. I would like to try to submit it again to another journal again with the same editor of previous journals. Does it have a bad effect if I submit again for this editor? Can I send an email to potential editor to ask his opinion on my new version of manuscript, then I submit it formally to the journal who is its editor? I am asking this because I suppose he probably has a presence of his mind about my manuscript and it helps me to speed out the publication of paper.<issue_comment>username_1: Unfortunately this depends somewhat on personalities so a definite answer is impossible. But if your communication with the editor has been helpful/cordial then it might not entail much risk, contacting that editor.
But since you already have two rejections where the person was involved, you might want to try for a fresh look at your paper with a different editor. This is especially the case since you weren't encouraged to resubmit with revisions.
You might also try contacting that editor without sending the paper and just give the title and state that you have revised the paper with advice from the reviewer and ask for any advice they might be willing to give. Perhaps they ask to see the paper. Or not.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I don’t see the benefit of trying a third journal with the same editor. This person already rejected your paper twice, that suggests they do not think highly of it. There are plenty of math journals, I strongly suggest finding one with a new editor who will look at your paper with fresh eyes.
As for a pre-submission email, that would be going outside the normal process, and the normal process exists precisely so that all authors have a uniform, consistent process to have their papers evaluated. It’s frustrating to get repeated rejections and to deal with automated submission workflows, but this is how the system is set up - for everyone - and there are no shortcuts. In very exceptional cases I’d say it’s acceptable to ask for an editor’s informal opinion, but your situation doesn’t sound like one of them.
In any case, good luck!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: This person already rejected your manuscript twice. So there is a little chance you will be able to convince him in the third attempt unless you have revised your manuscript with some major corrections.
Also, I don't think sending a manuscript to a person is a good idea unless you know and trust the person very well.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: You could find the official email address and contact the editor. The editor will tell you some information. If it is OK, you could send the new paper to the editor directly. By the way, if the editor has contacted you, you also you could send it to the editor.
I am an editor. If there are authors who send new papers to my email address，I will send the feedback to them in time.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/10/24
| 912
| 3,691
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is it a nice practice to use diagrams from another work and mention the name of the author? If yes, what is the correct way of doing it? Citing the author in the footnote or an in-line citation?<issue_comment>username_1: Speaking generally diagrams are the creative work of the original author and you should not reproduce a diagram in your published work without permission from the person who created it. If, however, the diagram was published under some sort of license that allows reuse (e.g. CC BY 2.0) then you can reproduce it along the terms of the license. If there is no indication of what license the diagram has been published under, you must assume it is all rights reserved.
If you like a diagram and want to use it in your published work, seek the appropriate permission.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: As with many questions here, there are two issues: plagiarism and copyright infringement.
By citing the work of another you avoid plagiarism, which is claiming the work of another as your own. So you have no issues with that.
Copyright infringement, however, is governed by laws that vary by jurisdiction. Normally (i.e. most jurisdictions) you can copy (with quotes) some words from the publication of another as long as you cite it. But there are (weakly defined) limits to that. Copyright law is usually civil law (I know of no exceptions) so infringement is subject to lawsuit and in a lawsuit a judge or jury gets to decide what is reasonable and what is not.
But in copying diagrams and images there is a special consideration. Even when produced inside another work, an image might be interpreted as a "work" in itself. So, copying it might be interpreted as copying an entire work, likely a violation. Another thing to think about is that "A picture is worth a thousand words.". That is more than just a cute saying as it has some truth. So, if it would be improper to copy a thousand words from another work, an image might just might be considered as "too much" to copy, even if cited and "quoted".
But let me give an example that might help you see the issue clearly. Take, for example, the book [The Handmaid's Tale](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Handmaid%27s_Tale) by <NAME>. If I were to produce some work in which I quoted a complete chapter, it would very likely be considered infringement. But, as you can see, Wikipedia has provided a synopsis of the entire work without infringing copyright. The linked article explains the entire plot in some detail and lots of the reasoning and structure behind Atwood's work.
More deeply, however, suppose that I copy a complete chapter, but change a few words. Change names, perhaps, or locations, or phrasing of some parts. This is still almost certainly infringing.
So, in your case, if you take a figure and "change" it in insignificant ways, moving a few elements then you are on shaky ground. But if you take the *ideas underlying the figure* and produce your own, from the ideas, not just modifying the figure, then you are, in some sense at least, *paraphrasing*. But all that means is that you have a defense against a charge of infringement. Possibly a solid defense. So, if you do that and also, as you suggest, say that it was adapted from ... (avoiding plagiarism) then you are probably fine. But in the last analysis, neither you nor I get to make the final judgement if you are challenged. But do more than just mention the name of the author. Cite the actual work.
---
And you can avoid the issue entirely by asking for permission as [username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/138985/75368) suggests here.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2019/10/24
| 851
| 3,670
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently applying for a Masters degree in a competitive program, and most things on my application are going well.
The problem I'm having is with securing a letter of recommendation - I have already secured two strong letters, one from a workplace manager in the field that I am applying for and another from a professor in an unrelated field. Regarding the third letter, a professor that I spoke to said that he could write a "positive, but not enthusiastically strong" recommendation.
From reading up on answers here and on other sites, it seems that in most cases I should look elsewhere for a letter. However, in my case I do not yet have a letter from a professor in the field that I am applying for. There are a few other professors in the field that I will reach out to, but assuming that they reject my request, should I take this letter?
Another option that I have is to secure a strong third letter from another manager at my workplace. Would taking a third letter from a work manager be better? I am leaning towards this being the case, but I also do not want to jeopardize my application by not having a letter from a professor directly in the field I am applying to.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> a professor that I spoke to said that he could write a "positive, but not enthusiastically strong" recommendation
>
>
>
This sounds like a polite way to tell you to ask somebody else.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> I also do not want to jeopardize my application by not having a letter
> from a professor directly in the field
>
>
>
Having a lacklustre letter from someone in the field you want to go in to is significantly worse than having an extremely positive letter from someone outside the field. A committee is likely to interpret the first letter as an expert saying that you really aren't very good. It would be smart to seek a very positive letter from elsewhere and ask your letter writer to focus on your potential to succeed etc.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Since the professor hasn't outright declined your request (which he/she could have), you could still ask him/her to write the letter and see how positive and enthusiastic it is. If it is good and then you may still be able to use it for the application. Otherwise you can ask another person to write you a letter. In fact you could get many people to write you letters and then only pick the best ones for the application.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: You need to understand what “positive but not enthusiastically strong” means in the context of *this specific* referee.
I have seen too many reference letters that are positive and enthusiastically strong but totally meaningless because they do not reveal anything about the candidate or do not provide anything but narrow context for the letter: “This student is the best student of my class and should be awarded a full scholarship” is totally unhelpful.
Having a well-written, clearly balanced letter with lots of context can be very valuable, even if it comes with caveats and especially if it comes from a specialist in the field.
It seems that, given the reservations expressed by your third referee, you might want to arrange a 15-minute conversation to discuss the situation with this person and politely ask if your referee can clarify reservations. It could be a difficult conversation, but just asking for an in-person meeting to clarify what is meant by “positive but not enthusiastically strong” letter will be immensely useful. If the referee does not agree with having such a meeting then you should consider asking another person.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/10/24
| 1,276
| 5,212
|
<issue_start>username_0: While preparing a bibliography, I have noticed that some authors' journal titles have not used diacritics correctly. For example, some authors have written "<NAME>" in their titles rather than <NAME>.
Should I be referencing these titles exactly as they have written it, or should I correct them?<issue_comment>username_1: This is, perhaps, a judgement call. I would correct them. There may be "reasons" why the original wasn't accurate, even if it is just not knowing how to produce the letters of an expanded alphabet on your keyboard. I suspect, but don't know, that the diacritics might actually change the meaning in a few cases. But in this case it is proper to "honor" the person named even if it is a bit out of sync with the one doing the citing.
But others might disagree, believing that, when quoting, it is necessary to be precise.
A solution, of course, is to put the corrected name (or other word) in parentheses, following a quote. Or, some would write ... Angel [sic]... to indicate that the original is being preserved even though incorrect.
---
I'll also note that search engines seem to be sensitive to this issue and find the item correctly. For example searching Google or Duck Duck Go for "<NAME>" behaves correctly even when the name is in actual quotes. It also finds items that don't correctly accent the name. Likewise a search that has the proper accents finds items that don't.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In my opinion you shouldn't change the title.
The purpose of your reference is letting your readers find the referenced work, so changing the title (even if it is to correct a mistake) may make this harder or even create inconsistencies in scientific indexing services.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: To add to the answers already posted: authors themselves sometimes avoid diacritics, presumably because they (used to) complicate indexing and search as well as increase the likelihood of citation errors. A colleague of mine decided to forego diacritics in his papers and on his Google Scholar profile for this reason. So if you suspect that might be the case you'd be better off not changing anything.
The situation is different when a reference to an old paper has been mangled through a citation chain. This happens fairly often with author names and can make it a nightmare to track down the original paper. And even if it doesn't, it is sometimes obvious that the paper is indexed incorrectly - for example, the first and last names of authors are inverted. These cases call for a correction although that doesn't seem to apply here.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: This is really opinion based. I am happy my surname contains one letter beyond basic ASCII table...
The reasons I purposely omit the accent are:
* Inconsistent encoding. You know, UTF-8, CP1250, Latin2,... All of them use the space beyond plain ASCII but in completely different manner and no-one knows what are the default settings.
* There are many accents that may look similar or same for different people while the sorting algorithms may not see the similarity at all
* There are many font families that does not support the accents properly, draws some random glyphs or leads the setter using completely different font or return the character code.
* Many people may struggle even more reading my name when faced with the additional complication (accent).
Imagine what can go wrong if your surname is [Štěpánek](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radek_%C5%A0t%C4%9Bp%C3%A1nek) (Stepanek, `%C5%A0t%C4%9Bp%C3%A1nek`). Please, try to read aloud the name before following the link to Wikipedia, where the pronunciation is shown.
From the cited author's perspective, I'd be happy to be cited using plain ASCII charset. My name won't be crippled by encoding issues. I'd be also happy when my name will be dispayed in same way through whole document, the correct way preferably.
From the referencing perspective, the thing that really matters is that the reader can find the cited resource properly. DOI, ISSN, ISBN, Journal tags etc. are the true keys to follow when looking for the references. Author Name(s) and Article Title fields are "optional extras" for the reader. I've seen many articles where the reference contained only the first author name and the Journal Tag (for example: <NAME> al. / Acta Materialia 61 (2013) 4226–4236).
My advice is:
* Be consistent throughout your documents.
* Be sure you use basic Latin letters or the correct forms.
* Be sure all the letters are printed properly. If in doubt go for the safe plain ASCII.
* If in doubt, do not hesitate to contact the author what form is the correct one or what form they prefer.
* Be sure there are identifiers independent on the (possible) name misspellings.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> Should I be referencing these titles exactly as they have written it, or should I correct them?
>
>
>
Look for those authors' websites; other published work; and especially works they published all by themselves. If the lack-of-diacritics is an outlier, I'd say add them; otherwise leave them out.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/10/24
| 2,322
| 9,754
|
<issue_start>username_0: I know there's many different questions that involve having a life with a healthy work-life balance but my question is different: I'm looking for a balance between my school life(high school) and studying.
But I don't mean studying for school-related stuff. We usually have enough time to study in class and sometimes during lunch hours. I'm talking about my independent studies involving math and programming.
What's stopping me from doing so? Well, when I get home from school, I only have about 3 to 4 hours until I go to sleep so that leaves me with 3 hours at most to study when you count things like eating, bathing, etc(nothing unnecessary) which is way less than what I want. This is making me loathe school and not want me to pursue a college degree because I feel like if I had more time to do math and programming, I could accomplish much more than I am now and so school is preventing me from reaching my best self.
I have tried many things. First, I asked my math teacher to put a grade higher for math which she did(I'm in grade 9 but I do grade 10 math) but I find the classes way too easy(I dare say even easier than grade 9 math that my friends are doing) so I bring my own stuff to work on but for some reason, the teacher told me I can't be doing that even if I have done everything she's asked for and am not disturbing anyone else(I asked my teacher to put me up yet another grade but he said no because then when I reach grade 11, I won't have anything to do).
I try to do math in my other classes as well but if the teacher finds out(which, on many occasions, my teachers have), they would just get understandably mad so I need to be really careful to not get caught but that requires me to pay attention to my surroundings which decreases my focus to do math problems.
I also get tutored by a grad at my local university but we have at most two 2-hour classes per week so although it's definitely helping me, it's not that huge.
My question is, have you ever been in such a situation? If so, what did you do about it and how was the outcome?
Sorry this is so long, I tried to make it as short as possible:)
Thank you so much for your time!
P.S: I have the tag "work-life-balance" because it's the closest thing I could find to my question but if you think there's a better tag, please feel free to change it<issue_comment>username_1: (re-writing my answer after some further reflection)
It seems that right now, you have a burning passion to be studying Math and Computer Science, which is very commendable. However, my advice would be to spend some time now working on a longer-term plan for your future, and how your passion for these areas fits into it. At a basic level, I would suggest a key goal of this plan should be: 'how do I get to a position where I am doing what I am passionate about and getting paid a live-able wage to do it?'
So, your plan might be to go to a top tier college and major in CS, then go on to do a PhD, then become an academic in that area. Or, alternatively, it might be to major in that area and then go and work for a particular company in Industry that is doing work in an area that excites you, which is closely-related to those fields of study.
Then, once you have that longer-term plan, you can look more closely at the details of how can you get to that destination as quickly as possible and what the next step should be. You can also look more closely at what the *requirements* are for that next step. For example, you can (and should) reach out to some of the top 5 colleges you are planning to apply to, to see what their entrance requirements are.
You might find that they are looking for candidates that are fairly well-rounded and have shown excellence over a range of courses, not just one or two. You might also find that you would need to get a good score on an SAT-style standardized test, which might require knowledge beyond just Math and CS. If this is the case, then you know you can't afford to neglect your other courses. *However*, knowing that they are required for you to take the next step towards your longer-term goal should give you more motivation to study them, because now they are no longer pointless and irrelevant to your life.
On the other hand, you might find a college that would be willing to take you on sooner, if you are showing exceptional potential in one or two subjects, regardless of your performance in other areas. If that is the case, it might provide you with a quicker path to your destination and then you may be able to afford to slack off a bit more in those other subjects. *But*, I think it's very important that you verify this first. I.e. you need to do your research to see what options are available for your continued education and what they require.
You might also find that some colleges prefer candidates that can show evidence of extra-curricular activities, such as sports or music. If that is the case, then it might be well worth investing some of your extra time into some of those activities, as a means of helping you to reach your end goal, of being paid to do what you have a passion for. This is probably a healthy thing to do anyway, as it's good to have some balance in your life and make time for social activities and to keep yourself healthy.
So, in summary, give some serious thought to your longer-term plan of where you are going and how you are going to get there. Simply succumbing to the immediate burning desire to study Math and CS might not be the most effective way to realize your long term goals. Unfortunately, the education system has to cater for a very wide range of students and it's not always possible for it to be tailored perfectly for every individual. So, keep an eye on the longer term plan, so that even if you end up spending a year or two doing things that you would ideally not be doing, at least you know they are helping you work towards those goals. As you progress further in the education system, you will find you get more control and say over what subjects you study.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: It seems like there are three things going on here.
>
> This is making me loathe school and not want me to pursue a college degree because ... school is preventing me from reaching my best self.
>
>
>
First, it sounds like you are asking whether to give up on school. In 9th grade, I wouldn't! University is *completely* different than high school - you have a lot of freedom to choose your courses, you can select into advanced electives, and no one is micromanaging your attendance or behavior in lecture halls. It sounds like you would do much better in this environment.
While some people can and do successfully study independently, I think this would be very hard at your age. Even if you are exceptionally talented, you might more out of your abilities if someone is able to point you to new ideas and topics to work on.
>
> I asked my math teacher to put a grade higher for math which she did ... I asked my teacher to put me up yet another grade but he said no because then when I reach grade 11, I won't have anything to do.
>
>
>
There are two possibilities. First, even if you can manage academically, the school might not want to put you two grades up for social reasons (has anyone else ever done this?). For example, the teacher might be refusing to advance you because you're not mature enough or might get bullied.
Assuming that is *not* the case, then it sounds like the teacher might not know what to do with you :) Then, I see two options. Either, you need to find and propose a constructive alternative - such as investigating whether you can enroll for credits in your local community college once you're in 11th grade. Or, you need to try and transfer to a new school that will give you such alternatives.
>
> I bring my own stuff to work on but for some reason, the teacher told me I can't be doing that even if I have done everything she's asked for and am not disturbing anyone else
>
>
>
Yes, this is not a good idea. Even if you think you're being unobtrusive, it can distract your neighbors and create the impression that you are getting special treatment, or worse - that no one else needs to pay attention either. Fundamentally, try to empathize with the fact that your teacher is trying to command your and your peers' respect and maintain an engaged classroom. This also goes for your other subjects - you'll need to work hard in all your classes to show your teachers that you take them seriously.
**At the end of the day, I recommend that you propose an alternative which demonstrates that you have a well-thought out plan. You will need to have adult allies who can speak to your potential** (such as your parents, or a supportive mentor), **and you should try to make the conversation happen at a higher level** (rather than negotiating with each teacher). For example, I'd recommend setting up a meeting between your parents and your school principal to discuss your options. Rather than framing the situation as trying to "get out of" your classes, try to frame it as an effort to move forward -- to meet the requirements of your high school, and then go on to challenge yourself even further. Ask your school to help you do this and realize your potential.
I know someone who was in your situation and I realize how frustrating it can be. I hope you can find a good solution that lets you do what you're passionate about! In the worst case, try to remember that you have summers, and holidays, and weekends -- and that things will eventually get better once you graduate and get to go on to the next (more challenging) level.
Upvotes: 1 [selected_answer]
|
2019/10/24
| 524
| 2,127
|
<issue_start>username_0: Just started my second year of a 3.5 year EPSRC funded Ph.D (in engineering, and using some machine learning) in the UK. I have recently finished my confirmation review so have secured the funding for the remainder of the Ph.D.
I have a conference paper from my first year, but I have spent most of the year up and down with the ebbs and flows of research and I am not sure I can handle it mentally anymore.
I am looking at applying for data science/analyst positions. I think I am far better suited to a life in industry.
Part of me thinks I should just try and grind it out and finish (maybe this is second year blues?), but part of me also just wants to get out and start progressing with my career (I already have a Masters degree).
At what stage would you consider leaving a PhD in order to pursue an industry career?<issue_comment>username_1: The standard advice given on the Workplace StackExchange site is “don’t quit your job until you get an offer from another employer”. I think that would also apply to your case: don’t quit your PhD until you’ve gotten a job offer from someone in industry. You may or may not regret quitting your PhD for a job in industry, but you’ll definitely regret quitting your PhD and then *failing* to find a job in industry!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: "you think" you'd be happy working might not be enough, depend on the situation I suggest you to take a leave of absence (usually universities in the UK allow this) for 6-12 months, and get a job so you know for sure what ticks for you, then decide whether to return to your program or keep the industry position. Don't feel guilty for taking options that are readily available.
I had similar experience and this, to go or to stay, might be the hardest question I had to answer myself for the longest time. In the end I decided to stick it out, but I also have a close friend who's having the time of their live ditching their PhD 2 years in. You just need to work out the best approach for your situation, and the best way to do it is from a little bit of distance.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/10/25
| 932
| 3,962
|
<issue_start>username_0: I (a grad student) first-authored a paper with my ex-PI and some colleagues. The paper was rejected from a journal. Meanwhile, this ex-PI also bullied me, did something else that was hurtful, and did not provide helpful feedback on the paper. The ex-PI is now asking if I want to re-submit. Can I politely refuse? If so, how?<issue_comment>username_1: They’re an ex-PI and one that you’ve had negative experiences with. Still, networking and connections, even if faint, can come back and be helpful directly or indirectly. Diplomacy is key. Give your appreciation for their interest in collaborating, but decline, citing other obligations, time commitments, etc.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If you were happy for the work to be resubmitted more or less as it is but didn't want to spend time/energy doing so, you could ask one of your colleagues to be corresponding author (citing other obligations as in cralr's answer). If you would need to make substantial changes to the work to have it published (if reviewers' comments from the rejecting journal were quite extensive, for instance) that might be more complicated, but another author might be willing to coordinate these changes.
Either way, you'd be well within your rights to say that unfortunately you don't have the time to do anything with this paper. No reasonable person would take offence to this, but that's predicated on the ex-PI being reasonable. An unethical PI might simply take your name off and resubmit elsewhere - you may be able to take this up with the administration of your institution, but it could be a difficult fight.
Sorry you've had what sounds like a really difficult experience.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: From your question, it seems that you are not keen on resubmitting the paper. If that is the case, you have every right to refuse. However, make sure that your response is polite but firm. You need not give any reasons or excuses. Just thank him for the request, and say that unfortunately, you are not interested in resubmitting the paper at the moment.
Having said that, however, given your past experience with your ex-PI, I would suggest you reconsider your decision. For all you know, if you refuse to resubmit, your ex-PI might just go ahead and publish the paper without you. While I can understand your feelings, refusing to resubmit would just give him another opportunity to get one over you. If you resubmit the paper, at least you are sure that you will get credit for your work (and an additional publication in your CV). However, make sure that your communication with him/her is polite but firm at all times.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: It's extremely difficult to understand your special situation with your adviser. As always, there are at least two sides to every such story, and you're telling us your side of it.
Getting papers through is an important academic goal for PI's, and many uncomfortable situations occur during the process.
I recommend thinking about this in the context of your career aspirations, and not necessarily how pleasant the experience has been so far (though that should certainly factor in). Do you have the time to resubmit, or is your current work demanding all your time? Can you agree on a timetable with the ex-PI?
The way I see your situation from your terse description, it looks like there is an opportunity to recover from an unpleasant situation. You can get a first-authored paper, and maybe patch up a relationship with your ex-PI. If this is important to you, you should consider it, and if it isn't, you should consider telling the PI you're not interested. Since the PI is obviously interested in pursuing this, and you've already submitted once, you might tell them you'd be happy to cede first authorship if they want to take it to the finish line, and you will review all manuscripts promptly, but you have no time for major effort.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/10/25
| 798
| 3,262
|
<issue_start>username_0: My PhD adviser and I decided to publish in Physical Review Letters. After nearly finishing the manuscript, he realized the publication cost was $800 and now instead wants to publish in a significantly worse journal that also is not appropriate for the work (Journal of Lightwave Technology) because the publication cost is free. In response, I informed him (for the first time, coincidentally) that I need to TA (as a degree requirement) in January, which will bring in about $25k for us. It seems absurd to me to publish in a worse and inappropriate journal to save money and it seems unethical to be unwilling to kick back $800 of this $25k I’ll be getting. I think he knows that he has the power to take the $25k and save the $800 regardless, though so he doesn’t care. Is he being unethical here?<issue_comment>username_1: Is your supervisor breaking any sort of accepted ethical code within academia? No, they are not. They are not engaging in academic dishonesty, plagiarism, bullying, or abuse of any kind. While "what is ethical" is often a matter of opinion, I would guess there are few people who could find any sort of violation of ethics in your supervisor's behaviour.
Indeed, your supervisor is acting like a perfectly normal co-author and is communicating to you their requirements for a publication venue for their work. Perhaps, as you suspect, your supervisor simply does not want to spend the money. Perhaps, as a commenter has suggested, your supervisor is taking their own small 'ethical' stand against the absurd and insulting fee required for publishing in your preferred journal (in my field only sham predatory journals charge for publication). It doesn't matter, really, what their reason is, your co-author will not agree to publish in the journal you want to publish in, which is well within their rights, so you need to publish it elsewhere or dissolve the writing partnership. If you don't like the suggested replacement journal, find another journal and suggest it.
Admittedly I am not in the USA, but I am unclear on how $25k comes to your supervisor for your teaching. Is this because the Uni has to, essentially, "buy out" the time spent in the lab? If that is the case, the $25k is meant to offset the work you would be doing and may be earmarked specifically and only for salary costs. I'm having trouble coming up with a scenario where you being a TA somehow results in $25k for your supervisor to do whatever they want with. Maybe I am misunderstanding something.
All told, saying that your supervisor is behaving unethically is a serious allegation indeed. It is not one to be made lightly, certainly not about minor disagreements with no clear ethical violation. Doing so risks totally souring your relationship with the person who you depend on for co-authorship, support, and recommendations.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> My PhD adviser...realized the publication cost was $800 [for Physical Review Letters] and now instead wants to publish in a significantly worse journal...because the publication cost is free.
>
>
>
"Physical Review Letters is perfectly OK with publishing their papers for free," source: <https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/139304/22768>.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/10/25
| 718
| 2,988
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have two manuscripts that I am ready to submit in two different journals.
In the first manuscript, I have developed two models to be used for my research. Both of them are new and are an upgrade to the currently used models.
In the second manuscript, I have used one of the models developed in the first manuscript and have carried out an elaborate study. However, I am unsure on how to cite the first manuscript in the second.
Can I cite a submitted manuscript as "under review" in another manuscript? What's the correct procedure for citing under review works?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes. Under review or "in review" are normal and I have used them myself when publishing several papers near simultaneously. (They were separate enough, different chemistries, that I thought made sense to cut into separate articles. But, for someone interested in the general area, they likely would want the citation.) It is to be understood that "under review" does not mean it will EVER get published (but likely will). You are doing the best you can, at the time. If the paper never makes it out or shifts to another journal, so be it.
You may also see citations that say "in press" (meaning accepted, but you are lacking the issue and page numbers). I have even used "in preparation for" and listed the journal I planned to, and did submit to. And I've even used "unpublished" for work that never saw the light of day (e.g. another worker's parallel chemistry study that was pretty finished, yet shelved as uninteresting...but was relevant to a chemistry to chemistry discussion.)\*
The key thing is that you are not trying to get away with anything nefarious. You are simply doing your best to give citations to other work. And that will include some not-yet archived research. You just do the best you can, at the time you submit.
[Obviously if you are claiming some super insight and your current paper is fundamentally dependent on the other work, the editor/reviewer may cavitate and reject. But if you are just doing good stuff and other work is comparative, not dependent, people will appreciate the citation, not resent it.]
\*Even this still has a use. For one, a simple (non-controversial) insight may be shared, that is scientifically relevant. In addition, if anyone ever really cares, they might still track down the author. <NAME>; structure of unimportant chemical; 1989; Random Federal Agency; unpublished.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I would use a preprint server, such as [arXiv](https://www.arxiv.org) and [bioRxiv](https://biorxiv.org), and then cite the preprint version of the paper. In my opinion, there is no purpose in citing a paper that is not available anywhere.
You cannot be sure in which journal your article will be published nor if after revision it will remain with the same title you referenced. Furthermore, after the paper is published, journals do not accept editions to correct references.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/10/25
| 387
| 1,661
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student now and i am willing to publish my masters degree research work, but the supervisor is refusing to publish for many reasons concerned him not the quality of my research.
There is no other way just to remove his name.
the question can i be a corresponding author ?
Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: There's nothing stopping you being the corresponding author on a submitted paper - I was several times during my PhD. But you can't submit a paper with your supervisor as a co-author without his agreement.
In general, it's worth listening to your supervisor. If he doesn't think the work should be submitted for publication there's probably a reason why. You don't specify what reason he's given you - that might be helpful to people trying to answer your question.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If the work is yours and yours alone then you can do with it what you like.
However, a better question might be whether it would be wise to cut out your advisor. If you want to build a future for yourself in academia you should try to build bridges to your advisor, not blow them up. This is a political issue, not necessarily one of fairness.
But, your advisor should have more experience in these things than you do, so their opinion might actually be valid.
Also, if your work isn't yours alone, but was done in concert with others, including your advisor, then you actually *need* to come to a joint understanding in order to publish it without breaking ethical norms.
The answer to *can* I do this and *should* I do this aren't necessarily the same. Take a long view before you decide.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/10/25
| 718
| 3,014
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am applying for faculty positions in the US this year (in computer science).
Ideally, I would want to attend the SODA conference (January 5th-8th) and was wondering if it is safe to assume that on-site interviews are likely to start at a later date.
The reason why I ask is that the early-registration deadline ends December 2nd, probably before I'll know which (or how many) universities would want to interview me.<issue_comment>username_1: The conference window is pretty small. I'm not sure why you'd be concerned. You should get, from any reasonable institution, some leeway in scheduling an interview. I think that is especially true in a case like this. Even more so if you were presenting, though you don't indicate that you are.
And it might even turn out that some institutions will also have faculty at the conference, making for an additional opportunity.
And if you get an especially hopeful response to your application there is no reason you can't cancel the attendance at the conference, assuming you are *not* presenting.
But, I'll also note that many US colleges are on break during that period and so are unlikely to be holding interviews then. Not impossible, but less likely than during the coming term.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: First, you should be aware that on-campus CS faculty interviews have *already* started. Yes, yes, I know that even the earliest application deadlines are still several weeks away, but at least in some departments (like mine), stellar candidates can be (and have been) invited to interview well before the application deadline.
That said, you should not worry at all about interviews colliding with SODA, for two reasons. First, as username_1 says, most North American universities are on winter break that week; holding a faculty interview when none of the faculty are in the building, and many are out of town, would be pointless.
But more importantly, if a department invites you to interview for a faculty position, they will work with you to find a date when you are available to travel. No sensible (North American) department is going to *both* devote the time and money and energy to fly you out for an interview *and* insist that the interview happen on one specific date. If someone does suggest an interview on January 7, you can quite reasonably respond that you are attending an important conference that week, and ask for a different interview date. If they really want you, they'll accommodate your schedule.
Remember that departments want their faculty to succeed; in particular, they *want* their faculty to be visibly active within their research communities. The fact that you are attending SODA works in your favor, even *if* it makes scheduling slightly more complicated.
tl;dr: Yes, it's safe to register for SODA.
[I've served on faculty recruiting committees for at least 15 of the last 20 years. I've also attended SODA every year since 1994. See you there!]
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2019/10/25
| 765
| 3,297
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am applying for a PhD in neuroscience and one of the requirements on the application is to write a supplemental essay about a time you experienced failure. I wrote an essay about finding a job after undergrad and the times I was rejected and what I learned to ultimately land a job after several rejections. I want to conclude the essay by writing a sentence or two about how the job hunting experience will prepare me for some responsibilities during my PhD. I'm having trouble relating the skills I learned while job hunting (tailoring applications, organizing application materials, networking, interviewing etc.) to what is done during a PhD. Can anyone suggest what I can connect this to? Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: The conference window is pretty small. I'm not sure why you'd be concerned. You should get, from any reasonable institution, some leeway in scheduling an interview. I think that is especially true in a case like this. Even more so if you were presenting, though you don't indicate that you are.
And it might even turn out that some institutions will also have faculty at the conference, making for an additional opportunity.
And if you get an especially hopeful response to your application there is no reason you can't cancel the attendance at the conference, assuming you are *not* presenting.
But, I'll also note that many US colleges are on break during that period and so are unlikely to be holding interviews then. Not impossible, but less likely than during the coming term.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: First, you should be aware that on-campus CS faculty interviews have *already* started. Yes, yes, I know that even the earliest application deadlines are still several weeks away, but at least in some departments (like mine), stellar candidates can be (and have been) invited to interview well before the application deadline.
That said, you should not worry at all about interviews colliding with SODA, for two reasons. First, as username_1 says, most North American universities are on winter break that week; holding a faculty interview when none of the faculty are in the building, and many are out of town, would be pointless.
But more importantly, if a department invites you to interview for a faculty position, they will work with you to find a date when you are available to travel. No sensible (North American) department is going to *both* devote the time and money and energy to fly you out for an interview *and* insist that the interview happen on one specific date. If someone does suggest an interview on January 7, you can quite reasonably respond that you are attending an important conference that week, and ask for a different interview date. If they really want you, they'll accommodate your schedule.
Remember that departments want their faculty to succeed; in particular, they *want* their faculty to be visibly active within their research communities. The fact that you are attending SODA works in your favor, even *if* it makes scheduling slightly more complicated.
tl;dr: Yes, it's safe to register for SODA.
[I've served on faculty recruiting committees for at least 15 of the last 20 years. I've also attended SODA every year since 1994. See you there!]
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2019/10/25
| 721
| 3,129
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am writing a publication-based PhD thesis, and the **thesis will not be publicly accessible once has been finished** due to classified data included. The thesis is not the traditional sandwiched thesis, it is supposed to be a commentary on my own publications.
I will use three papers in my thesis, two have been published in journals and another one is still under review. I have obtained permission to **reuse** the content of the two published papers for my thesis. I have two questions:
1. Dose reuse mean that I can use exactly the same words? like I can copy and paste the content of the two published papers? or do I need to rephrase the content?
2. The third paper has not been published yet. If I use the data in my thesis, can I still publish it in a journal? if so, can I copy and paste the same content?<issue_comment>username_1: Since you have the publisher's permission to use the words of the original you can *quote* freely. But make sure that it is a quote and that you actually cite the original.
Simply reusing the words without quoting will confuse any future reader. You avoid self-plagiarism by quoting the work as you would any other. You avoid copyright infringement by getting permission as you have done. You can quote longer passages from the papers than would normally be the case due to not having copyright issues. Alternatively you can rephrase and cite if you like, but don't avoid the citation. That is what lets a reader connect, properly, to the original work as is necessary for future research.
As to the third paper might be a bit different. If your thesis is not published and that paper is based on what is in the thesis, rather than the other way round, then the third "paper" that forms a part of the theses is really just a draft of any future paper and so you would normally be free to use it as you like. But your advisor could give you the best interpretation of that. The only issue I see is that while you don't *intend* to publish the thesis, things might change in the future. If that is a concern, then you could quote and cite just as in the other papers, avoiding self-plagiarism. You currently hold copyright yourself so you have no issues with that. But you are probably about to give up copyright since it is under review. So quote and cite seems the better path.
One worry I have is your use of the term *classified data*. If the work was done for a client, they may have some claims to the data and what is done with it that you will have to deal with.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: **When compiling a dissertation, copying parts or entire sections from published papers is perfectly fine and standard behaviour.**
If a section is (mostly) identical with a published paper, it should say so clearly at the start. If the paper is submitted, but not yet published, you could either just treat it as published, and cite the submitted version; or you could use the text in the dissertation without further comment, and then add a note to the article that it is based on Section X of the dissertation.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2019/10/25
| 465
| 1,902
|
<issue_start>username_0: Suppose, a research school in the USA offers a [Joint/Dual (Education + English) PhD](https://jpee.lsa.umich.edu/) program. That university has an [acceptance rate of 27%](https://www.collegesimply.com/colleges/michigan/university-of-michigan-ann-arbor/admission/).
Understandably, someone with either an MA in Education or MA in English can apply for that program.
Do having 2 masters (MA in Ed + MA in English) increase the chance of getting acceptance in that joint PhD program for the student?<issue_comment>username_1: It will of course depend on the specific school.
However, let us think logically: People are not admitted randomly. Most likely, somebody estimates who has the best chances to succeed in the program. So, all other thongs (recomendation letters, grades, motivation etc.) being equal, it is likely that those people have an advantage in getting admitted.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: One of the answers here emphasizes that all else equal, the extra prep is better. I understand this rationale but think you may actually getting the wrong idea from it.
Of course all else is not equal. And at the end of the day Ph.D. programs are WAY more interested in talent than experience. So emphasizing doing extra time in the salt mines to make up for past issues (and we get MANY questions down that line of thinking) is probably not an optimal strategy.
This is a key insight you need to consider. Given the massive overproduction of advanced degrees (and the miserable job possibilities because of supply and demand), you really should not enter this "tournament" unless you have confidence that you are well above average. If you need to be doing extra degrees to even get into the tournament? Bad sign.
I realize this answer is both contrary and discouraging. But I would at least consider the alternate insight.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2019/10/26
| 1,593
| 7,132
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a physics Master's student. I have good grades, with CGPA above 9(/10)(However, all courses in my university are graded on a curve so the actual marks are significantly lower than 90%). This has been my marks throughout my undergraduate and graduate courses and I was happy because this was above average. Also, my summer projects in UG were usually computational and any difficulty I had in theoretical aspects I attributed it to my inexperience in advanced Physics.
However, recently I have started to work on pure theoretical project and while reading for the project I realized that I consistently miss some details from each topic. I understand the general idea, can re-derive most of the equations(with some effort) however when I discuss things with my professor or when I read further topics I realize that I have missed certain key-details. This is exactly similar to the case of me missing a few key questions in my exams and getting that 9 grade point instead of 10(or at-least I think so). I was not worried about this before but now I realize that there is some flaw in the way I study (but I do not know what).
Since I want to apply for Physics PhD I realized that I will need to have solid concepts and it would be best to correct my mistakes but I do not know how or even what could be the reason for my imperfect understanding.
Any direct suggestion would help or even certain general guidelines on what I can do.
**Things I've tried recently -**
1) I've started to written down almost everything I read. This is slightly laborious but is certainly helping. It also helps me to gloss over the things I read previously when I come back the next day.
2) I completely avoid smartphone when I'm library/study room so that I won't get distracted. Not sure if it helps me solve the above problem but certainly helps me study better in general.
3) I've tried to read the topics from several sources. The books I am reading is somewhat like a collection of research papers and hence does not have a exercises. So I though reading from various sources might help get better ideas but it's not really helping because most other sources are too high level as an introductory text. But this will probably help me in cases where it's practical to do this.
4) Somewhat similar to point (1)- I am trying reread, whenever I can, what I've done until that point. But not sure how much this will help me in filling the gaps.<issue_comment>username_1: Related to your first point, but instead of just writing down whatever you read, you could summarize the material and write down the important points. You could also write them in the form of a blog post (not necessarily public), where you explain the key ideas to the reader. Combining multiple sources (point 3) would be even better -- you might end up creating a valuable resource that helps others too.
This should help in evaluating your understanding and finding gaps, if any, after which you could re-read the relevant parts. It may particularly help by forcing you to explain and think over any inadvertent jumps in reasoning you might have made (something that appears deceptively obvious may not be so, for example). In addition to all this, getting occasional feedback from someone familiar with the subject area would also be useful.
However, sometimes gaps in understanding might be inevitable, if the explanation in the paper is truly ambiguous. In such a scenario, after making an initial effort, you could discuss with senior colleagues or contact the authors directly.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I will give a separate answer for textbooks and for scholarly papers. The difference is that textbooks normally come with exercises to help solidify the understanding of the material.
For a scholarly work in a technical field, however, a proven method is to read the paper three times, but with a different focus each time.
The first reading is something like a deep skim. You are looking for an overall, not a detailed, understanding at that point. Take notes as you go, but don't just try to copy things. The notes should capture the main points of the paper. What was the methodology, what are the main conclusions. But also take notes about what you don't get from this reading.
Wait bit, a day or so, before the next reading so that the ideas have a chance to settle in your mind.
The second reading is deep. Here you are trying to follow the arguments of the paper in detail. Use the notes from the first reading to guide you. Think about how the paper extends the field. Think about what it does that is new and interesting. Take notes also. The notes include those things you don't yet understand. Different colored note cards are very useful for different kinds of notes.
The third reading, again after a short wait, is to solidify the second, if needed, but also to look for ways that the paper can be extended. What future research does the paper suggest, explicitly or implicitly. Again, refer to your older notes and take new ones.
Then, after the third reading, summarize your notes. What is most interesting about the paper? What is incorrect in it? What are the important things to retain?
Note that not every paper requires this deep understanding, but those that relate to your own research probably do.
For textbooks, you can do the above, but it may not be necessary for two reasons. First, a scholarly paper is directed at a small group of specialists and you may not yet have the skill and experience to understand it quickly, but the textbook is supposed to be written for people still learning. So, it should be more accessible, using more complete arguments, say. But you can also, intersperse your readings with the exercises. Ideally you should be able to do every exercise in the book. (There are exceptions, in which research problems are hidden in the "exercises", but these are rare.) If you don't have an obvious solution to an exercise, seek feedback on your attempt. Even if you don't have time to do every exercise, you should read them. Think about how you would attack that exercise.
Time is obviously an issue if you adopt/adapt this method. One way to handle that is to make sure that you don't waste time, not that you spend longer hours. If you take notes on notecards and paper then you aren't tied to your desk. If you have periods of inactivity, say on a long commute by bus, make sure that you always have a copy of the current paper and a few note cards. Even if there are only a few moments, waiting in a line to buy coffee, you can review your note cards and jot down a few ideas if they come.
---
There is a learning theory behind all this. Deep learning requires reinforcement. You don't "learn" something by reading or seeing it once. Feedback from exercises is also an important element, but harder to get for papers. One way to do that is to read a paper as part of a study group and have a discussion after, say, the second reading. Discussions with the professor for students can also work if it is available.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2019/10/26
| 857
| 3,613
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've submitted a short paper to a well-known cs journal. It got rejected after **two years** with the below one para explanation. While I admit that the submission was not strong, I feel cheated because of waiting for two years for this explanation (no full report was made).
*In the paper, the author shows that NP-completeness for [...].
The proofs are very basic and standard. The results are reasonable, so it may be acceptable if this paper was written in 1990s. However, as far as I
know, such a kind of paper is obsolete nowadays. Since 2000s, among
such papers, few papers are acceptable for [...] only when there are
some extra value to be published. For example, they solve big open
question, or the NP-completeness has very important influence to the
other research. From this viewpoint, this paper is not strong enough
for the recent [...]. So my recommendation is reject.*
>
> What shall I do? I think this situation is unacceptable, let me know if you disagree.
>
>
>
I've already complained of course to the editor upon receipt of the report, but I got no answer.
ps. Btw, imo the given journal still publishes NP-completeness proofs regularly, that's why I've chosen it for my result.<issue_comment>username_1: You seem to mix two different aspects: Your (understandable) disappointment about the response and the long time it took to get the response.
You cannot really complain about the response itself because it generally seems to be rational and the reason for the rejection is not the long time it took. Right now you can only try to use the helpful aspects in the response to improve your manuscript.
On the other hand, you should complain about the time it took. Two years is indeed inacceptable. If you will get no reply, there is very little you can do, I'm afraid. It is probably best to look for an alternative journal.
My advice for the future: Do not submit to the journal again, but count it as an important experience: next time, you could ask in regular intervals (not too short or long, let's say every three months), and also give the process a maximum timeframe.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: My guess is the manuscript spent two years going from one potential reviewer to the next, as each sat on it a while then finally turned the review request down. There may not be much you can learn from this except that perhaps you can try harder to make the paper clearer to read so reviewers won't be as reluctant to take a look. Perhaps break things up and put the really dense stuff in appendices. Come up with a way to make a figure to describe the idea if possible.
As for the review, it looks like the dreaded "significance" criticism. I.e. they find the results to be correct, novel, and relevant, but not (in their personal opinion) sufficiently important for publication. Of course every researcher likes to think this about most every other researcher. E.g. my research direction will change the world, while others' are just an over-hyped rehashing of old ideas. It is only a single data point so hard to be sure how commen the reviewers opinion would be regarding your result. But what you can do is try harder to "market" the result in the abstract and intro, ideally with citations supporting your claims of significance. Then the next reviewer has to basically argue directly against your citations, rather than just handing this stock criticism out.
At this point though, I'd say just make a quick pass to address the issue of significance a bit more, then move on to a new journal to get a second opinion.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/10/26
| 1,453
| 6,213
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a doctoral student in the engineering area in Europe, Belgium. I applied for the project in which I am in April and was accepted. I also had other offers from England.
I liked the subject and refused the other offers, also because of the higher salary and the beautiful city where the university is located.
I started in early September. I have always been a very dedicated student and a passionate and curious person, but now I go to work only because I have to and sometimes I feel very depressed and nervous, and these are the reasons why:
1. The supervisor is a good person. He looks good, is very calm, but has shown a lack of knowledge in the field where I am. She is a strong researcher, but in the field in which she graduated (which is also the field of my degree)
2. It is a small department with a very small laboratory. Everyone is on the paper of others and I don't think it's because they have made a great contribution to the work. I'm like a family and even if I enjoy the relaxed atmosphere, I don't feel "proud" of where I am;
3. When I applied, they told me that I had to do some tests in a very interesting laboratory abroad. These tests are important for having very precise data (experimental data should be compared with numerical work) and they also told me that I had to integrate a technique into a production process. I discovered the first week that people using the machine are in a very early stage, they have to learn to use the machine and this was not emphasized during my interview. Furthermore, the test will probably not be performed abroad. This has negatively affected the way I perceive them. I feel that they have selled the position without being totally honest with me;
4. I come from another field. I'm not really understanding most of the things they say and I doubt I am the right candidate for this position. I'm starting to think I just hired "because" I have a strong resume. To be more precise, I am a civil engineer and the field of my doctorate is more on material / mechanical engineering.
5. I can't change my topic: my project is part of a bigger one. This is another important reason why I wanted to go to this university. I liked not being alone on an island, but I liked the spirit of collaboration and the link with the industries. But I can't really follow them when they talk, they speak another language for me.
What do you think of this situation? I have been alone for two months.
My feelings are very bad and I don't know how to talk to my supervisor. I often think to quit and to find onother position, but I feel that is very hard in my position now. I know that i am unhappy and if I had another possibility, I would quit.<issue_comment>username_1: Consider forming a small study group with a few of the other students with whom you feel at least a bit of comfort. It may well be that others feel as you do, and a group in which to discuss issues, both technical and otherwise, can be good fro all of you. Three or four people is enough. If it is too big it will be less useful. It can also become a long term collaborative relationship.
Some students thrive under minimal supervision, being able to develop their own ideas. But others, most I think, require some guidance from their advisor or or other, senior, members of the lab or the faculty. Many require a lot of guidance, especially at the start. In the US, a doctoral degree normally starts with a lot of coursework, giving you the opportunity to meet faculty and build relationships. But, I think that anywhere, it is a lot to expect that a graduate student is already so well formed that no guidance or other specialized instruction is needed.
I don't think that you are in a hopeless situation, but you will need a plan for focusing your knowledge on the task at hand and acquiring skills and knowledge that you will need for success. Your lab-mates may be able to help you with this or at least give advice about the kinds of things that it would be helpful for you to know. Ideally your advisor should supply this, but not all are willing to do that, being more focused on the task at hand than on the students making it possible.
Again, I suggest that you treat this partly as a social question. "How do I get more connected to those in my lab for mutual benefit?" There is more to it than that, of course, since you come from a different field, but it might make it easier in the long run. A senior member of the lab, a student close to finishing, might be an especially valuable resource - especially if a co-advisor is not possible.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I wish I could offer you more here, but the only way forward is for you to talk to your supervisor about all of this. That is what she is there for. Until you have spoken her about how you are feeling you don't know what your options truly are.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I had a supervisor who didn't know my field. It was terrible. She didn't want to lose control of the topic and so kept me in areas within her reach, which were never enough for the field. I tried to get a second supervisor, but for the same reason, she didn't accepted it. It was a farce fine relationship, but I put up with it. I fully understand if someone else would wanted to quit. In the end, I stayed because (i) problems started to arise well into the second year, (ii) I realised it was my fault in the first place, and (iii) there were other benefits of the place.
Another friend had the same problem than me, but he managed to get a second supervisor, which ended up being the main one, allowing him to do a good thesis. I've known other people whose supervisor was helpless and absent, so was like having no supervision.
I don't offer a direct solution, but only as a reflection for you. Without fully understanding your case, I would say that, if you are just starting, and there is nothing else there for you, I would quit. You will have a bad time and might even jeopardise your whole academic career (e.g. by making you hate the topic). In the end, there is generally just one chance to do a PhD (in a given field) so it has to be good. My limited opinion.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/10/26
| 3,680
| 16,102
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been working on a PhD for over 6 years, and in that time have published 5 (conference) papers, each of which I intend to convert to journal articles after my PhD. My supervisor has been insisting that I do some experiments which have turned out to be considerably more challenging than either of us expected. Our funding has run out, so I recently asked my supervisor if it would be okay to scrap the experiments and defend what I have done so far at the end of the year. Based on the volume and quality of my work, I think any objective person would feel that I have done more than enough for a PhD. (Indeed, I've had a professor who clearly has read my work ask me out of the blue at a conference why I haven't graduated yet, as he thinks I've done way more than is typical for a PhD.)
My supervisor's reaction was particularly bad: He accused me of reneging on a promise, suggested that I've been conning him for years, etc. I agree completely with him that the experiments would be nice to have, but I disagree that they are essential, and I particularly disagree that they are worth going into debt over. I think we could get a good paper detailing what we've done so far and what the challenges have been. Unfortunately that option was unacceptable to him too.
**Question:** Any attempt to discuss this further with my supervisor goes nowhere. What are my options at this point? I told him that in the absence of funding I will be dropping out at the end of the semester. He said that is a waste, which I agree with, but ultimately I don't want to continue what I'm now viewing as abuse.
---
**Update, one month later.** Taking the advice I received here and elsewhere, I decided to complete one additional set of experiments and then speak with my supervisor again. These experiments' results did not solve all our problems, though they did clarify some things. We then had a discussion about what he expects me to do to graduate, and again, he made clear that he doesn't care about what I did previously and only wants the new experiments and some computer simulations of the experiments. I tried to justify what I did previously as necessary to do the new experiments correctly, but he wasn't convinced.
Some suggested that my situation would be different if I had journal publications. So, I asked if submitting my previous work to journals soon would make a difference. Surprisingly, he said yes, it would. So, we agreed that I would submit my previous work to journals before the end of the semester, and write up a chapter in my dissertation on the completed experiments. I will switch to a part-time position at the end of the year, move to a cheaper location, get a job, and return late in the spring semester to defend. In that time I should have reviews for some of the journal articles, which is sufficient for my supervisor.
**Update, 6 months later.** After a delay due to COVID, I successfully defended this summer, and am working a full-time (non-research) job.
I submitted two papers to a journal late last year, both of which were accepted well in advance of my defense. My supervisor seemed skeptical of the papers' acceptance before they appeared online. I suspect that they believed both would be soundly rejected, but the reviews were fine. The most substantial points were fixed by rewriting parts of the papers to improve clarity. My dissertation was quickly finished. As it turned out, we agreed to reduce the chapter on the experiments to an appendix.
My defense was fine overall. At this point, I believe the problems with my supervisor stem mostly from differences in research philosophy. I added a brief description of my philosophy to my dissertation; I think this helped my supervisor understand my choices better.<issue_comment>username_1: This is a really hard problem that is hard to give advice for. If the advice is bad, you will suffer, not the person giving the advice. You know the personalities better than we do. But, as an outsider, it seems like you are being abused. You are giving, but getting little in return at this point.
Fighting with an advisor is seldom a wise choice. But quitting after five years with good productivity seems equally terrible, maybe worse.
For your consideration only, let me suggest a possibility. Work with the graduate advisor on a plan to get you out the door properly. Tell them that you are feeling abused and defeated unjustly and you need to graduate. It is at least partly the responsibility of the institution to assure that you have a clear path. Take their advice to stay an extra semester, but put them on notice that you need funding, either from them or from a proper job elsewhere. Other professors in the department might also be able to apply some pressure if they are approached properly. They can prevail with your advisor even when you can't. Advisors need the support of their peers, generally, and need to be seen as fair in dealing with students. But don't try any of this if your reading of the personalities suggests it would be counterproductive. But you have a right to insist on a fair path and a right to insist that your advisor and the graduate director do their jobs properly.
If you trust that outside professor enough to ask for a letter applying some pressure on the graduate director, it might be useful (or not, depending, again, on personalities). Most especially if they would consider hiring you.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This is way out field but you might want to consider moving to the other professor if he will consider allowing you to defend your thesis with him...
Had a friend who changed supervisors but was not easy...
Will definitely get that supervisor noticed in their department though...
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: You simply aren't going to get a PhD without the signatures of your committee. And the rest of your committee will generally give a lot of weight to your advisor's opinion when they decide to sign off or not.
Of course if you quit now both you and your advisor will lose out. As will the department and school because they all invested resources in you and did not get a successful graduate out of it. Plus you have various rights to make a big fight for them via appeals to the administration. All of this gives you some leverage to negotiate what would be acceptable to finish. As with every negotiation, it often starts from what seems like an impossible point, but it's very often possible to find some alternative or some middle point that can work. If experiments are off the table for you, what else *can* you do to satisfy them? Talk to the entire committee and find out. You could even do this formally at a qualifying exam if you must. But if your advisor is not yet satisfied, you really should offer something more.
If you are not being funded then the last thing you should do is stick around as a full-time student paying out of pocket to hang out in a lab and be someone's research assistant. Your school may have the option of being part-time (which still costs you, but less at least), or taking a leave, where you can work while finishing up. Ideally you should take the qualifying exam, where you basically propose what your final thesis will entail, and then advance to ABD status. Then you can finish up the final agreed-upon tasks on your own time. At least you aren't going into to debt to do it.
As for your plan of publishing journal articles, I can almost guarantee you that you will come across reviewers just as demanding as you advisor. Major revisions could easily entail months of further experiments in the lab, for each paper. You really need to start one or more of them in the process and learn this. It's something you should already be all-too familiar with before you earn a PhD, frankly.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Did you never write a research plan before starting your PhD with milestones/goals you want to pursue and to which you could now refer to as being fulfilled? Or a talk you gave outlining those which was seen by your advisor and another professor. Both is pretty much mandatory at my university to not end in the situation you describe and being dependent on a single advisor with own interests suggesting new experiments at the end of your PhD. It also allows a third person which I had choose (another professor from different chair) to be mediator in that case of advisor and student disagreeing. What experiments and measurements you want to do should have been outlined between both of you at the beginninig.
What I don't understand and cannot judge is your conversion of conference to journal papers. Does a conference paper count as much as talk or a poster in your field, is there a serious review by 2-3 reviewers? In my field having no journal articles apart from talks/posters given at conferences or conference papers that are part of a special issue of a renowned journal would be a strong point that you are not ready to finish PhD.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: My advice is to write your thesis up and submit it to the committee. If you are going to have an argument about whether your work is sufficient, it will go better for you if you can show that everything is written up. Maybe you still don't win. But the time is not wasted. And it is too loosey goosey to argue about "done enough" when you're not looking at a document.
Personally I think 6 years, several papers is enough. And this guy trying to drive extra experiments, that aren't working, sans funding, in year 6 is being unreasonable.
Write it all up. Dump it on the committee. Involve the department chairman and the grad school. You may still have problems. But I bet if you show some spine, you end up doing none or at least "less" extra experiments.
Good luck.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: I recall something like this happening with a fellow graduate student in my dept. The advisor kept wanting more. Just because the advisor wants more doesn't mean the advisor's position is reasonable. The student went to another member of the thesis committee for help, and was able to negotiate a resolution that led to graduation.
My advice would be to first bolster your position with data. Specifically, you should get a list of all the students who obtained PhD's from your department within the past few years and, for each of them, determine their publication list at graduation (the former can be obtained either directly from the graduate office, or from the department's commencement announcements; for the latter, use your choice of search engine, e.g. Google Scholar).
This info. should be subdivided into logical categories (first-authored conference papers, co-authored conference papers, first-authored papers in peer-reviewed journals, co-authored papers in peer-reviewed journals, etc.). Make a spreadsheet. Then determine if you are indeed being held to a different standard than is typical for your department. If you are, then go to your graduate advisor, show this, and then state, objectively and without rancor, that you have met the standards for your department.
This is a much stronger argument than simply arguing that you should be allowed to graduate. If you can demonstrate that the PI is forcing you meet standards significantly different than is typical, that strongly bolsters your position.
Alternately, you may be surprised to find that your fellow grad students typically do have at least a couple of first-authored papers in peer-reviewed journals before they graduate (that was typical in my department), in which case you haven't met the typical standards for your department. Only the data will tell you this.
Also, I would politely tell your PI that you want to resolve this is a civil manner, and that his ad hominem attacks are unacceptable. If he balks, the best response to his accusation that you are "reneging on a promise,...been conning him for years, etc." would be to say: "You would not like it if I made the accusation that you've been acting in bad faith, i.e., that you are keeping me here even though you know I've met the requirements for graduation, and simply want to benefit at my expense. So please don't accuse me of bad faith either."
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: Unfortunately, situations like this are best resolved before they reach this stage.
I think your path forward, given that you're already in this situation, is to speak with, in this order,
1. Your committee
2. the graduate program leadership in your department
3. your department chair
4. the graduate program leadership in your school
5. a university problem solver, like an ombudsman
Work through one at a time, until you can come up with a mutually agreeable solution with your adviser. Having you actually pay or live unstipended to continue your degree is NOT a mutually agreeable solution. If your adviser is in a hole, it is the department's place to dig him or her out of it -- not yours! The department should be looking for resources to fund you.
For the record, the right way to not get into such issues is to form and use a graduate student committee as early as you can. One of the goals of the first meeting is to determine how often the committee should meet. As you get closer to finishing, an important milestone for the committee is to work with you to figure out what you need to do to finish. There is no way this decision should fall on one person with inherent conflicts.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: There are many replies above, with excellent advice for you.
However something that is missing above, I would like to add here.
I was exactly in the same situation 10 years ago (Germany) - funding finished but professor was asking for more; visa was linked to studies and without funding I couldn't continue, so eventually dropped out!
I can suggest you what not to do!
1. Don't ever think of quitting at this stage.
2. Don't irk your professor in any way. Be polite *and* assertive.
3. Don't isolate yourself at this time when you need help from the fellow researchers at your department.
4. Don't take a full-time job in case if your funding is finished, but your thesis is not.
5. In case if you were able to secure a part-time job or external funding for your studies, don't let your professor know about it. I told my professor when my funding was finished about my new job, and he never bothered about my thesis as he assumed I was happy with my job.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: Most of the other answers here don't really address the professor's situation.
The professor may be feeling significant pressure to deliver results, especially if he does not yet have tenure. This means, in part, having students like yourself graduate and deliver good quality research. He may be in denial about the fact that your planned experiments were not feasible in the time and budget he had set aside for this.
Rather than approaching it as a potential confrontation, you may find it better to address it as a shared problem: you not finishing your degree is a problem for both of you. It's a black mark on his track record for graduating students, and he is not able to deliver the expected results for funding he secured.
If you approach it in the light of: we both underestimated the complexity of the experiments so how do we get the best possible outcome with the time and budget remaining? One part of this is definitely finding acceptable content for a thesis and having you graduate and possibly publishing some journal articles. Another part might be working together to write up a post-doc project for the supporting experiments, which he might then shop around to funding agencies. This might be a project for you or a future student for him.
The most important thing though is to recognize that you're in this together, and that it's in both of your favors to find a good way forward where you successfully graduate and he can claim success in the research project.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/10/27
| 550
| 2,404
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is it alright to include students' first names in a teaching statement, or would this come off as weird and too personal? Or a privacy concern?
You often hear the advice to include specific stories that exemplify some of the things you claim about yourself in your teaching statement. I've got an anecdote involving two students I want to tell. My thought is that including their names will demonstrate that this wasn't just some frivolous incident that I'm talking up; that I honestly got to know these students. Also, I think the story would read more clearly if I can give them names rather than pronouns.<issue_comment>username_1: I think you should avoid giving their full names, as opposed to just their first names unless they give permission for it. Better, using an alias for the students protects their privacy but doesn't cost you any thing in the telling of the stories. Alice and Bob, as usual.
But some readers might actually wonder whether you were *too* personal with the students, not keeping a proper "academic distance". I often tell a story about two students who succeeded after failure. It is a great story, and it works without names. If they heard my story they would recognize themselves, I think. But no one else would. Not even their classmates at the time.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You could easily use alphabetically-sequential names, as we use in logic problems, communications, and so on. Typically this starts "Alice, Bob, Charlie", but you may wish to vary this for your paper if student gender is important.
The sequence of names often also uses "Eve" in communications and cryptography, as an "eavesdropper". It would probably be more appropriate to change this for your paper
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I would just use made-up names, made obvious by using scarequotes on the first usage. Personally, I feel Alice and Bob is a little too generic (like a math problem).
I would probably choose two from Renee, Sophia, Marcos, and Hans. Names with some interesting oomph to them. I would keep the sex the same. Not because gender is a part of the story (well I doubt it is). But just you will have an easier time picturing the students in your mind and writing about them if you don't change the gender. Or possibly referring to them on the spot during an interview (no pronoun slips).
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/10/27
| 581
| 2,319
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently published a paper in which I proposed a new transmission design relevant to wireless communication (skipping the details here).
Now I am thinking to file a patent but I am not sure if the work already published can be patented? Can the community kindly suggest me if I can patent this work either fully or part of it?<issue_comment>username_1: There are caveats to the grace period but the U.S. you have a one year grace period to file.
[35 U.S.C. 102 Conditions for patentability; novelty.](https://www.bitlaw.com/source/35usc/102.html)
```
(a) NOVELTY; PRIOR ART.—A person shall be entitled to a patent unless—
(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention; or
(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(b) EXCEPTIONS.—
(1) DISCLOSURES MADE 1 YEAR OR LESS BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE FILING DATE OF THE CLAIMED INVENTION.—A disclosure made 1 year or less before the effective filing date of a claimed invention shall not be prior art to the claimed invention under subsection (a)(1) if—
(A) the disclosure was made by the inventor or joint inventor or by another who obtained the subject matter disclosed directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor; or
```
For most all of the rest of the world, the day something is published it is no longer patentable, at least to the extent of what was disclosed. Nor is anything patentable that is obvious from what was published.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Consult your university’s legal team.
=====================================
Most universities will have lawyers on staff, and often they’ll be pretty experienced in patent law. This seems like the sort of question that you should ask them, since they’ll be the ones who will know the full legalities for your location, and they’ll likely be able to assist you with the patent application.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/10/27
| 1,300
| 5,466
|
<issue_start>username_0: This is related to my previous question [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/138737/how-should-i-tell-my-professor-that-i-want-to-quit-my-integrated-program-midway).
I'm enrolled in a MS/PhD integrated program in computer science at a South Korean university and have just started my first semester. In the linked question, I discuss my desire to quit my program, get my master's degree, and go for a PhD abroad.
The reason I want to quit is that when I first talked to my advisor in March, I told him that I noticed his lab does a lot of work that I'm interested in (NLP and finance). He told me that he'd be happy to have me and that there are "many research projects in those fields going on."
This is partially my fault, but when I entered the lab, I found out that the professor's main interest is bioinformatics, and that he's pretty much only involved with work relating to that. This is also where most of the lab's funding comes from. The fact that my professor's interests don't align with my own is more than enough for me to not want to do my PhD here.
Most of the students here, including myself, barely get any guidance from the advisor and usually teach themselves or learn from upperclassmen. I'm currently involved in a bio project that I don't want to be a part of. I've told some upperclassmen about my plans to go abroad after quitting my program midway, and they told me that there's a lot of people who are in the same boat. They said I just have to do the bare minimum to not get on my advisor's nerves and then I can do my own thing in the meantime. I was also advised to talk to the professor early on about my plans - despite having me told him twice before already - so that there aren't any misunderstandings in the future.
Is this normal? Do professors usually twist the truth to entice students into joining their lab?<issue_comment>username_1: I think your perception of twisting the truth is correct, but I wouldn't call it lying if this is your interpretation. The twisting of the truth is more produced among professors and group leaders by students that don't know exactly what topic they are interested in exactly and should pursue for PhD work. I think you are a in a minority, burning for a exact topic. At least when you don't have to pay for your PhD work, but have a salary, my impression is many PhD students choose their department/group/topic rather based on criterions like salary, infrastructure, need to move, location and culture than topical or research-related criterions.
Group leaders need simply good people to work in their labs, and they are looking for really good people or mediocre with very much hands-on experience for a distinct project. A group doesn't act like a company with very specific job description. You need a team that is able to develop and learn, as science never stands still. Maybe your professor wants to go more into NLP and finance in future. Especially young group leaders have to dive also in new topics and broaden their scope. So this you should discuss with him. But in general his "approach" is right to make you interested in his group and not deliver you reasons on a silver tablet to not join him.
If there is too much truth twisting can and should also be proven by you. Good groups hava a good publication track and often an alumni section on their website. This is something I would always throw an eye one before talking to group leader. What research did he 5 years ago, last year, how much people work on distinct topics and has the group many collaborators and of which quality?
The group may currently not work on your topics, but have a better infrastructure than other groups to work on it. This is something you have negotiate and outline with the professor before starting any contract, in best case by a binding research proposal, so there are no misunderstandings for what you will get your PhD and work on mostly.
That competition and working pressure is really high in south korea is not unknwon, as suicide and emigration rates of academics to have an easier life.
I'm not sure why often professors are here on the academia.se treated as holy cows or responsible for everything. No researcher is trained to become a professor like a surgeon, it's learning by doing and they are humans like everybody else with personal inadequatnesses. They are no own species like it often sounds here. If the truth is twisted a lot, then it is rather a problem of academia at your university or country or the general culture. Of course professors are in competition to get good people, like everywhere else outside of academia.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't think "twisting the truth" happens often in my circles, but you should also understand that lab activities aren't cast in stone. Circumstances change every year. I have to align my activities with grants I receive, with interests of my colleagues and senior lab students, current research trends and so on. While the "core" direction remains relatively stable, it's sometimes hard for newcomers to see what actually constitutes this "core". For example, if I use method A to solve the problem B, what is my core interest -- the particular method or the particular problem?
Perhaps, your case is quite pronounced indeed, but I'd say most frustration from in-lab work doesn't really come from "twisting the truth" about daily activities.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/10/27
| 885
| 3,770
|
<issue_start>username_0: With the GREs being phased out of so many PhD applications in the sciences, I think this question is reasonably fresh.
I have taken the GRE and scored in the 70 percentiles for verbal and math. I scored a 6/6 on the essay. This score is fine, but not "great" for top biomedical science Ph.D. programs that I am applying to (e.g. Duke, that wants 90+ percentiles).
**Do you think it would be worth it to send my GRE report to show that I have taken the GRE and did attain a "reasonable" score?** I have a strong application when looking at other factors (e.g. research experience since freshman year, 2 summer research internships at a hospital and in Amgen Scholar program, strong GPA, 3 letters of rec. from my 3 research PIs). Thus, I feel that my GRE score is the one component that does not equally compare to the rest of my application.
This may be irrational of me, but I am somewhat worried that the programs will wonder why I am not submitting a score given that it's clear I have not experienced major financial problems throughout my undergraduate career (nor do I come from an underrepresented/underprivileged background, which is a large reason to why the GRE has become an "optional" test now).
Thank you for your opinions.<issue_comment>username_1: If the institution requires them they must be sent, of course. But, as you say, that is becoming more rare.
But if they are not required I would only recommend sending them if they were truly superlative, which yours don't seem to be. I doubt that anyone would consider that you were hiding anything if they aren't required.
Your application need to contain (only) reasons why you are well qualified for the position and highly likely to be a success. Don't include things that point in other directions unless required.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Sounds like you might not be the sort of student capable of succesfully completing your studies in a top-tier program. This is okay. Just aim lower.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: It really depends on the rest of your application. Are you a top applicant everywhere else and the score brings the package down? And how competitive is the program you are applying to? Is your score within their typical range? When standardized tests are optional, applicants will self-select where disproportionately only those with good scores will send them. And those with terrible scores but great everywhere else will apply to GRE-optional schools that are ranked higher than they might have gotten into if test scores were required.
Of course because of this, another sneaky side-effect of making GRE's optional is that the average test scores of these schools will increase. But I'm sure their motives are pure.
I suppose that does answer your question to a degree. Some people may suspect you didn't send them because they would hurt you. But others will not care, or actually be staunchly against standardized testing. Also we obviously can't be sure whether you took the test and did poorly, or just wanted to save your time and money and skip the hassle of taking it.
One final caveat though, people who don't want to see test scores generally may still be interested in test scores where they are absolutely the only way to rate a student's background, such as if you come from far away and attended an unaccredited school no one knows anything about. I don't know how widespread it is, but I have seen complaints about "discrimination against schools" on the part of some western graduate schools, where they don't even consider applicants from many schools. Basically (I presume) they don't trust the school's grades. A lack of standardized test scores to counter this would only hurt you more.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/10/27
| 1,200
| 5,232
|
<issue_start>username_0: I just started a PhD supervised by a clinician and a bioinformatician. The bioinformatician informed me they have received funding to get another PhD student to work on the same disease/ broad question of machine learning.
I love this PhD topic, but I am very concerned about a new student working on the same question. I wonder about how we will divide up our research. I do not like the idea of it as I do not know how our research will grow organically, and I had big plans for what I wanted to publish during this PhD, which is longer than average in duration.
Is it usual or right for 2 students to have the same question? Has anyone got experience of this and how did it work?
When I was doing my Master's I had a similar thing. A different clinician wanted to add another Master's student to my exact project, but in the end the other supervisor blocked it. In retrospect, now I know the topic better, there could have been space for another student and I to go down different routes. I think it would have occurred in the much longer term however (after the 1 year mark), and would have limited and been to the detriment of my research. Of course the commitment of a masters is much smaller.
I suppose I also wonder if it's a reflection of their perception of my capabilities.<issue_comment>username_1: Projects can be broad. Research topics are narrow. I see no problems arising here as long as the advisor is responsible. A project at its inception has a lot of potential. That potential results in unanswered questions. Those questions may be closely related but distinct. They may also be individually very important and support the overall project.
But at the start, little is known. If a team works on the project all will start at about the same place. As more becomes known and the questions emerge there is room for different threads to be developed by the team members. This can result in dissertations.
So, I think your use of the term "question" is too narrow. The "project" is broader than any question within it. It is ok to work on the same project, but not to put students in competition with one another on a narrow question within it.
Think of a really new project like the Big Bang. Initially there is nothing. Almost immediately there are worlds and worlds to explore.
When I was a student something close to this happened to me. A friend and I worked with the same advisor within a small research seminar group. We studied the "same thing" but wound up with very different doctoral dissertations. But our advisor was wise enough to separate us when it became appropriate.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I strongly recommend you to talk to your advisor before you hand her/him your thesis proposal.
I faced this kind of problem once.
What my advisor did is she divided my thesis proposal and shared it with another research fellow.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: We had two people working on the same project and almost the same research topic. They both graduated very succesful and founded a company together. Why am I saying this? Because their work formed a great friendship and not a competition. You should not see this as a threat, you should see it as a great opportunity. Of course this solely depends on your personalities, but you can benefit a lot from each other if doing correctly. Also for publications, you can co-author each other or write papers 50/50. You can find out one problem, discuss it, and each other tackles a different portion of this problem.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: Having a close colleague with whom to discuss tough sticking points, potential research ideas, etc. will be INVALUABLE for you.
There is nothing quite so lonely as being one of the experts of the world on a very narrow subject and never having the opportunity to discuss that subject with another person who shares your understanding.
You will likely produce better work as a result of having this other student around. And you two can collaborate. Don't think of this as zero sum. Think instead about collaborative potential and about this student as a sounding board. Some of the greatest research I can think of was produced by pairs or groups.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Don't think of the other PhD student as a threat. Assuming they are intellectually as capable as you (+ you get along), they are likely to be a massive help. The point is that your PhD studies are going to be hard. They're going to be hard enough that at various points you'll run into roadblocks and have no idea what to do next. Being able to talk to someone who's very familiar with your work is a *massive* help. It's not just "what do we do next", you can also discuss "what's wrong with my code" or "how do we calculate X", crosscheck each other's work, etc.
Without another PhD student, you can still discuss things with your supervisor of course, but your supervisor is likely to be less available + less familiar with the nitty-gritty of your work.
I suspect the main reason most PhD students work on their own topic isn't because it's better, but because there is no funding to have multiple PhD students working on each topic.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/10/27
| 1,203
| 5,267
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a recent graduate of biochemistry from the University of Maryland, College Park and am currently working as a postbaccalaureate fellow at the NIH in Bethesda, Maryland.
For context, I work in a group studying rare inborn errors of metabolism. Our lab is transitionally oriented as we are working on the development of animal models of the disease and gene therapy.
I pursued research in a rare disease group as I am a patient of a rare congenital skin condition. I am currently enrolled in a study which is working to defined the molecular characteristics of my disease (outside of the NIH).
I would like to remain translationally oriented in my graduate pursuits. My proposal in its basic description would be to develop an animal model for my skin condition and pursue gene therapy or gene editing to correct its manifestations. This area of research (gene therapy in dermatopathology) in general is relatively underrepresented in the scientific literature (does this make my proposal stronger?). If anybody would like any more information I can absolutely elaborate.
I will be applying to graduate programs next year. How should I approach investigators (relevant to the described field) with a research proposal such as the one above before and or during applying? I would appreciate hearing your perspectives!<issue_comment>username_1: Projects can be broad. Research topics are narrow. I see no problems arising here as long as the advisor is responsible. A project at its inception has a lot of potential. That potential results in unanswered questions. Those questions may be closely related but distinct. They may also be individually very important and support the overall project.
But at the start, little is known. If a team works on the project all will start at about the same place. As more becomes known and the questions emerge there is room for different threads to be developed by the team members. This can result in dissertations.
So, I think your use of the term "question" is too narrow. The "project" is broader than any question within it. It is ok to work on the same project, but not to put students in competition with one another on a narrow question within it.
Think of a really new project like the Big Bang. Initially there is nothing. Almost immediately there are worlds and worlds to explore.
When I was a student something close to this happened to me. A friend and I worked with the same advisor within a small research seminar group. We studied the "same thing" but wound up with very different doctoral dissertations. But our advisor was wise enough to separate us when it became appropriate.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I strongly recommend you to talk to your advisor before you hand her/him your thesis proposal.
I faced this kind of problem once.
What my advisor did is she divided my thesis proposal and shared it with another research fellow.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: We had two people working on the same project and almost the same research topic. They both graduated very succesful and founded a company together. Why am I saying this? Because their work formed a great friendship and not a competition. You should not see this as a threat, you should see it as a great opportunity. Of course this solely depends on your personalities, but you can benefit a lot from each other if doing correctly. Also for publications, you can co-author each other or write papers 50/50. You can find out one problem, discuss it, and each other tackles a different portion of this problem.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: Having a close colleague with whom to discuss tough sticking points, potential research ideas, etc. will be INVALUABLE for you.
There is nothing quite so lonely as being one of the experts of the world on a very narrow subject and never having the opportunity to discuss that subject with another person who shares your understanding.
You will likely produce better work as a result of having this other student around. And you two can collaborate. Don't think of this as zero sum. Think instead about collaborative potential and about this student as a sounding board. Some of the greatest research I can think of was produced by pairs or groups.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Don't think of the other PhD student as a threat. Assuming they are intellectually as capable as you (+ you get along), they are likely to be a massive help. The point is that your PhD studies are going to be hard. They're going to be hard enough that at various points you'll run into roadblocks and have no idea what to do next. Being able to talk to someone who's very familiar with your work is a *massive* help. It's not just "what do we do next", you can also discuss "what's wrong with my code" or "how do we calculate X", crosscheck each other's work, etc.
Without another PhD student, you can still discuss things with your supervisor of course, but your supervisor is likely to be less available + less familiar with the nitty-gritty of your work.
I suspect the main reason most PhD students work on their own topic isn't because it's better, but because there is no funding to have multiple PhD students working on each topic.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/10/27
| 1,555
| 6,416
|
<issue_start>username_0: I had BSc + MSc in IT without thesis from my native country "A".
I had an ambition to do PhD in CS.
So,
First, I got enrolled in MSc in CS program in a university "X" in a country "B". I left the program as it was math-intensive.
Second, I got enrolled in MEng in CSE program in a university "Y" in the same country "B". I left the program because I failed in consecutive semesters.
As it stands, I am weak in math, stats, and some other core CS subjects.
I am now planning to get enrolled in BSc in CS.
Would that be a wise decision?
What other options do I have?<issue_comment>username_1: Many people succeed after setbacks. But your current base from which to move forward isn't strong. Let me suggest two options.
The first is that you reevaluate your "need" to get a doctorate. What else do you enjoy doing for which your preparation is better and the path to success shorter. I don't suggest that is best for you, but worth thinking about.
But the other option is to take a long view. Figure out where you are weak - math, stats, and some core CS subjects. Figure out how to get the required knowledge in (most of) those and work on that, delaying but not abandoning a doctorate. Proving yourself there will help you move along, but it will also help you figure out if it is really right for you. If you wind up hating the study of the basics it will be hard to move to higher levels.
But a doctorate is about more than just those sorts of topics. It involves research and you don't indicate whether you have any experience there, so it is hard to guess whether your desire is realistic. That is, do you have a realistic picture of what a PhD graduate actually does to succeed. If you don't have a good picture of that, you need to get one before you spend a lot of time and effort trying to reach something you may not enjoy in the end.
(a) consider options, or (b) long path - long view.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: From your comments I understand
A) you cannot imagine living and dying without a PhD in CS
B) you are now so good in the subjects you failed previously that you can even teach them to anyone (I hope I understood this correctly)
C) you want to teach CS and for that you need a PhD in CS
Putting these together, I think it would be a wise decision to enroll. Under the premise that B is true (you might want to check this again - if B weren't true, I would reconsider my answer. Look, if possible for outside evaluation on that as soon as possible) you would probably pass this degree. If you have the BSc, you might change your mind about A and C -- but in any case, a BSc degree in CS seems like a good careeer start. Maybe a PhD is too difficult/math heavy for you, maybe you hate teaching then - but those are questions you should answer in a few years, not now.
But really check before if you are no longer weak in those areas!!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: You are clearly not the sort of student who should do a PhD. I am not trying to be rude. And I know this might hurt your feelings. There are so many outside options. Take your consecutive failures as a signal and move on to something other than academia.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: It sounds like computer science is a subject that really interests you, so a BSc in that subject is a good place to start. Mathematics and statistics are both core skills for computer science, so you will need to devote time to improve your skills in these areas. The Bachelors program should be at a lower level of difficulty than a Masters program, so it should give you an opportunity to develop at a pace that is more manageable for you. Contrary to one of the comments above, if you go into that field, you should **not** try to avoid the areas in which you are weak --- to the contrary, you should "run towards" those things, and put it in the time to develop your mathematics and statistics to a point where you are comfortable with that aspect of the material.
Setting your sights on a PhD program at this early stage is premature, and for now I would recommend that you see how you find the Bachelors program, and use this to determine if this is a good field for you. I would recommend that you look at your education as a means to develop some skills sufficient for practice, and you will find that opportunities for later work/study will begin to present themselves once you finish your undergraduate degree. Once you have finished your BSc you will be able to see if you can handle a Masters program (i.e., see if you can then handle the mathematics that was giving you trouble before), and from there, who knows. A PhD program is essentially a training program for scholarly research, and there are many other avenues to practice computer science. Concentrate on learning as much as you can in your undergraduate degree, and then you will have a bunch of good options at the end.
>
> **From comments:** "PhD is in my blood. I can't imagine myself [dying] without a PhD. ... I want to become an instructor of [computer science] in colleges."
>
>
>
With present technology, doctoral-level knowledge of academic subjects cannot yet be injected intravenously, so unfortunately, the traditional arduous journey of research and study is still required. I think academics cringe a bit when we see students express the notion that their life is a failure unless they achieve a particular academic title. That kind of talk suggests a longing for social-status rather than an emphasis on acquiring valuable skills and knowledge.
In your case you have a goal to teach the subject in college, so that is a more useful way to look at it. If teaching at a tertiary level is your goal, then you will need to master the subject and its foundations. By the time you get to the end of a Bachelors degree there may be some opportunities to tutor classes, and this can be a good entry-point into teaching. Many academics begin by tutoring courses for their own professors while they are in the late stages of their undergraduate degree, and this practice assists them to master their subjects and become adept at teaching. Students are usually selected for these positions if they have high grades in their undergraduate subjects, so try to accomplish that, and you will be able to get your first taste of teaching in a college environment.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/10/27
| 1,748
| 7,936
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am considering applying for two new jobs. I love where I am now, but these opportunities would be better for me as they would come with higher compensation and are closer to where I live. One idea I had was to ask a couple of my best students to write a letter recommending me for these positions. Is that ethical? I do not need them per se (I have others I can ask), but I was wondering about this idea. It seems like this school is looking for student-centered instructors, so I thought this might be a way to set me apart. Thoughts?<issue_comment>username_1: In my opinion, this is ethical if and only if it is clear that there are no (positive or negative) consequences for the students if they accept/decline/write positive/write negative things.
In particular, if you will still grade your students in the near future, the students may feel pressured to accept and to write a positive letter. This would not be ethical. In this case, you might want to consider asking ex-students instead.
(A random thought: Is it really the best to ask the best students and not some students who made a lot of progress due to your teaching? I don't know the answer to this question.)
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: From my perspective (as a student who has for many year been involved in students' union work and higher education quality and development), I would not recommend it. Although I very much appreciate the weight you give to the students' opinion, I see a number of potential negative consequences - but of course all of them are dependent on the system or country you are working in.
Firstly, I think it would be very difficult for these students to actually say no. The dependency of a student on their teacher for evaluation and grades goes further than I think most university employees realise. My experience is that students are, with or without reason, still very much afraid to do anything that might upset their teachers. Saying no to such a question is basically equal to saying that you are a bad teacher, which is the last thing a student want to say to someone who will set their grade or influence their further career.
Secondly, I believe that it would not tell your prospective employer very much, as every teacher will have some students that really like them and others that don't. As long as you have picked which students write the letter of recommendation it will not actually say anything on the proportions between these groups.
If you want a letter of recommendation from the students (which in itself, I want to stress once more, indicates that you have an interested in the best of the students' and are probably a committed teacher) I would recommend contacting the local students' union or students' association. They hopefully are independent enough to give an "objective" letter, and if they have the time and the resources to contact students, they can provide something of this kind. For this reason, in my students' union we award different prizes to appreciated teachers and mentors, which apart from showing general appreciation and gratitude for often hard and unrewarded work effectively fills this exact purpose.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: As others say, there are good reasons not to get reference letters from students: they are biased to please you, don’t know how to write references, and it might be perceived as cherry picking (you’re in fact an awful teacher but one or two students like you).
If you want to offer insights about what students think of you, why not use your teaching evaluations? If you’re indeed an excellent educator, this should reflect in your evaluations. It’s also acceptable to offer snippets from written course evaluations: while this is still a bit of cherry picking, at the very least it’s unbiased. However, I would check your institution’s policy regarding this practice. Some universities are ok with it, others may not be.
Finally, if you want to show you’re a great educator l suggest indicating how you go the extra mile: participating and organizing student events, mentoring, volunteer work etc.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: It's not a good idea, for several reasons. First, even if you ask students who are literally *former* students, they themselves may need or want a recommendation letter or similar from you in the future, so they are coerced.
Second, almost surely students have no idea how to write effective letters of recommendation for any purpose... There are often-implicit stylistic expectations.
Third, in particular, often letters of recommendation should concern predictions for the applicant's future, based on the letter writer's prior experience with such future-predicted-from-past. Students will not have any such information (e.g., how likely the applicant is to succeed in grad school, as an extreme case).
Fourth, the people reading your file will wonder why you did not have more senior people writing letters, no matter what the students say. The people reading those letters will suspect you of having dubious judgement about how things work...
Even if you've not had student evaluations of your teaching, hopefully (?) some faculty member in your department will have visited one of your classes, and can give an opinion on your teaching (based on broader experience than any student would have).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: It is never ethical or appropriate for someone who has power over someone else (you determine their grades) to ask that person to do anything that is not already determined by the nature of the specific relationship that defines that power.
You can ask your students to do particular assignments. You *cannot* ask them on dates, for loans of money, to renovate your house, baby sit your children, or to write you letters of recommendation.
For "Instructor", try substituting "Judge", "Doctor", "Therapist", "Manager", "Law Enforcement officer", and then substitute any other actions that are not specifically defined by those roles and think carefully about the possible implications.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I wish this was not a bad idea (but it is).
You could consider writing a paragraph in your cover letter or teaching statement wishing that you could ask students to recommend you but know you can't. Then perhaps describe the progress some particular students made, and why you think you helped that happen.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I would personally lean to NOT soliciting such letters.
Most schools have some sort of standardized course evaluations. Thus, your teaching record sort of speaks for itself. If you feel the need to highlight some issues, perhaps you can quote comments from your course evaluations, and use them to put together a nice story. That said, everybody will be aware that such a story will be using cherry picked comments.
As a graduate of a program, since left, I have been invited to submit a tenure letter for a prof up for tenure. I assume the tenure boards have a procedure for getting a list of potential student support letters and fairly choosing who they invite to submit.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: I have done this once in the past. I was a graduate student TAing in a course taught by an assistant prof who was applying for promotion (and also tenure at the same time). I was already senior TA for the course at the time, and this was for promotion within the University, where such letters from a senior graduate student could have some weight.
The issue is: what can these students say that will provide insight for an employer? In my case it was easy to talk about the course organization, the undergraduate response to the course and other factors important to a Faculty Dean and a promotion committee, but what context and insight can these students bring to your advantage in the application process?
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/10/27
| 1,779
| 8,093
|
<issue_start>username_0: So I am a bit confused as to how the standard scholarship application works (North America, mainly Canada). When applying to a masters program, most schools ask me if I have applied to any scholarships and to list them. However, when looking to apply to any scholarships, one of the prerequisites for most is to have already been accepted to an academic program.
This is confusing to me, should I apply to scholarships before applying to my masters, should I apply after receiving a positive reply from at least one institution?
I understand that specific scholarships will have their own details, but this is a general question. How do I approach not starving if I get accepted to a masters?<issue_comment>username_1: In my opinion, this is ethical if and only if it is clear that there are no (positive or negative) consequences for the students if they accept/decline/write positive/write negative things.
In particular, if you will still grade your students in the near future, the students may feel pressured to accept and to write a positive letter. This would not be ethical. In this case, you might want to consider asking ex-students instead.
(A random thought: Is it really the best to ask the best students and not some students who made a lot of progress due to your teaching? I don't know the answer to this question.)
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: From my perspective (as a student who has for many year been involved in students' union work and higher education quality and development), I would not recommend it. Although I very much appreciate the weight you give to the students' opinion, I see a number of potential negative consequences - but of course all of them are dependent on the system or country you are working in.
Firstly, I think it would be very difficult for these students to actually say no. The dependency of a student on their teacher for evaluation and grades goes further than I think most university employees realise. My experience is that students are, with or without reason, still very much afraid to do anything that might upset their teachers. Saying no to such a question is basically equal to saying that you are a bad teacher, which is the last thing a student want to say to someone who will set their grade or influence their further career.
Secondly, I believe that it would not tell your prospective employer very much, as every teacher will have some students that really like them and others that don't. As long as you have picked which students write the letter of recommendation it will not actually say anything on the proportions between these groups.
If you want a letter of recommendation from the students (which in itself, I want to stress once more, indicates that you have an interested in the best of the students' and are probably a committed teacher) I would recommend contacting the local students' union or students' association. They hopefully are independent enough to give an "objective" letter, and if they have the time and the resources to contact students, they can provide something of this kind. For this reason, in my students' union we award different prizes to appreciated teachers and mentors, which apart from showing general appreciation and gratitude for often hard and unrewarded work effectively fills this exact purpose.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: As others say, there are good reasons not to get reference letters from students: they are biased to please you, don’t know how to write references, and it might be perceived as cherry picking (you’re in fact an awful teacher but one or two students like you).
If you want to offer insights about what students think of you, why not use your teaching evaluations? If you’re indeed an excellent educator, this should reflect in your evaluations. It’s also acceptable to offer snippets from written course evaluations: while this is still a bit of cherry picking, at the very least it’s unbiased. However, I would check your institution’s policy regarding this practice. Some universities are ok with it, others may not be.
Finally, if you want to show you’re a great educator l suggest indicating how you go the extra mile: participating and organizing student events, mentoring, volunteer work etc.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: It's not a good idea, for several reasons. First, even if you ask students who are literally *former* students, they themselves may need or want a recommendation letter or similar from you in the future, so they are coerced.
Second, almost surely students have no idea how to write effective letters of recommendation for any purpose... There are often-implicit stylistic expectations.
Third, in particular, often letters of recommendation should concern predictions for the applicant's future, based on the letter writer's prior experience with such future-predicted-from-past. Students will not have any such information (e.g., how likely the applicant is to succeed in grad school, as an extreme case).
Fourth, the people reading your file will wonder why you did not have more senior people writing letters, no matter what the students say. The people reading those letters will suspect you of having dubious judgement about how things work...
Even if you've not had student evaluations of your teaching, hopefully (?) some faculty member in your department will have visited one of your classes, and can give an opinion on your teaching (based on broader experience than any student would have).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: It is never ethical or appropriate for someone who has power over someone else (you determine their grades) to ask that person to do anything that is not already determined by the nature of the specific relationship that defines that power.
You can ask your students to do particular assignments. You *cannot* ask them on dates, for loans of money, to renovate your house, baby sit your children, or to write you letters of recommendation.
For "Instructor", try substituting "Judge", "Doctor", "Therapist", "Manager", "Law Enforcement officer", and then substitute any other actions that are not specifically defined by those roles and think carefully about the possible implications.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I wish this was not a bad idea (but it is).
You could consider writing a paragraph in your cover letter or teaching statement wishing that you could ask students to recommend you but know you can't. Then perhaps describe the progress some particular students made, and why you think you helped that happen.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I would personally lean to NOT soliciting such letters.
Most schools have some sort of standardized course evaluations. Thus, your teaching record sort of speaks for itself. If you feel the need to highlight some issues, perhaps you can quote comments from your course evaluations, and use them to put together a nice story. That said, everybody will be aware that such a story will be using cherry picked comments.
As a graduate of a program, since left, I have been invited to submit a tenure letter for a prof up for tenure. I assume the tenure boards have a procedure for getting a list of potential student support letters and fairly choosing who they invite to submit.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: I have done this once in the past. I was a graduate student TAing in a course taught by an assistant prof who was applying for promotion (and also tenure at the same time). I was already senior TA for the course at the time, and this was for promotion within the University, where such letters from a senior graduate student could have some weight.
The issue is: what can these students say that will provide insight for an employer? In my case it was easy to talk about the course organization, the undergraduate response to the course and other factors important to a Faculty Dean and a promotion committee, but what context and insight can these students bring to your advantage in the application process?
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/10/28
| 3,997
| 17,184
|
<issue_start>username_0: There exists plenty of literature about how to be inclusive, both in the workplace and in the classroom.
I'm wondering how this might be done intentionally — specifically in the context of a computer science class — from a curricular standpoint. I'm thinking of generic intro-to-programming types of courses, which usually include algorithms and data structures.
I have attended several workshops and have read a few articles, but haven't really delved into the literature about inclusivity in the classroom. From these workshops, I am quite comfortable being inclusive in the classroom (lectures, interactions, etc.) -- but I'm looking for ways to have that reach to homework, projects, and so on -- and specifically for computer science as far as possible.<issue_comment>username_1: This is an interesting question. The program I am doing most of my teaching in has recently been faced with a similar question (due to comments of an external evaluation), and I can't say we have come up with a satisfying solution yet.
Here are some pointers (in no particular order) that have come up in our discussion:
* **For exam tasks / homework descriptions:** evaluate critically if your tasks (or rather, their descriptions) carry bias. Naturally, you want to avoid the cool developer being called Bob and the silly user Alice or Ahmed, but it goes deeper than that. For example, in an Intro to Programming exam I was giving many years back the task was to model and implement a simulation of a game of football/soccer (the assumption here being that the majority population - white, male college kids in Europe - would be intimately aware of the rules and have an easy time conceptualizing the task). As it turns out, those that did not fall into the majority population (some women, foreign students) did worse on this task, presumably because they needed to spend a lot more brain cycles even understanding the game they were supposed to simulate.
* **For deadlines:** consider that some students may not be able to, if need be, work through the night or the weekend. It's easy to think that a deadline Sunday evening is not a big deal if you think of your students as a homogenious mass of 20-year-olds with no other obligations than to study, but if one of your students is a father / mother of two, or working on the weekend to sustain themselves, the story becomes different.
* **For extra-curricular activities:** the same is also true for extra-curriculars. If at all possible schedule attractive extra-curriculars (e.g., Hackathons, job fairs, whatever your university does) in a way that they can also be attended by people outside the majority population.
* **For social events:** the same applies to social events. Make sure that social events, to the extent possible, not only cater towards the majority population. For instance, when I studied, a lot of the student social events boiled down to "find an excuse to drink", and basically all conversation was in the local language. Both of this together unsurprisingly meant that foreign students, especially Islamic students, never showed up.
* **Avoiding "hidden knowledge":** in many universities and courses, there are official rules and "unspoken rules". For example, a teacher may *say* that students are expected to learn the entire book, but well-connected members of the majority population know from previous years that in reality most of the questions are about Chapters 3-8. Given that (some) minorities are less well-connected than the majority population, these constructions can disadvantage these students severely.
* **Diversity of TAs:** ensure that not all TAs are always from the majority population (i.e., ensure that there is some amount of representation of non-majority students). This may need active steering, because if you just take the first 5 qualified students, you may easily end up with only students from the majority population (because they are more, because they are better-connected, and because a lot of TA contracts are written in a way to appeal to 20-year-olds).
To summarize: keep in mind that some of your students may have a different cultural background, different life constraints, different priorities, or different access to "common knowledge". Try to level the playing field as well as you can.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Adding to what @username_1 said, and from a curricular/class activities and program standpoint:
* Add a class regarding BIAS in data with plenty of examples of GIGO
(Garbage in- Garbage Out).
* On the grading, force part of the grade to
correspond to BIAS/exclusion testing for all homework/projects, and
to consider the potential economic cost of such bias.
* Assign works that are targeted to a different sample of people than the average majority. VG: Model how a daycare works rather than a futbol match.
* Include mandatory books and lectures like: 'Invisible Women: Exposing Data Bias in a World Designed for Men', 'Coders: The Making of a New Tribe and the Remaking of the World' , Technically Wrong: Sexist Apps, Biased Algorithms, and Other Threats of Toxic Tech, 'When Cultures Collide: Leading Across Cultures'
* Be open with times and regarding remote work.
* Be strict regarding noninclusive behavior.
A lot of noninclusive behavior can be traced to the lack of knowledge about it or the comprehension of it's importance. Anything tech however is tricky, because for IT people (my field), social or political reasons are completely useless, you need to give rational reasons to why this matters, and the best and easiest way is to pinpoint economic or productivity reasons. If it seems that in small quantities its not much, then escalate to a country or society levels, even species/world level. With this you can ensure that the reasoning behind the curricula is sound and will be headed.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: **tl;dr** It's not so much about curriculum, but in delivery and materials.
---
I have specialised in issues of inclusivity in Computer Science within my university and have several publications in this area. Many of my papers look at inclusivity for students with alternate needs but I have also been looking at issues of gender issues that affect inclusivity.
The question asks what changes in a curriculum should one make? It depends somewhat on how you define curriculum and the scope of what a curriculum contains, which in my experience varies from place to place (or even discipline to discipline). In theory a curriculum is a document that defines higher level outcomes, competencies and broad brush subject areas. For example, it would say that students should be taught computer programming but not specify a language or software platform; it might say computer architecture without naming specific hardware devices and so on.
Thus we should have a universal curriculum that makes it clear what would be learned and demonstrate the value of the qualification without saying in detail the mechanisms by which those goals would be achieved (or am I being too theoretical in my pedagogics?).
What does need addressing to permit inclusivity in a computer science curriculum are aspects of delivery: the teaching material, the environment, the language, the people, the attitude. Many of these are human focused aspects of education.
There are probably too many detailed elements for me to include them all, but some important ones are:
**Hearts and Minds:** If your colleagues are not totally engaged in the diversity agenda, or see value in it then much effort in this direction would be attenuated. Everyone has to agree; the problem is convincing them. One has to point out that it helps recruitment, reputation, retention, income generation, student morale, improved results and so on. For the recidivists I just pointed out that to do otherwise would probably be illegal and perhaps result in embarrassing legal cases at some indeterminate time in the future, and would they like to explain their position in court? (That worked).
**Language (spoken and written):** Everyone has to be able to use appropriate language automatically and without undue effort. All class material should use appropriate language, and all verbalisations in class should be appropriate. Some examples from the past: do not assume programmers or manager would be male by slipping into "when he ...". Do not assume everyone can see the screen by saying "as you can see in the diagram..." (vision impairment) or assume that everyone is able to hear clearly, and so on. Use multiple forms of delivery in any class.
**Images and Illustrations:** Be careful in the selections of images used in teaching material. What do the images imply: like the languages do they imply particular attributes for the people pictured; particularly ones that not all students could relate to (e.g. all men etc).
**Use Technology**: As we are talking about computer science there is no excuse for not using technology. There should be online support for the classes (like a VLE) so students can download notes, copies of the presentations and even video recordings of the class. This can also allows assessment submission and feedback. This permits student with differing needs to use their own support technology to access the material without extra spport.
**Unconscious Bias:** Teachers needs to accept that they have implicit unconscious Bias use that awareness in their work. Colleagues might need to attend the available training.
**Culturally Specific Examples:** To help students understand difficult concepts examples and exercises are important. Picking the right examples will help learning. However there are cultural traps in these example which one should avoid because they might implicitly exclude or disadvantage a particular group. Assuming that students know how tax works or using abbreviations for tax forms or assuming they know something outside the subject like complex numbers or eigen vectors can be difficult.
**Physical Access:** An obvious one when considering diversity, but labs need adjustable height desks, doors wide enough for adult wheelchairs there need to be appropriate toilet facilities, appropriate break and rest areas, quiet and social spaces. All these address the needs of different groups. For example, our campus lacks a fully equipped disabled access toilet (i.e. one with a power hoist).
**Regulations and Procedures:** Are the institutional regulations for things such as attendance, submission of mitigation, repeat years and such like appropriately accommodating for the various needs of student groups or are they discriminatingly punitive in an attempt to be equal.
**The wider institution:** It is as important that management, IT provision and marketing for your institution are similarly minded. Without them many of the efforts in one subject area would just be made impotent by the lack of support from elsewhere.
---
Although not answering the question directly you may be interested in publications in this area. As has already been mentioned in comments, there is plenty of literature out there that you can refer to. Mine is but a splash is the ocean:
* [Experiences of Teaching Disabled Students of Computing at UK Universities](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263120564_Experiences_of_Teaching_Disabled_Students_of_Computing_at_UK_Universities), (2007)
+ Discusses funding provisions in the UK for disabled students (DSA), common adaptations required for students being taught within the University of Hull's Computer Science department [e.g. electronic accessible lecture notes, clarity of taught examples and assignment information, adaptations for examinations] and the process through which students can disclose additional needs at application time. Generally a very UK-representative discussion of what is involved to teach students with disabilities at university-level.
* [Experiencias de enseñanza a estudiantes de informática con discapacidad en Universidades del Reino Unido](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261528122_Experiencias_de_ensenanza_a_estudiantes_de_informatica_con_discapacidad_en_Universidades_del_Reino_Unido), (2008) Spanish Version.
* [Vortrag über Diversity in der Informatiklehre](https://www.oth-regensburg.de/international/nachrichten/einzelansicht/news/vortrag-ueber-diversity-in-der-informatiklehre.html) (2018) German report on similar talk.
I hope that of that would be useful at pointing you at issues in this area.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: **Important Notice**
Be careful about what you have read, a lot of grievance studies "papers" are based in faith not science. And do more harm than good. Here is a very good "study" done by two Phds and one journalists about the validity of gender studies, critical race studies etc. It is scary.
<https://areomagazine.com/2018/10/02/academic-grievance-studies-and-the-corruption-of-scholarship/>
**To answer your question:**
Try to use simple language if possible if you have non native speakers. Of course do it only when complicated terms are not needed to describe what you want to teach.
Make sure people don't write their name but their id number on their homework to
avoid bias.
If you employ TAs try to hire them blindly, have someone send you their job applications without any personal information like name, age, etc. .
If you are doing some activities plan for different preferences. Provide alcoholic and non alcoholic drinks. Bring a bbq grill for vegans, vegetarians and omnivores and provide food for each of them.
Make sure people in a wheelchair can enter the location.
Make sure their are different areas for people with different needs. Some people are epileptic or have hyperacusis (can't be in loud locations).
Make sure everyone is invitited via an official mailing list.
Respect the freedom of all people. So don't overdo it. If you ban alcohol to please muslims, you are infringing on the freedom of non muslims. If you ban meat to please the vegans, you are infringing on the freedom of omnivores. You can have two tables, one with beer and one with lemonade. Let people decide which table they prefer.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: To add to the other answers, I'd like to point out that at least 10% of the general population has some sort of significant learning difference such as ADHD or a specific learning disability. If "learning differences" include things like ASD, social anxiety, sensory issues, and psychiatric conditions, the percentage is much higher. So avoid creating one-size-fits-all courses. Provide multiple ways for students to access material and participate in the course and multiple ways for them to develop and demonstrate mastery.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: I expect that most modern schools will have many special-interest groups for every minority and sexuality, gender and religion. This attitude has no place in the classroom. What classes really seem to need in terms of inclusivity are the following:
* **Inclusivity of ideas.** Don't inject snarky political comments into your lectures under the assumption that everyone has the same opinions. This alienates students who have different ideas and opinions, and gets old quickly. I was in school during the 2016 election. I was about ready to die by graduation.
* **Inclusivity of learning styles.** On tests and exams, include different types of questions, and award points for answers that don't quite hit the mark but show evidence of critical or logical thinking, as these are the underpinnings of computer science. Even if the student doesn't remember the exact algorithm in question, showing that he can think about it in a "CS-y" way proves that he is the right kind of student for the program. This also can be extended to lectures and additional readings. Provide examples that are visual. Provide examples that are auditory. Create analogies and parallels. And make sure that the board is visible all throughout the classroom and that you can actually be heard all throughout the classroom. If a lecture hall is so big that the students in the back have a significant disadvantage, that's because there are supposedly that many students in the lecture, so don't punish kids who have to sit in the back.
* **Inclusivity of schedules.** While the point about setting deadlines to avoid weekends or nights is not really practical due to the aforementioned snowball effect, you can try to make sure that someone is available in some capacity for a lot of time. Try to respond promptly to emails, or have a TA who responds quickly to them. Keep up with Piazza. Nothing is more disappointing than a class message board that hasn't been viewed by an instructor in over a month. To take this a step further, please keep up with your grading. Some students are not all right with having to wait until the day before the final to know how they're doing in the course. Many students are planners, and want to have as much information as possible as early as possible to make informed decisions about how to allocate their study time.
Upvotes: 5
|
2019/10/28
| 4,069
| 17,290
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm studying political science. My CGPA is awful at around 2.95, however, my GPA for the last fall, winter, and summer semester for my 3rd year have been 3.3, 4.0, 3.8 (I did really bad in first and second year). At the best, I am looking at about a 3.1/3.2 CGPA by the time I graduate.
I am wondering how competitive I actually am? Do I even have a chance with such a low CGPA knowing that meeting the requirements does not guarantee acceptance?
In terms of professors, I'm in the DSA of my program and know a couple of professors who would write me a good reference letter. I'm currently doing a independent study research project with a prof as well. And I worked through my entire undergrad: about 4 years of work experience in administrative and retail work.
Do I have a chance or is this a pipe dream? Is it true that grad schools only look at last 2 years?<issue_comment>username_1: This is an interesting question. The program I am doing most of my teaching in has recently been faced with a similar question (due to comments of an external evaluation), and I can't say we have come up with a satisfying solution yet.
Here are some pointers (in no particular order) that have come up in our discussion:
* **For exam tasks / homework descriptions:** evaluate critically if your tasks (or rather, their descriptions) carry bias. Naturally, you want to avoid the cool developer being called Bob and the silly user Alice or Ahmed, but it goes deeper than that. For example, in an Intro to Programming exam I was giving many years back the task was to model and implement a simulation of a game of football/soccer (the assumption here being that the majority population - white, male college kids in Europe - would be intimately aware of the rules and have an easy time conceptualizing the task). As it turns out, those that did not fall into the majority population (some women, foreign students) did worse on this task, presumably because they needed to spend a lot more brain cycles even understanding the game they were supposed to simulate.
* **For deadlines:** consider that some students may not be able to, if need be, work through the night or the weekend. It's easy to think that a deadline Sunday evening is not a big deal if you think of your students as a homogenious mass of 20-year-olds with no other obligations than to study, but if one of your students is a father / mother of two, or working on the weekend to sustain themselves, the story becomes different.
* **For extra-curricular activities:** the same is also true for extra-curriculars. If at all possible schedule attractive extra-curriculars (e.g., Hackathons, job fairs, whatever your university does) in a way that they can also be attended by people outside the majority population.
* **For social events:** the same applies to social events. Make sure that social events, to the extent possible, not only cater towards the majority population. For instance, when I studied, a lot of the student social events boiled down to "find an excuse to drink", and basically all conversation was in the local language. Both of this together unsurprisingly meant that foreign students, especially Islamic students, never showed up.
* **Avoiding "hidden knowledge":** in many universities and courses, there are official rules and "unspoken rules". For example, a teacher may *say* that students are expected to learn the entire book, but well-connected members of the majority population know from previous years that in reality most of the questions are about Chapters 3-8. Given that (some) minorities are less well-connected than the majority population, these constructions can disadvantage these students severely.
* **Diversity of TAs:** ensure that not all TAs are always from the majority population (i.e., ensure that there is some amount of representation of non-majority students). This may need active steering, because if you just take the first 5 qualified students, you may easily end up with only students from the majority population (because they are more, because they are better-connected, and because a lot of TA contracts are written in a way to appeal to 20-year-olds).
To summarize: keep in mind that some of your students may have a different cultural background, different life constraints, different priorities, or different access to "common knowledge". Try to level the playing field as well as you can.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Adding to what @username_1 said, and from a curricular/class activities and program standpoint:
* Add a class regarding BIAS in data with plenty of examples of GIGO
(Garbage in- Garbage Out).
* On the grading, force part of the grade to
correspond to BIAS/exclusion testing for all homework/projects, and
to consider the potential economic cost of such bias.
* Assign works that are targeted to a different sample of people than the average majority. VG: Model how a daycare works rather than a futbol match.
* Include mandatory books and lectures like: 'Invisible Women: Exposing Data Bias in a World Designed for Men', 'Coders: The Making of a New Tribe and the Remaking of the World' , Technically Wrong: Sexist Apps, Biased Algorithms, and Other Threats of Toxic Tech, 'When Cultures Collide: Leading Across Cultures'
* Be open with times and regarding remote work.
* Be strict regarding noninclusive behavior.
A lot of noninclusive behavior can be traced to the lack of knowledge about it or the comprehension of it's importance. Anything tech however is tricky, because for IT people (my field), social or political reasons are completely useless, you need to give rational reasons to why this matters, and the best and easiest way is to pinpoint economic or productivity reasons. If it seems that in small quantities its not much, then escalate to a country or society levels, even species/world level. With this you can ensure that the reasoning behind the curricula is sound and will be headed.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: **tl;dr** It's not so much about curriculum, but in delivery and materials.
---
I have specialised in issues of inclusivity in Computer Science within my university and have several publications in this area. Many of my papers look at inclusivity for students with alternate needs but I have also been looking at issues of gender issues that affect inclusivity.
The question asks what changes in a curriculum should one make? It depends somewhat on how you define curriculum and the scope of what a curriculum contains, which in my experience varies from place to place (or even discipline to discipline). In theory a curriculum is a document that defines higher level outcomes, competencies and broad brush subject areas. For example, it would say that students should be taught computer programming but not specify a language or software platform; it might say computer architecture without naming specific hardware devices and so on.
Thus we should have a universal curriculum that makes it clear what would be learned and demonstrate the value of the qualification without saying in detail the mechanisms by which those goals would be achieved (or am I being too theoretical in my pedagogics?).
What does need addressing to permit inclusivity in a computer science curriculum are aspects of delivery: the teaching material, the environment, the language, the people, the attitude. Many of these are human focused aspects of education.
There are probably too many detailed elements for me to include them all, but some important ones are:
**Hearts and Minds:** If your colleagues are not totally engaged in the diversity agenda, or see value in it then much effort in this direction would be attenuated. Everyone has to agree; the problem is convincing them. One has to point out that it helps recruitment, reputation, retention, income generation, student morale, improved results and so on. For the recidivists I just pointed out that to do otherwise would probably be illegal and perhaps result in embarrassing legal cases at some indeterminate time in the future, and would they like to explain their position in court? (That worked).
**Language (spoken and written):** Everyone has to be able to use appropriate language automatically and without undue effort. All class material should use appropriate language, and all verbalisations in class should be appropriate. Some examples from the past: do not assume programmers or manager would be male by slipping into "when he ...". Do not assume everyone can see the screen by saying "as you can see in the diagram..." (vision impairment) or assume that everyone is able to hear clearly, and so on. Use multiple forms of delivery in any class.
**Images and Illustrations:** Be careful in the selections of images used in teaching material. What do the images imply: like the languages do they imply particular attributes for the people pictured; particularly ones that not all students could relate to (e.g. all men etc).
**Use Technology**: As we are talking about computer science there is no excuse for not using technology. There should be online support for the classes (like a VLE) so students can download notes, copies of the presentations and even video recordings of the class. This can also allows assessment submission and feedback. This permits student with differing needs to use their own support technology to access the material without extra spport.
**Unconscious Bias:** Teachers needs to accept that they have implicit unconscious Bias use that awareness in their work. Colleagues might need to attend the available training.
**Culturally Specific Examples:** To help students understand difficult concepts examples and exercises are important. Picking the right examples will help learning. However there are cultural traps in these example which one should avoid because they might implicitly exclude or disadvantage a particular group. Assuming that students know how tax works or using abbreviations for tax forms or assuming they know something outside the subject like complex numbers or eigen vectors can be difficult.
**Physical Access:** An obvious one when considering diversity, but labs need adjustable height desks, doors wide enough for adult wheelchairs there need to be appropriate toilet facilities, appropriate break and rest areas, quiet and social spaces. All these address the needs of different groups. For example, our campus lacks a fully equipped disabled access toilet (i.e. one with a power hoist).
**Regulations and Procedures:** Are the institutional regulations for things such as attendance, submission of mitigation, repeat years and such like appropriately accommodating for the various needs of student groups or are they discriminatingly punitive in an attempt to be equal.
**The wider institution:** It is as important that management, IT provision and marketing for your institution are similarly minded. Without them many of the efforts in one subject area would just be made impotent by the lack of support from elsewhere.
---
Although not answering the question directly you may be interested in publications in this area. As has already been mentioned in comments, there is plenty of literature out there that you can refer to. Mine is but a splash is the ocean:
* [Experiences of Teaching Disabled Students of Computing at UK Universities](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263120564_Experiences_of_Teaching_Disabled_Students_of_Computing_at_UK_Universities), (2007)
+ Discusses funding provisions in the UK for disabled students (DSA), common adaptations required for students being taught within the University of Hull's Computer Science department [e.g. electronic accessible lecture notes, clarity of taught examples and assignment information, adaptations for examinations] and the process through which students can disclose additional needs at application time. Generally a very UK-representative discussion of what is involved to teach students with disabilities at university-level.
* [Experiencias de enseñanza a estudiantes de informática con discapacidad en Universidades del Reino Unido](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261528122_Experiencias_de_ensenanza_a_estudiantes_de_informatica_con_discapacidad_en_Universidades_del_Reino_Unido), (2008) Spanish Version.
* [Vortrag über Diversity in der Informatiklehre](https://www.oth-regensburg.de/international/nachrichten/einzelansicht/news/vortrag-ueber-diversity-in-der-informatiklehre.html) (2018) German report on similar talk.
I hope that of that would be useful at pointing you at issues in this area.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: **Important Notice**
Be careful about what you have read, a lot of grievance studies "papers" are based in faith not science. And do more harm than good. Here is a very good "study" done by two Phds and one journalists about the validity of gender studies, critical race studies etc. It is scary.
<https://areomagazine.com/2018/10/02/academic-grievance-studies-and-the-corruption-of-scholarship/>
**To answer your question:**
Try to use simple language if possible if you have non native speakers. Of course do it only when complicated terms are not needed to describe what you want to teach.
Make sure people don't write their name but their id number on their homework to
avoid bias.
If you employ TAs try to hire them blindly, have someone send you their job applications without any personal information like name, age, etc. .
If you are doing some activities plan for different preferences. Provide alcoholic and non alcoholic drinks. Bring a bbq grill for vegans, vegetarians and omnivores and provide food for each of them.
Make sure people in a wheelchair can enter the location.
Make sure their are different areas for people with different needs. Some people are epileptic or have hyperacusis (can't be in loud locations).
Make sure everyone is invitited via an official mailing list.
Respect the freedom of all people. So don't overdo it. If you ban alcohol to please muslims, you are infringing on the freedom of non muslims. If you ban meat to please the vegans, you are infringing on the freedom of omnivores. You can have two tables, one with beer and one with lemonade. Let people decide which table they prefer.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: To add to the other answers, I'd like to point out that at least 10% of the general population has some sort of significant learning difference such as ADHD or a specific learning disability. If "learning differences" include things like ASD, social anxiety, sensory issues, and psychiatric conditions, the percentage is much higher. So avoid creating one-size-fits-all courses. Provide multiple ways for students to access material and participate in the course and multiple ways for them to develop and demonstrate mastery.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: I expect that most modern schools will have many special-interest groups for every minority and sexuality, gender and religion. This attitude has no place in the classroom. What classes really seem to need in terms of inclusivity are the following:
* **Inclusivity of ideas.** Don't inject snarky political comments into your lectures under the assumption that everyone has the same opinions. This alienates students who have different ideas and opinions, and gets old quickly. I was in school during the 2016 election. I was about ready to die by graduation.
* **Inclusivity of learning styles.** On tests and exams, include different types of questions, and award points for answers that don't quite hit the mark but show evidence of critical or logical thinking, as these are the underpinnings of computer science. Even if the student doesn't remember the exact algorithm in question, showing that he can think about it in a "CS-y" way proves that he is the right kind of student for the program. This also can be extended to lectures and additional readings. Provide examples that are visual. Provide examples that are auditory. Create analogies and parallels. And make sure that the board is visible all throughout the classroom and that you can actually be heard all throughout the classroom. If a lecture hall is so big that the students in the back have a significant disadvantage, that's because there are supposedly that many students in the lecture, so don't punish kids who have to sit in the back.
* **Inclusivity of schedules.** While the point about setting deadlines to avoid weekends or nights is not really practical due to the aforementioned snowball effect, you can try to make sure that someone is available in some capacity for a lot of time. Try to respond promptly to emails, or have a TA who responds quickly to them. Keep up with Piazza. Nothing is more disappointing than a class message board that hasn't been viewed by an instructor in over a month. To take this a step further, please keep up with your grading. Some students are not all right with having to wait until the day before the final to know how they're doing in the course. Many students are planners, and want to have as much information as possible as early as possible to make informed decisions about how to allocate their study time.
Upvotes: 5
|
2019/10/28
| 320
| 1,367
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am applying for tenure track /postdoc and I asked two professor to write me a research letter. In some job applications I am asked to describe the relationship with them, and I am not so sure what are the correct words.
The first one is a professor in the university where I obtain the PhD. They are also an expert in the field.
The second one is a world-class expert in my field. I know them personally as we meet in conference over the years and I visited them occasionally.
I did not collaborate with both of them.
Any suggestions?<issue_comment>username_1: Both don't seem like unusual "relationships" at all, so I don't think there should be any issue describing them just like you did here.
If there is a drop-down list, you can select whatever is the most appropriate (presumably there are options amounting to "colleague at my current department" and "collaborator" - I think it counts as "collaborating" if you have visited them occasionally, even if you happened to not have published a paper yet). If there is a freetext field, you can just write what you wrote here.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Your letter writer will describe the relationship in the first paragraph of their letter. If you are not sure what they will say, then ask the letter writer. You should be saying the same thing they say.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/10/28
| 1,417
| 6,158
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've been asked to referee a paper about a software tool. I'm struggling with whether this particular work is sufficient to warrant publication. The journal I'm reviewing for doesn't have a "notability/novelty" criterion, but they do require that the work be a "unit of publication."
Let's call the thing I'm reviewing "Feature." Feature is part of a larger package, let's call it "Package." Feature is a GUI tool that takes the data that has already been calculated by Package and plots it using a widely-used plotting backend. It has some nice stuff exposing options in the plotting backend as GUI elements, and a few options related to the nature of the plot being made (scatter plot vs. heatmap, basically, plus some toggles based on domain-specific labels in the data).
Here are some facts that are shaping my view:
1. There is essentially no scientific logic in Feature. It needs to be able to read the files, optionally multiply by a weight, and then it has a few stored toggles in the data to change which data is presented. But it's mainly a very simple GUI to ~~analyze~~ visualize data from Package.
2. The entirety of Feature is less than 1400 lines of code, with almost half being the GUI-specific.
3. Looking at the code, (especially non-GUI) I suspect that I could cut about 300-400 lines of code -- the developers aren't using scientific software tools available, including reimplementing a function that's in a library they include.
4. Currently, a paper about Package version X.0 is under peer review (X>1); cited in the manuscript I'm reviewing. All authors of the paper on Feature are also authors of the paper on Package.
5. The entire author list for Package is essentially one research group -- this isn't a giant community-wide effort. And the paper on Package version X-1 was published only 2 years ago, so I'm surprised they're trying to get two more software papers out already.
The last two especially annoy me, because I feel like the purpose of scientific software papers are to make scientific software development citable, not to pad your paper count. The authors will already be getting the citations based on the other paper.
On the other side, I came to this with some bias that one of the authors has a tendancy to care more about quantity than quality with publications. So I'm not sure if my leaning toward reject is partially based on that, or on the facts on the ground. (Hence the desire for other opinions.)
EDIT: I forgot to say that Feature is not yet merged into the main branch of Package, but it currently in a separate branch in the same git repository.<issue_comment>username_1: There is no *bright line* threshold for such things and the answer should be the same as for any scientific paper, hinging on questions of novelty and extension of knowledge. If it doesn't have that, then it probably isn't a good candidate, though the standards of different journals vary widely.
But you seem to describe a small-if-any advance with little novelty and you also seem to have made up your mind. We can't help you with the judgement and you just need to take a risk and call it. Others may disagree with you, but that is always the case in reviewing.
I don't really understand your point 5 and might disagree with your emphasis on it. Why is work done within a group less valuable that work that crosses institutional lines? Lots of papers are done by one or a few people within a research group. However, I might agree more if you mean all of their cited papers come from those same people. That isn't necessarily a red flag, but might be.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'm going to accept username_1's answer, because even if it is not the "here's how
to make it easy on you" answer I'd hoped for, it seems to be the
generally-agreed correct answer.
That said, after a lot of thought (and considering feedback from here) I've
come up with a list that pretty much satisfies me. I guess that everything
after the first two points is more to check "is there novelty/notability here
that you're overlooking because your gut reaction is that this isn't enough
work to count as a paper?"
* **Does this implement any non-trivial science?** If the tool implements
significant data generation or data analysis logic, then it should be
considered. "Significant" is still a subjective term, but just reading an
output format would not be significant.
* **Is the software tool distributed independently?** One important purpose of
software papers is to make the community aware of plugins that otherwise
wouldn't be noticed (lost in some dark corner of the internet). These may be
relatively small (but useful) bits of code that would be overlooked without a
journal to serve as an announcement forum. This criterion is probably only
applicable to edge cases.
* **Is the tool re-usable in many contexts?** Even a very simple tool can be a
valuable contribution if it is designed to facilitate interoperability. For
example, a simple "universal translator" for domain-specific formats might be
very small, but might be worth publishing.
* **Is the approach novel?** Even for journals that do not have a novelty
*requirement*, the *existence* of a novel approach can be a consideration in
whether a paper should be accepted.
* **Does implementation of the tool require significant domain expertise?**
Packaging significant domain expertise in a way that makes it available to
non-experts is a potential purpose of a scientific software publication.
For the fifth point, I'm imagining something like a GUI that prevents users from
selecting incompatible options, where the incompatibilities may require domain
expertise. I know in my field we have script-based data generation programs
where users can accidentally select incompatible options and get nonsense as a
result.
I'm not positive that this covers all cases, but it covers everything I can
think of. And I feel better having used a rubric that I could apply
to any software package.
Posting with the hope of community feedback, and so the next person in a
similar situation can see what I did!
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/10/28
| 1,593
| 7,114
|
<issue_start>username_0: It is commonly understood that romantic relationships between faculty and students at the same university are frowned upon, or explicitly forbidden. However are romantic relationships between faculty and graduate students at geographically far away universities acceptable? Are they still acceptable if the faculty and graduate student are in the same field or neighboring field? Is a small age difference between faculty and graduate student ever relevant in such situations?<issue_comment>username_1: I would carefully check with each school's ethic guidelines, which should be written somewhere. That said, in general, I'd be surprised if there were any issue. There might be some possible complicating factors; for example, some schools will occasionally have faculty from outside sit on a PhD committee, and obviously it would be inappropriate for that faculty member to sit on that grad student's committee. But barring weird situations where they end up having some conflict of interest or authority over the grad student, there really shouldn't be an issue.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Short answer: **generally yes.**
---
Long answer:
It is commonly understood that consenting adults are in general free to enter voluntary romantic relationships with whomever they choose, except for people over whom they hold professional authority. Thus, a professor may not have a relationship with her or his *own* student. That’s a big no-no anywhere I’m familiar with.
As for graduate students in the same institution but in other departments, whether a professor is to be regarded as being in a position of authority over such a student is a matter of interpretation; opinions about this seem to vary considerably, and I think it would be a mistake to characterize any particular opinion as being “commonly understood”.
As for a professor having a relationship with someone who is a student in another university, there may be specific circumstances where that would be problematic, such as if the student is applying for a postdoc or other position in the professor’s department. Even this doesn’t make the relationship taboo, it only means appropriate measures must be taken to ensure the professor isn’t exercising any decision-making authority over their significant other’s application. But generally speaking, other than those specific exceptional circumstances, this doesn’t violate any rules, and isn’t frowned upon by reasonable people.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Look for guidance to the reasons behind such rules and norms. They serve, formally and/or informally to prevent situations in which one party can blackmail or extort the other into improper acts that affect the institution. The same sorts of rules occur in many large organizations for the same reasons.
Can a History professor adversely affect the career of a philosophy graduate student? Perhaps they can, though it would be less likely in a very large university. But each case would need to be judged individually. They could also improperly work to advance the career of the other person in some situations.
However, most formal rules also have the purpose of trying to avoid the *appearance* of impropriety, not just the fact of it. Therefore they are normally written (when written) to be a bit more conservative than some would consider necessary. Scandal reflects badly on the institution, of course.
But a relationship between someone at one university and someone else at a different university is unlikely to have the power imbalance characteristics that would raise alarms if their professional association were closer.
So the answer to the question "Is it alright to ..." is normally "It depends...". But some cases are much clearer than others. And predators *do* exist.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I'm not as sure as some of the other answers here, although agree with @username_3 that "it depends". Many of the answers here are posted under the assumption that what is wrong with faculty-student relationships is that the faculty member has the ability unfairly advantage the student, but this isn't the only reason.
Part of the worry with staff student relationships is that the relationship is not entered into entirely voluntarily, even if the staff member believes it is (actaully, even if the student believes it is). This is because the staff member has power over the student - but not just concrete power, like grade etc, but also social and cultural power. This differential can also apply outside your own university - students can have a hard time dealing with attention from staff at conferences because the staff member has social capital in the field that the student does not have, thus there might be an element of coercion involved, even if neither party (but especially the staff member) is aware of it.
Thus, to a certain extent, common sense has to be used - relationships that pre-exist the current staff/student status, or two people who meet at say, a Star Trek conversion, without being award of the connection, are clearly fine. Relationships that start at conferences are much more dodgy. As @username_3 said, look at the reasons behind the rules, and ask your self how this applies to your situation.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: A lot of these answers focus on the direct interpersonal aspects of the situation (eg, can two people date).
Here's a direct quote from my university's handbook about another aspect worth considering:
>
> A potential conflict of interest exists whenever personal,
> professional, commercial, or financial interests or activities outside
> of the University have the possibility (either in actuality or in
> appearance) of (1) compromising a faculty or staff member’s judgment;
> (2) biasing the nature or direction of scholarly research; (3)
> influencing a faculty or staff member’s decision or behavior with
> respect to teaching and student affairs, appointments and promotions,
> uses of University resources, interactions with human subjects, or
> other matters of interest to the University; or (4) resulting in a
> personal or family member’s gain or advancement at the expense of the
> University
>
>
>
For example, this might cover:
1. Faculty member reviews manuscripts, grants, etc from the lab of the
student
2. Faculty member uses official resources to travel to student's city for borderline reasons, or requests reimbursement for non-work-related costs during the trip (if you want to upgrade to the honeymoon suite, don't pay for it from a grant)
3. Unusual or preferential access to lab resources while student is visiting ("here's our visiting scholar. Give them whatever they need. Really.")
4. Sharing sensitive or privileged information (eg third-party manuscripts under review that might affect student's chances of publication).
None of these scenarios is specific to a relationship, but some of these situations might be more likely to occur when a romantic relationship is involved. All the standard rules of good judgment apply.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/10/28
| 550
| 1,804
|
<issue_start>username_0: What is the longest discrepancy between death and publication?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, papers get published posthumously.
I don't know who the world record holders are, but <NAME>, one of the greats of biomolecular simulation, who passed away in October 2016, has written several papers in 2019 (according to Google Scholar). These include a PNAS: <https://www.pnas.org/content/116/12/5356.short>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The paper
>
> <NAME>. "Some properties of coherent spin states." Journal of Physics A: General Physics 4.3 (1971): 313
>
>
>
was submitted in 1970, published in 1971, and contains the following:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/HGwrg.png)
At the time of writing this post, the paper has 951 Google citations.
There is no hint as to the date of the passing of Prof. Radcliffe but it is the only publication by this author on MathSciNet; it is entirely possible that Prof. Radcliffe could have published in Journals not covered by MathSciNet. The Mathematical Genealogy project contains references to a single <NAME> who graduated from University of London in 1967, but the general area of the thesis and the aforementioned work do not match very well.
Anyways, this is clearly an example of posthumous publication not done in collaboration.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Euler has several items [published/presented in 1862](http://eulerarchive.maa.org/date-publish.html#1840). This is 79 years after his [death on 18 September 1783](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonhard_Euler#Return_to_Russia_and_death). (Several were written in the 1740s, so the writing-publishing gap is more than a century.)
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/10/29
| 1,093
| 4,381
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am about to defend my thesis and I have not yet secured a postdoc position elsewhere. I want to ask my PhD advisor if she can support me as a postdoc till I secure a position elsewhere. Usually in other groups, it is the advisor who offers a position to their performing students. In my group, graduates have always secured position and have moved away so no one had to have this conversation with the advisor. She has not offered me any position till date.
I have a good rapport with my advisor, but I don't know how to phrase the request so that it doesn't sound awkward and desperate? I am feeling very hesitant in approaching her with this request but I don't see any other options.
I constantly fear that, probably she didn't like me as a student and wants to get rid of me asap. So, that's the reason she has not offered me a position yet.<issue_comment>username_1: Regarding the main question, I refer to [xLeitix' excellent answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/138812/48413) to a similar question.
Addressing the specific parts of your situation, I see two likely reasons why your advisor hasn't offered you anything yet:
1. **publication record** - in most fields, securing a post-doc position requires a reasonably good track record in publications. If your publication output during your PhD was not on par, she may be worried if an academic career is for you.
2. **lack of funding** - to offer you a position, your advisor would need to have funding for you readily available. This would be most likely if she recently won a grant. You should ask her about that. If she has no funding for you now, you can ask if she knows any other PIs who are looking for post-docs, which might be more likely.
You can also consider writing your own grant proposal for a post-doc position; some countries have dedicated funding options for that. (However, the decision process may take half a year or more.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If you are interested in the [possible implications](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/138811/4249) of making such a request to your advisor or accepting such a position, please check the linked question and all the related answers. I also [gave an account me asking my advisor about it](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/138860/4249) in an answer to that question, but the focus was a bit different so I'll summarise the relevant parts here.
Staying at the same lab following PhD graduation for a **short position** (~6months) can be *beneficial to the student to ease the transition period*. **Longer positions** are mostly *beneficial to the lab only*, but not to the academic career of the (now former) students.
Therefore, I think **one of the possible reasons you have not received an offer from your current adviser could be that they are not aware you might need one** (it could be, in a very minor way, a compliment).
I was in exactly your situation a month before my viva: looking through some job adds, not really finding any good fits, and spending 10+ hours a day on my viva preparation. So I had decided to ask my adviser for a short postdoc position to help me out of the situation. I was very direct. I'd invited him to go for our lunch break together (basically, just sit together during the lunch hour in the University canteen, where we would both typically take our lunch anyway). Some small-talk appropriate for the culture, and then I flat-out asked: **"I know I should've, but due to my intensive viva preparations, I did not yet sort out a (postdoc) position for after my graduation. Could you help me out somehow?"**
**As a result, he'd offered me a 4-month postdoc**, on the (legally mandated) minimal postdoc salary. The funding for it **came from the discretionary lab budget, not connected to any project**. I have seen a lot of (established) labs in Europe will have that type of budget.
While I can not help you cope with your feelings of awkwardness, **I strongly believe nobody should feel ashamed to ask for help when they need it**. The worst that can happen is being told no, and even then you are likely to end with more information or at least advice then if not asking at all. Especially in this situation, as your are asking for advice on your academic career from the person who is supposed to provide such advice in the first place.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/10/29
| 6,568
| 26,835
|
<issue_start>username_0: In short: I am starting my fourth year of PhD, and my funding is running out in roughly ten months. I could use some advice about how to make the most of the time I have left, in particular to make sure I deliver something coherent and I am employable afterwards.
More context:
* During the past three years, I have struggled with personal issues (breakup of a long-term relationship due to moving away for the PhD), poor lifestyle choices, and discipline problems, all impacting my PhD research.
* The result: after three years, I still haven't finished writing the manuscript of my main project, a project I don't like at all because it was half-baked since the beginning. What makes it harder to swallow is that I am 100% responsible for this situation.
* My supervisor was understanding at first, and started becoming stricter and stricter over time because of the lack of output. This in turn caused some other problems (stress, loss of sleep). Recently we had a discussion where he told me he would not let me finish my PhD, because otherwise I'd need 10 years to complete it and he can't afford to pay me for such time...
* I reached the point where I am completely disgusted with what I am doing and I am seeking a way out. My only problem is that I'd like to make sure I am employable. So I figured my best bet would be to try completing the PhD, no matter if it is imperfect / incomplete.
* Since I have only ~10 months left (roughly 10 because I could probably survive a few more months with my savings) to make up for the last three years, I'd like some pointers about how to make the most out of it, without going completely insane. To be more specific, I guess I am looking for advice about efficiency (both in professional and personal life), how to be more stable, how to make strategic choices and set priorities when there is a lack of time.<issue_comment>username_1: You cannot *make up for the last three years* in ten months; perhaps you can *salvage something*: Try to **devise a plan to produce a thesis in ten months**.
3-6 weeks: You presumably have sufficient material to write an introduction. You presumably also have sufficient material to write about any related work. (If relevant, you presumably have sufficient material to describe the context, e.g., mathematical background.) Even without all the material, you should be able to write those sections in 3-6 weeks.
This will leave you with around forty weeks. **Meet with your supervisor to discuss what you should prioritise to finish your thesis within that time frame**.
---
As per other answers, **your mental health must be a priority**. I won't expand further, because I'm ill-equipped to offer mental health advice.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: To be honest, from your description I would be less concerned with finishing your PhD and more concerned about your mental health.
You should probably talk to a mental health professional or GP, and then worry about this. The chances that the road to a PhD would be forever closed for you is reasonably small, but if you don't take care of yourself the impacts can be significant.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_3: It seems you are most concerned with being employed, but do you mean being employed at a university (after your PhD) or in the industry?
If you mean being employed at a university (as a professor) I think a PhD is mandatory (correct me if I'm wrong). So in this case you kind of need to complete it.
If you mean being employed in the industry, assuming you have a Master's degree (before your PhD), you should be able to find a job I think. You can try to apply for jobs now, and see if you get hired. If so, you could quit your PhD if that is possible (you seem to be really unhappy with it).
I'd say put your own wellbeing first
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: **In your current situation it seems you should not even think about it**. You walked a hard walk already for the last years and it took a mental health toll already (insomnia etc.). **You won't suddenly be another person** that can take the same toll, triple down on motivation, discipline and actual output. Especially not when you're already in a weak position on all fronts, i.e. health, relationship to advisor, current state where the advisor thinks substantial work is needed.
You should
* Look for and implement an exit strategy (either restart another PhD with a topic you like or publish what you have and look for a job that fits you, as research assistant, in industry or elsewhere)
* Take care of your mental health, **before** you start your next job: Give yourself some time to take a deep breath, decide what is most important, where and how you want to live, adjust the exit strategy accordingly
Remember: Doing the same thing over and over again in the hope the outcome is different is...
... so you need to change at least one variable. Changing yourself takes time and you likely tried that for the last years, so it's time to change your context.
P.S. This assumes substantial work is necessary for a submittable/passable PhD and it's not just the write-up that is missing. Clarify that status with your supervisor, but him saying he would not let you finish because it would take too long, seems to indicate there are huge chunks missing.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: A few remarks:
1. Getting a job takes time and some level of focus. You would need to write a good CV and cover letter, and be prepare to customize both for each job you apply. Then you should also train for interviews, and go for a few trial interviews in jobs you don't really want (this avoids being too stressed/nervous on a very important interview). So if you want to salvage your PhD, looking for a job right now is not what you should be doing. Half-assing a job search will not get you far, and will likely make your mental heath worse.
2. Apologize to your advisor, recognize that you are at fault for the lack of output in case you haven't explicitly done so. You will need his support and some level of his approval if you want to defend your thesis. In many places, you won't even be authorized to form a committee unless your advisor says so.
3. Make your financial plans as of now, and start saving money! Do your math to find out how long you can live without the stipend you have now. Once you've done this, pre-warn people that would be willing to help you, something like *"Hey dad, I'm doing my math, and I have 10 months stipend yet, plus I'd have savings for 4 months after that, then I will have no reserve funds and might need some extra months to finish my thesis, is there any chance you could help me then? If so it would ease my mind very much, and I'll do my best to repay you once I get a job."*. The key here is to show that you are planning ahead and not calling in a moment of desperation. The person you ask is likely to deny at first, don't push too much, but check later if there is anything you can do. Make sure to promise you'll repay the person. Write up a contract if you ask anyone who's not family, and offer at least 4% yearly interest. Then, check how much extra time you'll have.
4. From 10 months, I'd expect you should be able to extent your deadline to 18 months. This is much more reasonable. Once you've done this, and you have your planning done, talk to your advisor. It's important for him/her to know that you are aware of the load on your shoulders, but that you now have a much more feasible deadline. This should make him a lot more cooperative.
5. Don't forget to clean your house regularly, talk to family and friends every week, get enough sunlight and do some exercise, this is basic stuff to prevent mental health issues, which is something you cannot afford to fight with right now. Try to get at least one consultation with a psychiatrist just to check on status for red flags.
6. Once you get on track (i.e. when you always know what the next step is and how to start it), you won't dread the work anymore. I've been there several times: You get to new place where you always need to ask people about basic stuff, or started a new project with technologies I'm not familiar with and don't have people to guide me. It is very demotivating, but it's just the pain of kicking-off at unfavorable conditions: It goes away if you insist enough. Keep this in mind.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Yes, you can complete a PhD in 10 months if you work really hard. I had a 3-year funding for my PhD project in a Western country and managed to write a very good PhD thesis by working on my PhD project only part-time, about 25-30% of my time. I spent three years, but the effort I actually invested was equivalent to about 10-12 months of hard full-time work.
Postdocs usually publish quite a few articles per year, while PhD students usually publish 1-3 articles in the entire period of their PhD project. Think about that.
Advice about efficiency:
1. Ensure you are in good mental shape each day. To do so, sleep and eat well. Set strict boundaries for yourself about this. In particular, always go to bed in time and remain in bed no matter what until the dawn. This simple trick almost instantly resolved my sleep problems. If you have any addictions (e.g., gaming, drinking, etc.), just stop them cold turkey. If you have any obsessive thoughts about your past relationship, do not "feed" those thoughts by consciously thinking about your past relationship. They will go away on their own.
2. Plan your days carefully. When you make a plan for a day, allocate as much time to your PhD project as possible. During the time period allocated to the PhD project on any particular day, do nothing but your PhD work and do not succumb to any distractions or temptations to do something else.
3. Make a detailed strategic plan how to complete your PhD project.
4. In your everyday work on your PhD thesis, set concrete goals to be achieved by the end of each day. To achieve those goals, you can set sub-goals, etc.
5. Do not be hasty and do not be a perfectionist. Just calmly do your job each day like a professional. Do things step by step. Any great accomplishment is made of small steps. You just need to divide your work into small steps and to make those steps. As simple as that.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: Get out of there, as soon as possible, focus on improving your mental and physical health, then make a plan to restart your career. No amount of PHDs or jobs is worth your sanity.
If this argument ain't convincing to you, let me put it in other way.. the longer you stay this way the more expensive, time consuming and emotionally draining will be to fix your health issues.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: I read <NAME>' answer and was going to post this as a comment, but it was getting too long.
I have suffered from depression before myself; however, I don't think quitting a PhD should be the automatic path, just because you may be experiencing some depressive symptoms. That implies that we should always quit everything the moment things start 'getting tough'. Feelings of failure and inadequacy that would accompany quitting can also have an impact on mental health/self esteem, not to mention a potentially significant impact on your longer-term future.
My advice is that you need to weigh up the situation with your mental health and whether you think you can push through the hardship and finish the program. The answer really depends on how serious your mental health problems are, which is something only you can assess; however, a mental health professional would be able to provide valuable guidance and advice.
However, you should expect that the stress and depressive symptoms are probably not going to improve much until you are out of the situation that is causing them (if they are being caused by a particular situation).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: I think you should search for a job, it will solve all your worries and improves your mental health. if you get the job first then you will never think Ph.D. for job, you can still continue with your job funding as a passion so your 3 years you spend in pursuing a Ph.D. will not get waste.
your purpose for the Ph.D. is just to get employed, I think there are many other options to get a job without a Ph.D., Ask friends & relatives to help you out in getting a job, send them your resume. I know you don't have funding that is why you can't do business but I will say you can at least look for small start-ups plan on google, maybe you can do something.
There are many remote jobs & freelancer jobs available online. I think you also having enough knowledge to become a tutor.
about your mental health, I will say do not worry about qualifying Ph.D. is the best approach to start with, just think how to get the job. yes, think like you will give your best to the Ph.D. within the remaining time and look for the job, if you get the job you will get the funding and you can do Ph.D.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: >
> My only problem is that I'd like to make sure I am employable. So I
> figured my best bet would be to try completing the PhD, no matter if
> it is imperfect / incomplete.
>
>
>
Hi,
**if your only concern is your career/job, here is my story for you:**
I am one of those who quit their PhD. I gave up after 4th year!
Because it was way too much stress, without funding, with 4 kids. I had enough of it.
The professor had the same views about me (which your professor has about you).
I was considered totally unreliable, useless, directionless and lazy.
So I prepared my CV, talked to a lot of friends who are working in industry. Only a few of them were interested in advising, even fewer were willing to help.
And one of them actually had discussed with me about what kind of person his company was looking for.
After 2-3 months, he arranged my interview with his boss. I started as a part-time employee with 3 months contract.
I did really good during that initial contract (because I knew if I fail this will be the end of the beginning), and got the job which I held for next 6 years.
Don't forget that a PhD can make you over-qualified for many jobs.
Re-activate your personal contacts, talk to people you are willing to change and move to a practical job.
**Don't end-up being caught in this never-ending PhD whirlpool.**
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_11: I spent 6.5 years on my Ph.D. and finally got it this year, my suggestion to you would be setting up the deadline and prepare for the worst-case as well. Having the deadline will always make you more stressful and might crash you by making you panic, so you need to tell yourself what the worst-case would be and make sure you can swallow it, for example, not being able to complete the Ph.D. and, even worse, have to spend more than a year to get a job. Knowing or preparing for the worst-case can somehow relief your stress.
If you feel like you need to seek professional mental health assistance, go for it. Otherwise, talk to your professor and make a reasonable plan with him, and then work hard on it, I think you will be heavily relying on your professor's help (brainstorm, revise your paper, etc) and professors tend to be busy, so, make sure you have a clear chatting/working schedule with your professor and try not to waste time on scheduling or waiting. Seek help from your labmates if possible.
Try to analyze the factors that are blocking you, change them if you can. Try not to blame others cause there's not much you can do to change. Always make time for some weekly exercise and take enough rest to keep yourself mentally healthy.
I found some really valuable suggestions here and I know that it is sometimes difficult to make a change, all I want to say is, Ph.D. is totally not necessary for your life unless you want to stay in academia, and, if you do want to stay in academia, stuck on sth you do not like is not a good way. You might want to consider to restart a new round.
Bless you.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_12: I agree with many of the sentiments above. I had done the *research* for my PhD over a several-years period, but finished writing up the dissertation in about 10 months. Remember, that this is only *possible* with your advisor's cooperation (or finding another advisor, if that's *possible* in your situation). (I am in the US.)… As said above, the PhD may or may not be useful, especially if you go into industry instead of academia. People rarely call me "Dr" these days ….. I'm glad I got it, but your situation might be quite different. As they said above, your health is much more important!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_13: It is possible. That is an answer to your question. It will require writing 5-10 good pages a week steadily for about half a year, and a good part of revision.
It can be done. I am not saying it should be done.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_14: If your adviser does not think you're going anywhere and you are disgusted with the job you're doing, I don't think investing 10 more months makes sense. Chances are you will still not have finished your PhD.
So, like other people have said, I would take a long walk or a week's holiday doing something completely different. Lie on the beach, sailing, whatever relaxes you. Let go.
I think you'll decide that you are not going to finish this PhD. As responses here indicate: you don't need a PhD to find a job. In many fields it's not even a recommendation to have one.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_15: Yes, it is possible to save a PhD in 10 months. It's tough work, but you can do it if you give yourself the chance to clear your head and re-prioritise, if you change the way you handle downtime, and if you have a small sprinkling of luck.
I'm going to get some heat for this, but I can empathise and I would regret not sharing this with you if it meant it could help. This is all from experience and any points I'm going to make are purely anecdotal, a little bit brutally honest in places, with a little bit of dry humour in places. It's the first time I'm sharing my experience like this, and it's a bit of an essay but I hope it helps anyway.
**My Experience**
Out of a staggering coincidence, 10 months how long it took to get my thesis done - the end of the final month being the hard deadline. [Here's the Gource animation of my git commits to prove it](https://youtu.be/BWKkG6f8mWU). Making matters worse, I only actually started making real progress in the last month, as you will see, and pretty much everything I had written before that was either majorly rewritten or removed, so for all intents and purposes it was a *lot* less than 10 months. For complete shameless honesty, two days before submission I had three git commits, with commit messages "kill me now", "WHY?", and "F\*\*\* THIS S\*\*\*". Six commits later, my commit message was "OMG I'M DONE", before the final commit: "oops, forgot the declaration". Yeah, that happens.
I'm not proud of leaving it so late to get started on formalising my work, and I had slightly different reasons - I took on a C++ job during the early stages of my PhD (it grew from a bit of consulting work into a full time role quite quickly) and that took over most of my time, leaving me physically and emotionally exhausted. In the last few months this made it even harder, because it gave me the temptation of an easy out (sidenote: I'm still working there, and I love it - all that has changed is the letters by my name).
**General thoughts**
First of all you need to take a short break of a couple of weeks to gather your thoughts. It sounds crazy, right? You're stressed out by a looming deadline (i.e. you're human) and a break makes it WORSE, right? **No.** You need to focus on your mental health, get some exercise, get some nature into you and imagine how it'll feel to be able to do that one day without stress looming over you (or, at least, stress of the PhD flavour). Towards the end of this break make your decision on whether to continue your project based on the old trick - flip a coin to determine the outcome, and if the result disappoints you then turn that coin over. I bet you any money that your choice will be to continue.
The points about the supervisor are unfortunate. My supervisor was a superhero - extremely patient, fought my corner, and generally a really nice chap. However, this is the time when it's rather natural for students and supervisors to drift apart somewhat. They are no longer responsible for your 'supervision' as such [citation needed], although they should certainly be there to provide guidance if you ask for it. If your supervisor isn't playing ball, then it isn't the end of the world - it's the examiners you have to worry about, and although your supervisor does coordinate things with them, he won't harm your chances. If anything it sounds like he wants you to prove yourself, and you have **plenty** of time to do that.
I can wholeheartedly say that any advice about getting N pages done per week or writing X section in Y amount of time is to be taken with a pinch of salt - if you're anything like I was, you'll have periods of very little progress and periods of extreme productivity. In my experience, planning regular incremental steps will demolish your motivation when you fail to reach one of those artificial milestones on time. Case in point - if you look at the animation I linked to above, you'll see that I had long periods of inactivity or only minor modifications, and bursts of activity every so often (particularly September. My final deadline was the end of September. No, I didn't do the whole draft thing. That's for sensible people).
You have done a lot of work and you have specialised in a certain field. You might not feel like it right now, but you have done things that no one else has, got excited about something that a fraction of a percentage of the world's population is able to even understand, and the next step is to share as much of it as you can in one coherent document and to try and trick readers into feeling that excitement too.
I'd suggest not writing your introduction first. It's the hardest thing to get right, and the best and easiest way of doing it is to get your content down first and then figure out the best way to introduce it. Many people abuse the intro as a content filler, and as a way of raising the reference count into the stratosphere, but if anything this can detract the reader from the main content. If that's your thing then go for it, but IMO the best introductions are those that give a rather specific overview of the state of the specific area that you're going to present.
**Pointers on productivity**
So let me end this rant with a few suggestions if you decide to take this further.
* If you don't already adopt a project planning methodology, do so. The simplest option is to [start a Trello board](https://trello.com/). Install the app. Put it as a widget on your front screen on your phone. It will be your life from now on. Don't go crazy on the planning, though - don't spending more time micromanaging your thesis than DOING your thesis, though if you do then you're in for a fantastic career in management.
* If you don't currently use version control, do so. Obviously I'd recommend Git if you're running a LaTeX project. MS Office offers version control if that's your thing.
* You will have periods of low motivation. That's guaranteed. Use them to your strength. If you aren't feeling up to adding new content, there are plenty of house-keeping things to get on with that are essentially brainless - improve formatting of existing content, add acknowledgements and the declaration, play around with the title page, create some figures. If you're feeling pretentious, find some corny quotes to put on each section. You're going to need to take procrastination to a whole new level.
* University libraries usually store previous students' PhD theses. You have every right to access them. Think of some people in your field who completed their PhDs at your university and get some inspiration from their work - how they used graphics, how they formed their introduction, how they broke down their sections, how they concluded their work. Maybe they added toy examples of certain problems and demonstrated their solution, and maybe you like that idea and want to do it too. There is nothing to be ashamed about by getting inspiration from others' work. That's what science is all about. But, obviously, limit that to just inspiration please.
* Think of everything you've done so far. Which part of it do you feel is most important? That becomes the motivation of the entire thesis, and everything else leads up to it. Choose a plan of attack early.
* At all times keep a dream in mind of life post-thesis. This will help you more than you can imagine.
* Get feedback from colleagues. Not so often that they consider you a chore, but don't go it alone and end up going down the wrong path.
* Start a routine. It doesn't have to be a good one, but I'd at least advise (a) a regular eating place - NOT IN THE SAME BUILDING AS YOUR DESK, (b) a regular number of hours sleep, (c) dedicated time with people who you like and who can put up with you being a shell of a human being for a while, (d) a music playlist that provides you with a sense of continuity while working, (e) regular water breaks.
On that last point, my routine certainly wasn't a good one. In the last month I made sure I had at least 5 hours sleep, my regular eating place was Burger King, my dedicated time with people never really happened, and my music playlist was 20 dubstep and EDM tracks I liked on constant and endless repeat, and my 'water breaks' were a six-pack of redbull during the thesis day shift and beer for the thesis night shift. Again, not proud of that, but it worked.
In terms of your mental health, that is your utmost priority. If the stress makes you want to quit and become a park ranger, that's fine and normal (IMO and IME). If the stress makes you angry or upset about anything other than your thesis, quit and become a park ranger. It's a hard and fast rule to live by.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_16: Don't listen to them! Some people really need to be stressed out to start working hard. You did not waste 3 years, you were unconsciously preparing your thesis. Now is the time to start writing it. You can do it, trust me, page after page. Archimedes spent months trying to solve his problem, but it took him one bath to figure it out. You only have 10 months, so even if you fail, you won't waste much time anyway. Just don't think about how much time you have left.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/10/29
| 1,038
| 4,613
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a paper that got lost in the editorial pipeline for about a year due to the second reviewer dropping out and not telling anyone. During that year, I didn't revisit the paper much; it was a short, cute project that I whipped up quickly and didn't have big connections with my main body of work.
Recently, it got accepted with what the reviewer calls minor revisions. The revisions do not seem minor to me, however, as they would require in-depth knowledge outside my main field; furthermore, some of the questions the reviewer poses would spawn projects by themselves.
The pre-print has already been cited several times, so I know the core idea has utility and appeal in the larger community. It has also been relatively well received when presented at conferences. It is of course in my best interests to get the paper officially published, but is it worth delving deep outside my field to appease this reviewer?
For cultural context, let's say I do numerical methods for nonlinear PDEs, and the revisions would require a dive into machine learning literature. Also, I'm an early-career researcher.<issue_comment>username_1: When you get minor revisions, **you should definitely go for it**.
That's not that I say "go for it under any circumstance", so if you had to invest months of work, I would probably vote differently. But be aware that if you get a minor revision, you do not necessarily have to comply with all the remarks. In many cases the editor does not even send the revision back to the reviewers, but I am not sure if you can know that in advance.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: This is perhaps just stating the obvious, but whether or not your paper gets published isn't up to the referee. It's up to the editor. So if you received a generally positive referee's report then you can just tell the editor that the requested revisions are outside the intended scope of the paper and decline to make them. The only way I could see this becoming an issue was if the referee's report made it seem as though your paper wasn't publishable without the requested revisions.
**Added (as an extended comment to the OP in light of their comment to the above):** You seem to have a very defeatist outlook about the publishing process. For starters, the referee might not be all that much more senior than you are. I referee papers all the time (and have done so since my first year post-PhD) and I won't be going up for tenure for another couple of years, for example.
Regardless, all that the referee has done is write a referee's report which ideally makes some sort of recommendation to the editor. But that's all it is. A recommendation. If you send a response to the editor explaining that you don't think that one of the changes requested is necessary, you shouldn't assume that the editor will dismiss it out of hand. They might, of course, but then again they might not. I've had maybe ten papers where I explained to the editor that I did not agree with one of the referee's comments and didn't make the requested change. Not once did this have an impact on my paper getting accepted.
Like I said in my answer, it could very well be the case that the referee doesn't think your paper is worth publishing without the requested revisions. In this case the editor might side with the referee and you should probably just make the change if you can do so in a reasonable amount of time. But if you give a thoughtful explanation why the referee's recommendation is not necessary, the editor could very well take your side. Similarly, if the editor asks the referee what they think of your comment, they might decide that while the paper would be stronger with their requested revision, it should be published even without it.
**Bottom line:** It's your paper. If you have an opinion about what should be included in it and what should not be, you should let the editor know and assume that they'll at least hear you out.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Do you have a colleague or someone else you can ask who is an expert in the field you need? It is possible that with expertise in the area the reviews are very minor and a one hour talk with the right person will enable you to do whatever the reviewer suggested. Even if some of the reviewers ideas do take a lot of work this should enable you to satisfy some of the reviewers requests and come up with a reason to not do the others. Finally, if some of the questions create new interesting projects this might be worth going into, especially with a new collaborateur.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]
|
2019/10/29
| 552
| 2,370
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have found a potential advisor that is keen on advising me for Phd and has offered to fund me. However, he isn't sure if he has sufficient funds and budget to do so (something he is still figuring out and things don't seem too hopeful). He has told me to proceed with the application nonetheless.
Should I go ahead with the application and continue waiting on the news about the funds, knowing that there is a good possibility that there wont be sufficient funds? Or would it be better to turn down the offer early on and apply for jobs instead?
I'm asking because I don't want to wait too long for something that might not work out, but the PI has gone through the trouble of working out plans to make things work and I feel really bad if I backed out now. Furthermore, I am really interested in the projects the group has to offer, and everyone in the lab were lovely. I've also heard many good things about the PI as a Phd advisor. So I was really looking forward to joining the lab. On the other hand, I feel that if I were to decline the offer, I should notify the PI as soon as possible so it saves the PI further time and trouble.
Thanks in advance for any advice!<issue_comment>username_1: If the cost and time are reasonable by your standards the I'd suggest you do it for the experience if nothing else. There is little else to lose in this.
Applying isn't a commitment on your part, it is just an expression of interest. Even in the worst case the professor will probably continue to have good feelings towards you, which can help in the future if you work in related areas.
But there is no reason to wait for a decision. You can explore other opportunities in parallel with this. Decline only when you must.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Your decision may depend a lot on *when* the PI might know for sure. Why don't you start by asking him how long that might take?
If either (1) there is a chance that he can secure the funding or (2) you might be willing to work even if there is no funding, then it makes sense to apply. This way, you retain the option of either accepting or declining later.
In other words, you simply postpone the more consequential decision: whether you will actually join the lab. Hopefully, by the time you have to make that decision, he will know whether the money is there.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/10/29
| 568
| 2,511
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently working on a masters in CS and working at a university as research faculty (my title is 'research engineer'). I'm in the branch that does mostly contract work with the government or private industry, so not academic research.
My employer offers an attractive proposition for getting a PhD. I would keep my current position and salary in exchange for doing a project relevant to the division. They also provide a year of PTO to work full-time on the dissertation and time during the day to go to class. My work is mainly robotics software so I think it would be feasible to find a sufficiently related topic of research. As a university employee I get an indefinite tuition waiver so I would not need to do any teaching or research outside of my normal work.
My goal for the PhD would be to work in industry research, along the lines of Waymo, OpenAI, along with lower-tier companies. My impression is that there are many more of these jobs than academic positions, so I have I more reasonable chance of success.
Given the appealing financial circumstances, is getting a PhD an obvious choice? Should I just finish with the MS and try to get industry research jobs right away? Is my impression of the state of industry research correct?<issue_comment>username_1: Having a PhD or other Research Doctorate will definitely help you with many large companies. At some companies there is a fairly large gap between what someone with a degree can do and earn and someone without. "Senior Scientist" may only be open to PhD holders for example.
Moreover, some companies really need people on the cutting edge of research. Think Alphabet/Google here and similar data and algorithm driven places.
But I'm speaking of large and established companies. IBM, Bell Labs, and such. It may not be quite as valuable with newer companies and probably not at all with startups. But, large companies can support large scale research that may take a while to mature. They can offer a stability of employment similar to that available in an academic position.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: If you're interested in *research*, whether in academia or in industry, then getting a PhD is definitely worth the effort. The time when a PhD was only for people who want an academic career finished a long time ago, there's plenty of people who do a PhD without even considering academia as a career, and even more people who eventually decide to go to industry with their PhD.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/10/29
| 544
| 2,022
|
<issue_start>username_0: [Example](https://naylor.informs.org/jobs/13011876/assistant-professor-of-teaching), [example](http://careers.sutd.edu.sg/fa/en/job/494203/faculty-member-teachingtrack?fbclid=IwAR3533cf5pR8m07mDzIK4KmXeGimvhzgxztNnM3Z39NtlHk86B7xhZjZ8hQ).
From the first example:
>
> The Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering invites applications for a full-time Assistant Professor of Teaching (Lecturer with Potential for Security of Employment (LPSOE)), comparable to a tenure-track assistant professor appointment. *Professor of Teaching faculty are Academic Senate faculty members whose expertise and responsibilities center on undergraduate education and scholarly analysis/improvement of teaching methods*. The successful applicant will be responsible for teaching both lower and upper division undergraduate Agricultural Sensing and Data Science lecture and laboratory courses (up to six courses per year) ... *Qualified applicants must have a PhD in Engineering or a BS in Engineering with a PhD in a scientific field, preferably with postgraduate experience*.
>
>
>
(Emphasis mine)
If this is a full-time teaching position, why are they looking for PhD degrees and postgraduate experience? How are these primarily-research degrees relevant to teaching?<issue_comment>username_1: In order to teach new ideas in any field, you have to (1) understand how research is conducted, and (2) be current on the state of research in the field. By allowing you to do original research, doctoral programs prepare you for both, even if you do not continue research activity.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There is not a good reason. Some poor reasons are:
* Tradition
* Prestige
* Student expectations
* Regulation/accreditation
* Narrowing the job applicant pool in the face of oversupply
They ought to require training in teaching the discipline instead of training in doing the discipline. The reality is that in the near future, both will be expected.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/10/30
| 874
| 3,709
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have an undergrad degree in field A and have a lot of skills that led to me doing research in field B (not a lot of crossover traditionally, but the lab skills are similar and the experiments I run in field B are improved by the lab techniques I have from A).
I am now a fulltime research assistant at a top 10 university and have done interesting work including introducing methods from A to our work in B and proposing experiments grounded in understanding the science of B.
I want to do a PhD, but the trouble is I have an undergrad gpa of ~2.0, and my degree is in field A. (I also did several years of undergrad research in A, including some pretty advanced work, in a top 20 department.) I will have glowing recommendation letters from some top names in B because of my research work.
I want to do a PhD and a lot of people have suggested Europe because they're shorter. Do they care as much about gpa as American PhD programs? If so, I think it might not be worth applying because of GPA.<issue_comment>username_1: European PhDs are shorter? From what I heard, here (in Germany), you take about 3 years if you can get governmental funding and work on your thesis full time. If you need to do lab/project work to fund your PhD, you are looking at something like 5-6 years.
On top of that you get at least two years to do your Masters, as here it is Bachelors --> Masters --> PhD, you usually can't do a PhD with only your undergrad (no matter the grades).
I can't speak for all European countries (although I saw similar systems in at least a few), but I would strongly suggest to research how PhDs work in your country of choice a little more.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: There are a number of relevant differences between North American and European PhD programs. First, it is key to note that practices differ greatly from country to country. The following answer will focus on general trends across Europe, but be aware that there will be exceptions.
One big difference is that in Europe you generally would not be applying to a PhD program, but for a specific position with a specified group/professor. As such there are typically less requirements set by a graduate school (such as a minimum GPA) to deal with. Since there is typically only one position to fill, the hiring tends to be more risk averse, and things like recommendation letters become more important than pure grades. People will still however look at the grades and a 2.0 GPA will certainly raise some eyebrows.
Another difference (also mentioned in other answers) is that in continental Europe, it is typically expected that PhD applicants have already obtained a Master's degree. It is very unlikely you will be hired without a Master's. The only exception to this (I know of), is the UK where it is more common to start a PhD directly after the Bachelor (and PhD's have a short nominal length of three years to boot.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: This will be UK specific and life sciences specific.
The fact that you will generally be applying to an individual rather than a program in the UK means that you have the chance to appeal directly to the supervisor in question. We (just about) understand what a GPA is, and so your poor GPA will be noted, but it is unlikely absolutely rule you out. The fact that you have worked for several years as a RA and have done well at that will argue in your favor, particularly if you have publications.
The TLDR is your GPA will hinder you, but its probably still worth applying in the UK. One problem will be funding, as most PhD funding in the UK is restricted to EU citizens only (soon to be UK citizens only).
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/10/30
| 1,145
| 4,870
|
<issue_start>username_0: So I did research over the summer and applied to and got funded to go to a conference in Hawaii. I would have to leave to the conference early Wednesday morning and wouldn't return until about 1am Monday morning. The main problem I have is that since I'll be expected to be at the conference for most of the day and be pressured into having fun by my peers during the night, I don't think that going to this conference would help my goal of getting an A on the test's I have to take on Monday/Tuesday. I told my professor that this conference would be a burden on me and my studies so I wouldn't be able to go. She replied and said "I was making a huge mistake and that I would have to face financial and other consequences for my decision." Is she trying to scare me or can the university punish me financially for wasting funding money that I earned In order to attend to my studies. It's not like I'm blowing this conference off because "I'm not feeling it" Going to this conference would really set me back in all of my classes. Any advice, this is really stressing me out.<issue_comment>username_1: First, you have to check the conference website. Most (if not all) conferences state clearly that submitting a paper REQUIRES at least one of the authors to attend to present the paper, and that if you do not, your paper is out (will not be included in the proceeding), so you have to look for another place.
Everyone is busy, but we must plan and respect others. The attendees' time is also valuable as yours. When they come and found many people behave like you, wouldn't this be a waste for their time and money?
Remember that you are building your own reputation. So by breaking your word you give the organizers and attendees (who are your fellows) a bad impression.
To me, frankly, how can I take you seriously as a researcher if I can not trust your promises? If you break your promises in attending the conference you can also break many rules in your research.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I suggest that you go and make the best use of the time, both at the conference and otherwise. You have a long plane ride in both directions. You have evenings if you forgo socializing. You have time between sessions to review course material if you have some notes on index cards or otherwise that are easy to carry.
You might even be successful in begging to put off the exam(s) for a day or so.
And, as others have said, if you have had a paper accepted then you have an obligation to present it. Making your advisor happy is worth something also.
And remember that in the last analysis, for moving on to grad school, more than your grades will be considered. Most especially letters from your advisor.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: In addition to [the answer by username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/139275/4249), who correctly identifies that the paper will most likely not be included in the conference proceeding if none of the authors attend, there can be additional repercussions.
As far as I know, **all the peer-reviewed conferences** (in Computer Science) **require at least one author to attend the conference and present the work** in order to publish it. The session chairs will take note of any no-shows. **The people that have not shown up can get blacklisted from all the conferences by the same publisher**.1
Sending a replacement presenter is usually acceptable. If an author registered to attend but was unable due to last-minute developments (travel documents, illness, etc) they are required to prove that they have made a good-faith attempt to attend - or at last communicate this to the organisers who then may ask for proof (i.e. booked flight tickets, or a document showing you applied for a visa, or similar). I don't know what the official policy is if the author decides to retract the paper and not attend due to personal reasons (e.g. exam, friends birthday party), but in case of professional reasons I would still recommend notifying the organisers with the hopes of avoid or soften future negative consequences (e.g. it was not possible to obtain travel funding in the end).
While I do not through which mechanics this is enforced exactly, **similar repercussions exist for not spending the granted funding money** (or trying to re-purpose it in case of purpose-specific grants). I have often heard it said that not spending the grant money would diminish the chances, or even prevent the person from applying for funding with the same source again (occasionally resulting in a big project dinner to spend the "leftovers" around the end of the project).
1 This is true at least for IEEE conferences (IEEE being one of the larges Computer Science publishers), as I had it confirmed by a session chair at a large international conference.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/10/30
| 1,220
| 5,224
|
<issue_start>username_0: I know there are already many similar questions posted on this website, but I need someone to comment on my email to potential advisors.
I should mention that I've been sending emails to potential supervisors for over one month now, and very few of them have replied, which makes me think there's something wrong with my email. Also, I personalize these emails for each professor and investigate their research before sending the email.
Here is an example:
Dear Professor X,
I am a graduate student of X from X University, highly interested in X and have recently published a paper in X. I have achieved a great deal of training and experiences in the field of targeted drug delivery. I’ve enjoyed reading your papers and ideas such as "assessing the impact of anti-PEG IgM on the biological performance of nanoparticles and using chelating zinc ions" and "optimisation of pH during nanoprecipitation to increase insulin loading into PLGA-PEG nanoparticles". Your research is best compatible with my research interest because I am looking for positions that I can both exploit my skills in drug delivery and further explore the field of X. I am very eager to know your opinion regarding my case in joining your research team as a PhD candidate for fall 2020. For more information, I have attached my resume as a PDF file. I look forward to hearing from you soon.
Sincerely,
XX
I would appreciate your comments about the email.<issue_comment>username_1: First, you have to check the conference website. Most (if not all) conferences state clearly that submitting a paper REQUIRES at least one of the authors to attend to present the paper, and that if you do not, your paper is out (will not be included in the proceeding), so you have to look for another place.
Everyone is busy, but we must plan and respect others. The attendees' time is also valuable as yours. When they come and found many people behave like you, wouldn't this be a waste for their time and money?
Remember that you are building your own reputation. So by breaking your word you give the organizers and attendees (who are your fellows) a bad impression.
To me, frankly, how can I take you seriously as a researcher if I can not trust your promises? If you break your promises in attending the conference you can also break many rules in your research.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I suggest that you go and make the best use of the time, both at the conference and otherwise. You have a long plane ride in both directions. You have evenings if you forgo socializing. You have time between sessions to review course material if you have some notes on index cards or otherwise that are easy to carry.
You might even be successful in begging to put off the exam(s) for a day or so.
And, as others have said, if you have had a paper accepted then you have an obligation to present it. Making your advisor happy is worth something also.
And remember that in the last analysis, for moving on to grad school, more than your grades will be considered. Most especially letters from your advisor.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: In addition to [the answer by username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/139275/4249), who correctly identifies that the paper will most likely not be included in the conference proceeding if none of the authors attend, there can be additional repercussions.
As far as I know, **all the peer-reviewed conferences** (in Computer Science) **require at least one author to attend the conference and present the work** in order to publish it. The session chairs will take note of any no-shows. **The people that have not shown up can get blacklisted from all the conferences by the same publisher**.1
Sending a replacement presenter is usually acceptable. If an author registered to attend but was unable due to last-minute developments (travel documents, illness, etc) they are required to prove that they have made a good-faith attempt to attend - or at last communicate this to the organisers who then may ask for proof (i.e. booked flight tickets, or a document showing you applied for a visa, or similar). I don't know what the official policy is if the author decides to retract the paper and not attend due to personal reasons (e.g. exam, friends birthday party), but in case of professional reasons I would still recommend notifying the organisers with the hopes of avoid or soften future negative consequences (e.g. it was not possible to obtain travel funding in the end).
While I do not through which mechanics this is enforced exactly, **similar repercussions exist for not spending the granted funding money** (or trying to re-purpose it in case of purpose-specific grants). I have often heard it said that not spending the grant money would diminish the chances, or even prevent the person from applying for funding with the same source again (occasionally resulting in a big project dinner to spend the "leftovers" around the end of the project).
1 This is true at least for IEEE conferences (IEEE being one of the larges Computer Science publishers), as I had it confirmed by a session chair at a large international conference.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/10/30
| 984
| 4,136
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am using a figure from a PhD thesis in an IEEE conference paper.
I have changed it slightly, mainly by adding text.
Though I will cite the author and publication, do I still need to pay the (what I am quoted as) $100 for rights from Springer? They have published the thesis under SpringerTheses.
How much can I use without paying the fee?<issue_comment>username_1: First, you have to check the conference website. Most (if not all) conferences state clearly that submitting a paper REQUIRES at least one of the authors to attend to present the paper, and that if you do not, your paper is out (will not be included in the proceeding), so you have to look for another place.
Everyone is busy, but we must plan and respect others. The attendees' time is also valuable as yours. When they come and found many people behave like you, wouldn't this be a waste for their time and money?
Remember that you are building your own reputation. So by breaking your word you give the organizers and attendees (who are your fellows) a bad impression.
To me, frankly, how can I take you seriously as a researcher if I can not trust your promises? If you break your promises in attending the conference you can also break many rules in your research.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I suggest that you go and make the best use of the time, both at the conference and otherwise. You have a long plane ride in both directions. You have evenings if you forgo socializing. You have time between sessions to review course material if you have some notes on index cards or otherwise that are easy to carry.
You might even be successful in begging to put off the exam(s) for a day or so.
And, as others have said, if you have had a paper accepted then you have an obligation to present it. Making your advisor happy is worth something also.
And remember that in the last analysis, for moving on to grad school, more than your grades will be considered. Most especially letters from your advisor.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: In addition to [the answer by username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/139275/4249), who correctly identifies that the paper will most likely not be included in the conference proceeding if none of the authors attend, there can be additional repercussions.
As far as I know, **all the peer-reviewed conferences** (in Computer Science) **require at least one author to attend the conference and present the work** in order to publish it. The session chairs will take note of any no-shows. **The people that have not shown up can get blacklisted from all the conferences by the same publisher**.1
Sending a replacement presenter is usually acceptable. If an author registered to attend but was unable due to last-minute developments (travel documents, illness, etc) they are required to prove that they have made a good-faith attempt to attend - or at last communicate this to the organisers who then may ask for proof (i.e. booked flight tickets, or a document showing you applied for a visa, or similar). I don't know what the official policy is if the author decides to retract the paper and not attend due to personal reasons (e.g. exam, friends birthday party), but in case of professional reasons I would still recommend notifying the organisers with the hopes of avoid or soften future negative consequences (e.g. it was not possible to obtain travel funding in the end).
While I do not through which mechanics this is enforced exactly, **similar repercussions exist for not spending the granted funding money** (or trying to re-purpose it in case of purpose-specific grants). I have often heard it said that not spending the grant money would diminish the chances, or even prevent the person from applying for funding with the same source again (occasionally resulting in a big project dinner to spend the "leftovers" around the end of the project).
1 This is true at least for IEEE conferences (IEEE being one of the larges Computer Science publishers), as I had it confirmed by a session chair at a large international conference.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/10/30
| 3,820
| 15,397
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a son (currently 16) who is a junior in computer science at a well-known university. We are Canadian. He is very passionate about AI research and has published several first-authored papers in highly ranked journals and conferences (top 1-5% in Scopus).
Given the competition in graduate applications in AI, does he stand a chance to be funded in CS Ph.D. programs at 18 (I cannot afford his graduate study)? Will his age be a problem to be admitted to top programs? Should he apply for Master programs first? He has a perfect GPA and GRE.<issue_comment>username_1: **I strongly recommend that your son (or you) speak with the professor he is working with at his university for guidance on your questions.** With that being said...
With regards to funding age restrictions, it should not be an issue. Also, funding for CS PhD programs (at least in the United States and Cananda) is almost always guaranteed with acceptance and is thus not a separate competitive process. For example, University of Toronto's CS PhD program explicitly states guaranteed funding periods with acceptance (link: <https://web.cs.toronto.edu/graduate/about>). There are other sources of funding that are competitive, such as the United States' NSF Graduate Research Fellowship, and do not have age eligibility requirements; however; the NSF Fellowship I just mentioned is restricted to US citizens.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: [For context: I am a professor of mathematics at the University of Georgia. I've served on my department's Graduate Committee, which does graduate admissions, for about eight years. From 2016-2019 I was the Graduate Coordinator, hence the faculty member most directly involved in the graduate admissions process.]
Regarding your son, you told us:
1) He is a junior studying CS at well-known university. He has perfect grades and GRE scores, and he has multiple first authored papers in highly ranked journals and conferences.
2) He is 16.
To my mind, the first point is highly relevant. In mathematics a student with that profile would probably get into some of the top PhD programs in the country. I am confident that the same holds in CS. Moreover, in both of these fields, admission to a top program comes with full funding the vast majority (over 95%) of the time.
I am also assuming that since your son is 16 now and in his junior year, he will be 18 -- i.e., an adult -- when he starts graduate school. Given this, the second point does not seem relevant to me. Some people will find your son's achievements (even) more impressive given his age. Others will have some concerns about the maturity and readiness of such a young student for a PhD program. But when it comes to admissions and hiring, times have changed: in the last few years faculty have received much more training and specific instructions (including on legal obligations) regarding admissions and hiring than in years past. Deciding not to admit a qualified student because of his age sounds like a discriminatory practice to be avoided. Conversely, giving more weight to a student because of his age sounds like a discriminatory practice against the other applicants...also to be avoided. A small number of committees may still be influenced by such thinking, but overall it should be the case that your son will be considered only on point 1) and I think that it will be the case.
In summary: your son has an excellent profile that will most likely lead to multiple fully funded offers at prestigious CS programs in the US. (By the way: yes, he should apply directly to a PhD program.) You do not need to, nor do I think you should, do anything out of the ordinary because of his age.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: The other answers speak effectively to the general case, and I agree with them, but thought an answer focusing on the specifics might be relevant too.
I suspect you are already aware of the strong parallels between your son's case, and that of another Canadian student with an interest in computer science, [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erik_Demaine), who was admitted into a funded PhD program in computer science at the age of 14, and went on to become MIT's youngest ever faculty member. Admittedly this was in Canada, but it would be difficult to imagine a US school turning down a similar opportunity.
If funding is a concern, your son may also want to look into fellowships and scholarships. If your son is a US Citizen, he may be competitive for an [NSF Graduate Fellowship](https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2019/nsf19590/nsf19590.htm).
It sounds like your son may only have Canadian Citizenship however. Luckily, NSERC provides two sources of funding that your son can take with him to a US School: The [PGS-D award](https://www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca/NSERC-CRSNG/FundingDecisions-DecisionsFinancement/ScholarshipsAndFellowships-ConcoursDeBourses/index_eng.asp), and [the MSFSS award](https://www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca/Students-Etudiants/PG-CS/CGSForeignStudy-BESCEtudeEtranger_eng.asp). The PGS-D, as I recall, can be taken at an institution outside Canada. The MSFSS award can be used to cover the cost of an exchange, rather than a permanent position.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: @Buffy pointed this out in their comment, but allow me to expound on what getting a PhD in the sciences in the U.S. looked like financially.
Getting into a PhD program in the US in a well-funded field like biology, chemistry, physics, computer science, engineering, mathematics, physical and mental health studies that are funded by the National Institute of Heath, etc., provides the following:
1) You don't pay tuition.
2) You work as a teaching assistant and receive a stipend (and fellowship if your field is particularly well-funded and/or you are an exceptional candidate) which is, in most instances, plenty to live on.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: Currently a CS PhD student in the US in a highly-ranked program. Anecdotally, there is a student in our department who just started at age 18 and is fully funded. I can't speak to how Canada's departments will view such an application, but I can't imagine it would be any different than here based on my interactions with faculty there. As mentioned in @username_2's (super awesome) answer, your son's age will not matter.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: First may I say what a legend your son is. For context, I'm a funded PhD student in the UK and I'm currently VP Lead Cloud Engineer for the central banking and regulatory arm of Barclays Bank (a division known as RFT). I also advise the UK government on national security strategy and countermeasures to cyberwarfare affecting critical infrastructure. At the heart of it, I'm just a guy who loves my craft. I jumped from a junior engineer to a VP in less than a year (something I occasionally have regrets about). When I finished my MSc I was admitted to the faculty at my university because they wanted to perpetuate our relationship, I began teaching on the apprenticeship, MComp and MSc Cybersecurity courses.
Your question reminds me a lot of <NAME>, otherwise known as the 7 year old surgeon. He applied for a PhD at Imperial College London as a young child. He was refused admission, but that doesn't detract from the fact that he was performing surgeries at that age. The reason he was refused admission is because he was deemed to have insufficient life experience to make a real contribution. They also thought that he needed to be allowed to have a childhood.
Granted your son is a bit older, this does remind me a lot of <NAME>. Whilst at the core of it, theoretical computer science is heavily mathematics and totally impersonal, many of the problems that research contributions need to address have a temporal dimension to them. Many of the innovations we see are not as a result of a genius finding the solution to a difficult mathematical problem, but lie in the humanity of what we do.
Before I entered software development and cloud engineering as a full time commitment, I had programmed since I was 8 years old and started to sell my skills at 14. Ironically, when I left school I trained to be a nurse and then became a lawyer (I'm far from a perfect man) - totally different professions. Unfortunately I didn't take the path of CS until much later in my life. The experience life has given me though allows me to be a good researcher. That isn't to say that to be a good researcher you need have lots of life experiences, but it helps significantly. My research area is trustless security, an area which is a hot topic right now given the increasing use of computers as weapons. The problem I'm working with goes much more beyond mathematics and founds itself in human nature, something that is very complicated indeed.
What I would say is that you should consider what you want the endpoint for your son to be. Does he want to be a researcher and only that? Or does he want to take his time to enjoy his youth and figure things out as he goes?
In the UK your son would be turned down for a PhD not because he isn't absolutely fantastic (which from what you say he clearly is), but because his contributions would be limited by his age. Many PhD students worldwide are considered successful if they publish just a single research paper, many PhDs can be submitted with just two good journal publications in solid journals. One of the final tests however is a viva which taps much deeper into the context of your research. A good admissions tutor would be able to detect the likelihood such a young man would be prejudiced through a lack of life experience and wider context. Another measure of a successful researcher is a wider understanding of the implications of their research and an ability to network and promote their research - I think this is where your son would fall down at his age. I don't say this in a negative way, but purely to give you a realistic view of what is required.
I began publishing as soon as I started my MSc, but this is not a measure of success. The reason I have been the leading author in the publications I have been involved in to-date is because I have networked with a large group and collaborated in a way that would not have been possible had that collaboration not existed.
I hope this provides a better view of where your son would sit in relation to a PhD. Ask yourself this, what are you trying to achieve? Is your son trying to obtain a qualification or make a wider contribution? If the latter, is he in a position to do that right now?
This is the fundamental difference between a PhD and any other type of qualification. It's not a benchmark, its an award for contributing to the state of the art, going much more beyond core academia but to the connection between the output of the PhD and the benefit of that output to the rest of the world and the impact it is able to have.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: I'm going to give a Canada specific answer.
Since your son is Canadian, I'd highly recommend that he do a MSc before pursing a PhD. There are a few reasons for this:
* A PhD is a long, huge, often painful commitment, and someone who is 18 might not know what they want to do with their life. If he decides he'd rather do industry than academia, an MSc will allow for that.
* Doing an MSc is common, almost expected, in Canada
* A Masters in Computer Science will be funded at pretty much every Canadian university, probably guaranteed to 18000 a year.
* Doing an MSc will give your son more publications and experience, which will increase his chance of getting extra PhD funding. There's some prestigious scholarships like the NSERC CGS-D and Vanier awards, and doing an MSc first might help bolster his application.
* PhDs require a lot of "soft skills." Things like networking, pitching your work at conferences, defending your work against criticism, giving talks, etc. Even if your son is a genius, which it seems like he is, there are some things that you are just better at with more years under your belt. I know at 18 I wouldn't have been mature enough to deal with these things.
* The social differences between an 18-year-old and his colleagues will be less pronounced in an MSc program. Many people with PhDs are married, having kids, etc. It's certainly not universal, but I suspect he'd have more in common with Masters students.
You might be interested in something like UBC's [PhD track Masters program](https://www.cs.ubc.ca/students/grad/prospective-grads/grad-programs/phd-track-msc-program), where you start in a Masters but then can transfer into a PhD if all goes well. I suspect other schools have similar things.
As a singular data point, there's someone in my research lab who can't have been more than 19 when they started their MSc. I've never known someone to start a PhD so young.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: Every university in the U.S. has different policies regarding each element of your/your son's predicament. Some accept students into Ph.D. programs immediately from undergrad; some only accept into Masters programs; some accept into Ph.D. programs provisionally-- that is, they must meet some benchmark of performance at some point during their first few years before they're approved to continue into the Ph.D. level. Part of your task in researching all this is to pick out a few prospective universities (btw, the use of diminutives such as "uni" is an unfortunate and rather vulgar practice), research their specific policies regarding their Ph.D. program, and let that influence which universities you apply to. Funding will not be an issue; even in the super-commodified U.S., the university will work that out (some combination of teaching or research assistantship or stipends)-- and, given your son's accomplishments, they may even offer financial incentives to attract him. Oh, and-- if your son receives a teaching assistant award, is he qualified yet to teach? Teaching is itself a skill which requires time and effort to acquire, and your son would want to work on those skills, out of consideration for the educational welfare of his students (skills such as "public speaking", group dynamics, leadership, empathy, patience, etc.).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_9: I'm in a similar position. I'm a junior (also at a well known university) at 15, set to graduate at about 17 years old. I'm also working in the field of AI, with 3-4 publications to my name, one first authorship, in good journals and conferences. I've also done a couple of internships (though this is not so relevant to PhD applications).
When I entered university early, I became aware of a few other people who had done similar things - several of these people DID go to graduate school at 18-19. Though I can't speak to the funding levels, I do know it is possible.
From my own personal experience, advisors for undergraduate research may encourage the student to join their *own* graduate teams, particularly if the student is of high caliber. That may be an avenue to pursue.
I would even consider this to be an advantage - it certainly is uncommon (though I find it funny that your son is in nearly exactly the same position as me!), and having quality publications shows that his age has not held you back in the past. Good luck!
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/10/30
| 1,176
| 5,112
|
<issue_start>username_0: Following common scenario:
You wrote a proposal for a larger several million € research project with several university partners after your PhD, the project got funded and you are the project manager, the professor is project leader and official applicant and principal investigator mainly visiting the regular meetings of the research alliance but not doing the micromanagement of employees, Phd students etc. He also encouraged the project leader to go for tenure, write a habilitation thesis etc.
The problem I see: A researcher seeking tenure has to show autonomy, especially postdocs should leave their Phd supervisor for 1-2 years and join other research groups or industry before coming back to the old group and leading a subgroup. This is not written into stone, but advantageous facing a committee deciding professorship and many professors did go similar way.
In germany now the junior professorship exists with and without tenure after the professorship. But also the habilitation is still common to work for a professor.
But how can you sell your autonomy? Should you negotiate hardly with your professor to publish some work on your own with him as a coauthor (who did neither conceive the experiments, in best case only review the publications internally before submission). Do you highlight you have to compete with junior professors later facing committees and need this autonomy in publications, also technically you are not the principal investigator, but do 95% of work to get money and conduct the project?
It's a delicate question to discuss this with your professor which you owe more or less for your PhD, but who also made profit from your work. Ethically, I know my professor has not many good reasons to be a co-author doing not much more then visiting meetings and reviewing the publications. Technically this is the common case, but due to junior professorships I think the situation changed a lot in comparision to 10 years ago when habilitation was the common and only way to become professor working until then for an already tenured professor.
EDIT: this is experimental sciences. So you are often dependent on expensive lab equipment of your supervising professor. Maybe an idea then is also to work more on theoretical papers, then authoring alone should be acceptable/negotiateable with professor?<issue_comment>username_1: Assuming that I understand it now, I do have a suggestion. Given the norms in your field, in which the PI is (I think) a co-author of every paper and who controls the grant and the research, you can't really distinguish yourself without help. But if *others* speak to your qualities more than you do, it might be enough - or even better. That would be the case in the US, anyway. Especially if that *other* is your PI and former advisor. You are, after all, his academic descendant.
Suppose you are looking for a position elsewhere. Suppose your professor writes the letter that says you wrote the grant and were the lead investigator for much of what grew out of the grant. Not your words, but theirs. That is pretty strong.
That may be easier to negotiate than trying to write as sole author, acknowledging the professor. Such might be possible, depending on personalities and norms, but maybe not.
At the opposite extreme is excluding your professor unilaterally. I'm guessing that would be breaking norms in your field and place. It is also a terrible way to move forward if you become alienated from that professor. They are not going to be there for you either in career moves or research opportunities.
In any case, it would be useful to have a conversation (or series of conversations) with your professor about this very question. "How can I distinguish myself here sufficiently so that I can move to an independent position? Can you help me do that? What should we do to enable it?" If the professor is honorable, and you don't suggest otherwise, you should get the help you need. And the professor, knowing the entire story may have options for you that none of us here can conceive of.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: For both sakes, reaching a Habilitation or being attested "Habilitation equivalence" by a hire committee (either one is mandatory to become a full professor in Germany), you need to show that you have moved on. Papers that **do not** list your PhD supervisor as a coauthor are considered a strong indicator for this.
However, this does not mean that you need to ban you former supervisor completely. If you have a few reasonably good papers after your PhD without them (say: one out of four to six, ideally also in a field/topic that differs from the one you addressed in you PhD), you should be fine. No hiring committee would expect total independence in you situation.
So, yes, it is a delicate question to discuss with your professor. But nevertheless, you should discuss it openly. A honorable prior supervisor will be able to deal with this. And of course, on the papers that do not list them as coauthor, you can still thank them in the acknowledgements.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/10/31
| 1,144
| 4,568
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a fifth year PhD student who has independently developed a project for my thesis. Recently, I have presented some promising preliminary results. My professor called it a 'gold mine', and wants to start a company based on it. I prefer to publish it and make most of the data open source.
Today, my advisor hired a senior research scientist who intends to learn my work and start a company based on it. Apparently, they have been talking to each other for several months without my knowledge. The scientist intends on becoming CEO of this company and eventually wants equal inventorship, despite not having any experience in this field yet. My PI has made it clear that it is my responsibility to transfer the ideas and technologies that I have developed over to him before the end of my PhD.
I have argued with him that this work is not ready for a company, and such a start-up would rest on shaky foundations (I have not published or patented, or finished animal studies).
I also feel that he is holding my PhD degree ransom, as he has done more than once with other students in the past. He has a pattern of doing this with other students- hiring a 'CEO-type' senior research scientist to learn from a younger PhD student, working with the research scientist to start a company while the PhD student does most of the work, not allowing the PhD student to graduate until the company is off its feet, and then making millions selling the company, with minimal benefit or recognition to the student.
How should I approach this? Is there legal recourse and should I approach a third party? I have already discussed this many times with my PI, but he will not listen. I fear that my graduation will be delayed, andI would like to avoid burning any bridges.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> My PI has made it clear that it is my responsibility to transfer the ideas and technologies that I have developed over to him before the end of my PhD.
>
>
>
That is correct. These things almost certainly belong to the university.
>
> not allowing the PhD student to graduate until the company is off its feet
>
>
>
This is an inappropriate conflict of interest. There is not much you can do about the conflict of interest. But you can:
* Transfer all the information as you are obligated.
* Complete your thesis
* Obtain a job offer
If you have a job offer in hand which requires a PhD, it puts a lot of pressure on your supervisor to recognize that your thesis is complete.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> How should I approach this?
>
>
>
**Jump at the opportunity!** Your professor considers your work a "gold mine" and wants to commercialise. This is an extremely rare opportunity for any student and I recommend that you seriously consider embracing the opportunity. Let me consider some of your ideas and alleviate some of your concerns:
>
> I prefer to publish it and make most of the data open source.
>
>
>
This is a worthy academic goal, but it mightn't result in your desired outcome. Academics share results for others to build on, yet many results have no impact: If you're hoping your results will have impact, then why not make sure they do yourself? Keep the results private, build a company, make an impact.
>
> Today, my advisor hired a senior research scientist who intends to learn my work and start a company based on it...The scientist intends on becoming CEO of this company
>
>
>
Is there any reason to believe that this scientist should be CEO? As opposed to CTO, for instance? Why is the scientist even necessary? Consider taking the CEO role for yourself and maybe consider hiring the scientist.
Whether your supervisor should be involved is open for debate. They seem well-connected, so they could perhaps be very useful.
>
> [The senior research scientist] eventually wants equal inventorship
>
>
>
Inventorship (in terms of IP law) cannot be shared: An inventor has to have invented, they cannot come onboard. Perhaps you meant equal ownership?
>
> I have argued with him that this work is not ready for a company, and such a start-up would rest on shaky foundations (I have not published or patented, or finished animal studies).
>
>
>
You can start a company, strengthen the foundations, and patent the results. (NB: Your university may actually own the rights to any patents, it depends on your precise scenario. Regardless, you might not need to patent results that would be owned by the university, since patenting later results might suffice.)
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/10/31
| 1,378
| 5,786
|
<issue_start>username_0: The journal that I think of specifically is Physical Review Letters. I've heard that professors pay pretty high amounts to get published in this journal, which is considered a good, if not top-tier, journal.
When then would profs use their funding to pay for this? If the work is good enough for a good journal, why not just submit it elsewhere, where there are no fees?<issue_comment>username_1: Can I phrase this another way? If your journal article could be listed on Bing for free, but Google for $1k, would you pay for Google? I think a lot of people would.
In general, whether reputation for the journal (Nature is such a great journal!) or the journal is well known (yes, of course I've heard of Science!), readership is important. People pay for perceived viewers, whether numbers only or quality of readers.
An author may prefer public fame of the general public (Science, Nature) over academic fame (e.g. JAMA), or they may prefer accolades amongst their highly educated peers instead of the public. Whatever the reason is that they need money to publish, most PIs have money to pay for this expense. I have to say -- I don't think I've ever heard of a PI "regretting" paying for a publishing fee. This tends to be one of those easy questions--they tend to know the value of the journal requesting the fee.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: **Note:** as pointed out by <NAME>, PRL indeed has a publication fee, making most of the original answer incorrect. I've rewritten the answer as a result.
When one pays a publication fee that isn't open access, one is effectively paying the publisher to distribute the paper. Most (subscription) publishers and journals are quite content to distribute the paper for free - a publication fee is bound to reduce submissions, which the journal needs to function. In this sense, *Physical Review Letters* is very unusual.
I have no knowledge of the internals of PRL, but I will guess that they have more expensive costs than normal because of the [numerous full-time PhD scientists they have on their journal staff](https://journals.aps.org/prl/staff#edboard). They are presumably offsetting some of the costs by charging a publication fee. Cynically, they're able to get away with it because 1) APS is perceived positively by people (even though their open access APCs are on the high end of the market rate) and 2) they're such an important journal (note other APS journals don't have such a fee).
Why would professors pay the publication fee? I imagine the most important reason is because they really want the prestige that comes with publishing in PRL. Other lesser factors could be they like the review process, and because PRL as one of the premier journals in physics has a very wide distribution.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The TL;DR is that a PIs job security, promotion prospects and grant funding is unfortunately based not on the quality of the research they produce, but on the prestige of the journal they publish it in. To pass probation on my position I needed a publication with Impact factor > 10 within three years of starting. To keep my job I need a so called 4\* paper once every 5 years.
---
There are two separate costs to publishing in many journals
1. Open access fees
2. Page charges/article processing charges
Open access
-----------
In general there are two sorts of journals - journals that are funded by the authors paying (open access) and journals that are funded by subscribers paying (closed access). Things are muddied by the fact that most closed access journals will allow authors to pay for Open Access for their paper, while most papers are closed (so called Hybrid journals or Gold open access)
Many of us page open access fees as a moral/ethical decisions - we believe it is wrong for research, that the public has presumably paid for, either through taxes to government agencies, or through donations to charity, it in accessible to the same public, as well as inaccessible to colleagues at less well funded universities.
However, moral issues aside, almost all funders in some fields, like medical research and life sciences, now mandate open access publishing. In some cases the funder will provide a mechanism for funding open access publication.
In the UK, every 5 years there is the Research Excellence Framework assessment, where the government assess the research success of every university and gives funding on the basis of this. This can be quite a lot of money (its about 20% of my universities income i think). They make this judgement on the basis of open access papers only.
But this doesn't explain page charges.
Page charges/APC
----------------
These are a relic of the days when it cost journals for every page/colour figure you had in your paper. You'd generally get a certain number of pages or b&w figures for free and had to pay more if you wanted more or colour. This no longer applies, but journals still like to charge it as its a nice little earner. The last paper I published charged $2,500 in page charges on top of the $2,500 open access charge. Why would you publish in a journal that has such charges? All the top journals have them. For the reasons I stated at the top - as a scientists you are generally judged on where your papers are published because those judging either don't have the time, the skill or the motivation to judge you on the content of your papers - you need to publish in top journals.
Paying these fees can be a real problem - the total $5,000 for my last paper was 25% of the total none staff budget of my lab at the time. You are generally not allowed to pay this out of grant money (which begs the question, what money is there that isn't grant money?).
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/10/31
| 1,188
| 5,126
|
<issue_start>username_0: Some time last year, I was casually talking to my professor when he asked me to look at this paper that he and his previous student had worked on but couldn't finish. I was hesitant but I took a look and decided to work on it. I've been at it for a few months now and I've developed it beyond the scope and reach of the initial paper. As such, my prof asked me to write a new paper from scratch, but I don't know if I'll get first(or even 2nd) author on it or if I'll have to settle for 3rd behind the initial authors.
Is it appropriate to ask such a question? I feel like I deserve it but I'm not sure if it's rude to ask for it or about it. He's going to be one of my recommendations for grad school in the very near future so I don't want to do something rude and lose any goodwill.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, it is appropriate to ask, but it may not be best to demand. But personalities can get in the way of ethics, as many posts here show. "I worked pretty hard on this and having first authorship would give me a big career boost." That could work. Much better than simply demanding it as a right, even when it might be considered so.
But, having some publication, no matter where you appear, is better than none. And don't think of this as *do or die*. There will be other papers and your professor's good opinion of you is worth more than first authorship on an early paper.
But yes, it is appropriate to ask. It won't be rude unless you make it rude.
---
Ideally these things are worked out before the research begins, but it often isn't. And the power imbalance between professor and student gets in the way as does ego.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You should ask him about this. There's nothing rude about doing so, authorship discussions are part of academic life. Unless he's been unreasonable in the past (and it doesn't sound like he has) you can approach it as a fairly casual discussion. Other authors (including the people who did the original research) would need to agree. Make sure it's a polite discussion, not a demand!
This can differ a great deal between disciplines, but in mine I would expect you to be the first author and the professor to be last author.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Since the professor has asked you to write the paper, I presume that he does not intend to be the first author. Almost no professor will want to be the first author of a paper whose text is obviously written by a student. The first author is usually presumed to be the author of the text, i.e., the person who actually wrote the text, and very few professors would sign a substandard text as the first author.
You can have a look at the professor's publication list to determine whether he often lets his students be first authors. If he does, he is likely to do the same in your case.
There is a simple method to remove the uncertainty about the order of authors. Prepare some very initial draft of the paper: write the title, abstract, and a few paragraphs of the main text, and write the authors in the order you think is most fair. Then email this initial draft to your professor together with some question about the draft. The professor will open the draft and see the order of the authors. If he makes no objection against the order of the authors, consider it negotiated. Later you can always refer to that email and the absence of objections. It is entirely normal to include the author list in a paper draft; moreover, failing to do so is rather weird, especially if you use an article template taken from the journal website, as such templates have a special place for the author list.
Do it early, not late. I know one postdoc who wrote a very good paper, in which he put himself in the fist position and his professor in the second, and then sent it to his professor, who then made only one correction: he swapped the positions. The actual contribution by the professor was nothing but funding the postdoc's salary. The postdoc was pissed off, but simply swallowed it because he needed a prolongation of his postdoc contract and was unable to take postdoc positions in other cities and countries for family reasons. If the postdoc had known in advance that he was going to be the second author, he would have at least invested less effort in that particular paper. Furthermore, if the postdoc had used the above described method in advance (i.e., in the very initial stage of writing the paper), the professor would possibly not have swapped the positions, because he would have known that such an action would strongly demotivate the postdoc and result in a paper of a worse quality.
Please note that students generally lack writing skills, so your professor well may have to re-write the paper or invest a lot of time and effort to teaching you how to write papers. If this happens, it may be fair to put him in the first position. If he really invests a lot of time and effort and suggests putting him in the first position, don't strongly argue with him, especially as you need a recommendation letter.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/10/31
| 614
| 2,762
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is it a problem if two students from the same university with very similar profile (similar number of publications, similar grade range, as well as the same strongest letter writer) apply to the same university for a PhD?
Edit: I have clarified the question in the comments. My main question was that since professors would like to increase diversity of their research groups, would they generally prefer not selecting two equally strong students coming straight from the same undergrad institution in the same year of admission. Also, I am talking about PhD admissions in USA.<issue_comment>username_1: I assume you are asking if the two are in competition with one another. Yes, of course, but they are also in competition with everyone else who applies. If the pool is large then there will, potentially, be a lot of very similar applications.
It is likely, but not required that they get the same result. Both accepted, or both rejected is more likely than only one accepted. But there is more to admissions than numbers in a spreadsheet and one of the two might be preferred for some reason. Suppose the Fencing Team needs new members, say.
And in a situation in which interviews are used, one of the two could be judged more likely to succeed based on some intangibles of presentation or perceived enthusiasm.
My main point, however, is that, in a good system, everyone is treated as and individual but there is tremendous completion for too few spots.
---
Specifically with respect to the "desire" for diversity. Not everyone will even have such a desire (worldwide). In some places there are strict laws. But those laws still try to assure, in some way, that people are treated as individuals. And none of the characteristics you mention come near to the concerns of those laws.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Are these people identical twins? Presumably despite having similar “profiles” they are distinct human beings each with their own name, personality, interests, and goals. The superficial fact that they come from the same undergraduate institution seems totally irrelevant from the point of view of a professor or graduate admissions committee.
So basically your question is informed by what appears to be a false premise. As @buffy stated, it is true that the students are obviously in competition with each other, but the point is that they are no more (or less) in competition with each other than they would be if they were applying from different schools but still had similar “profiles”.
In other words, the simple answer to your question is “no”. Except maybe for the situation of actual twins, which may indeed present some unique difficulties (I’ve actually heard of such cases).
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/10/31
| 1,113
| 4,690
|
<issue_start>username_0: A lot of Hype goes in reproducible, open and transparency for data analysis theses days in some fields mores that other. The code is to be share as well as the dataset.
How to achieve this in a context of patient data protection that all ethics' committees will require ? What are the best practice to overcome theses antagonistics goals ?
My team seems to think patient's data protection means the data (already anonymized) shouldn't leak and thus we have to work on the database's server without ever getting the anon db on our stations. This feels a tad too much / an overkill ?<issue_comment>username_1: Its totally normal practice for patient data to be allowed to be stored only on properly secured, regulated and monitored servers.
In my field (genomics), databases exist where researchers can deposit anonymized patient data, that is not "publically" available, but can be accessed by users that can demonstrate that they have good reason to use the data, that their use falls within the consent agreement and have the IT systems in place to keep the data safe (see for e.g. dbGaP and EGA) by making an application to a data-protection committee.
Code can be written in such a way that no patient data is in the code (loaded from secure locations, etc), so that the code can be shared.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: People have already though about the this. The American Statistical Association has guideline for reproducible results ([here](https://community.amstat.org/blogs/amy-nussbaum/2016/10/12/asa-advice-for-funding-agencies-on-reproducible-research)).
>
> 1. Reproducibility is enhanced by following best current practices, including:
>
>
> a. Ideally, exclusive use of publicly available data. However if the research domain does not allow for publically available data for widely accepted reasons (e.g., medical data with high confidentiality concerns), the principles outlined in items (b) - (e) should still be followed;
>
>
> b. Use of version control for all (collaborative or individual) code development;
>
>
> c. Exclusive use of open-source software freely available to anyone in the world
>
>
> d. End-to-end scripting of research, including data processing and cleaning, statistical analyses, visualizations, and report and/or manuscript generation, with the full workflow made available to others;
>
>
> e. Use of container/virtual machine tools to capture software versions, dependencies, and platform specifics;
>
>
> f. Publication of code in public repositories as with data; and
>
>
> g. For projects that develop algorithms, implementing algorithms on standard computational platforms (e.g., R packages, Python packages, source code packages installable via standard methods, etc.).
>
>
> 2. Reproducibility shouldn't be thought of as a binary state: either reproducible or not-reproducible. It's more useful to think about it as continuum from hard to reproduce to easy to reproduce. The goal of any reproducibility effort should broadly be to move as many people as possible further towards easy-to-reproduce. This involves some technological (to make the right thing easier than the wrong thing) and some social (to give people the activation energy to learn a better process even though it's harder in the short-term) components.
> 3. It’s perhaps worth noting that in this era of “replication crisis”, reproducibility is the only thing that can be effectively guaranteed in a published study. Whether any claimed findings are indeed true or false can only be confirmed via additional studies, but reproducibility can be confirmed immediately.
>
>
>
Also, the medical literautre has discussed this. For example, [Tucker et al.](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4943495/) describe how to protect patient privacy when sharing data. Their two key recommendations were:
>
> 1. Data anonymisation/de-identification: Data holders are responsible for generating de-identified datasets which are intended to offer increased protection for patient privacy through masking or generalisation of direct and some indirect identifiers.
> 2. Controlled access to data, including use of a data sharing agreement: A legally binding data sharing agreement should be in place, including agreements not to download or further share data and not to attempt to seek to identify patients. Appropriate levels of security should be used for transferring data or providing access; one solution is use of a secure ‘locked box’ system which provides additional safeguards.
>
>
>
Searching through the medical and statistical literature will give you more ideas we well.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/10/31
| 1,371
| 5,896
|
<issue_start>username_0: I will be graduating with a PhD from a US institution in computational sciences. I have published 10+ papers in peer reviewed journals in the field I am applying for jobs.
I have been interviewed by some PIs, and after interview, I have been asked to submit a few hours of tasks for further evaluation. I was wondering if it is normal these days in hiring process to assign some work/test to evaluate the candidates on top of interview presentation. Anyway, I found the assignment interesting and have decided to work on it.<issue_comment>username_1: It is highly unusual. As you note, the PI has plenty of "standard" information (publications, recommendation letter, CV, etc.) that can be used to assess your potential as a collaborator and independent scientist. This is what most PIs will use in the hiring process. Some will ask you to give a seminar or do an interview by phone, video, or in person.
How the PI evaluates you as a candidate will reflect how the PI evaluates you once you are an advisee. This is especially true if they ask you to do something unusual, which is certainly the case here.
You are being told that the work you have done in the past, the good credit that you have earned with your previous advisor, your attendance and interaction at seminars... these are unimportant factors compared to whatever skills this "exam" is testing. It sounds like you do not agree with that attitude. That is reasonable, and if true, I suggest that you and this advisor may not be a good match.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I find it a bit intriguing, actually. Though unusual. And, of course, if you object to it, move on now without another thought.
But perhaps she just wants to know how you will attack a new and fresh problem without the support you may have had in your studies. Or perhaps she and you are in a field in which a lot of opportunities pop up and there are threads of potential research that need a quick study and overview.
I don't find it offensive. Painful to comply with, perhaps, but that is up to you. Once she is paying you such things might become a requirement, not a request.
And I don't agree that she considers your accomplishments unimportant. But if the competition for the position is fierce, she will want every bit of information she can gather on candidates.
There is no reason to do this, unless you want the position, and no reason not to, but for the time it takes, if you do.
You choose.
Not everything that is weird is necessarily bad.
---
I'd love to hear from her why she does this. Maybe I'd be appalled.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: In the professional world there are plenty of interview processes that contain one or another way of skill assessment. That's pretty normal and not a way to devalue your general expertise but a matter of establishing whether your skills do fit the exact needs of the company and typically also if your way to apply them fits the company culture / type of person the company is looking for.
Whether an exam/report is the right and (e.g. wrt time investment) fair way to check how well you match for the given position is certainly debatable and definitely uncommon in the academic world.
However, note that this does not mean your other qualifications do not matter, they are the basis on which you get to the test level. Whether the job is worth the involved effort only you can decide.
On the other hand, isn't it a bit odd, that you want to complete the report while you don't want to take the position either way? That wastes your time and that of the potential advisor who will likely read it. Then again, if it is so motivating to do for you, maybe it is the perfect check whether you bring the right kind of motivation with you for the job. And it can also be valuable to you if you know the kind of stuff you would later deal with on a daily basis...
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: My former PI used to give assignments to candidates he wasn't sure about but thought they might have potential. They would generally be small problems that he would then have one of his current students evaluate to see if 1) the general approach was reasonable and 2) how realistic their evaluation of their own progress was (e.g. knowing your results were poor was more important than getting good results).
He did this because his lab was relatively prestigious and got a ton of applications. He didn't want to limit his search to "only people from top 10 institutions" or "only people with publications in top journals" and he felt this approach gave talented people from diverse backgrounds a chance. It also made a sort of filter where if the borderline candidate didn't care enough to do the project, he didn't have to care enough to evaluate it. Since this PI expressed concerns about the amount of time you spent in your degree, they may have a similar mindset as my former PI.
Personally, I didn't find the projects that useful, at least for the candidates I evaluated. Maybe I was just a tough judge, but I generally found the candidates were less "passionate" and more "desperate" as the results I got back were generally higher effort than was being requested with an overly optimistic evaluation of their own progress. Still, it may have paid off for a talented person with a middling CV who wanted to make the move to a top tier institution.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: How does this project fit with the PI's research goals? The answer may be surprising.
Do you think this project would lead to a publication? Is it possible this project would lead to a note or other short submission? If so, go for it. Even if you don't get the job, you can submit a paper.
If it is a throw-away project, I would avoid it, unless you need the job.
And don't forget that you may be the top candidate!
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/10/31
| 510
| 2,192
|
<issue_start>username_0: Would it make a negative impact on my PhD application if they get to know that I am already enrolled in PhD and now applying for another program in their University?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, you can apply, just as anyone else. But yes, it is possible that people in your current program would take it as a negative. And, yes again, that the other university or program might rank you a bit lower if you already have a "suitable" position in a doctoral program. But I doubt that the last would be a large factor in most cases.
But there are a lot of reasons to switch. Some of them are very important. If you have a serious *need* to switch, either for personal or academic reasons, don't hesitate to explore your options and follow up on good ones. This is especially true if you don't think you have a good path to success where you are now.
People understand that others change their minds and their directions. They understand the need to move locations and situations. They understand that some qualified students are in a bad situation.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Not really. There are people doing more than 2 degrees at the same time. That is relatively common for people that want to end up at the same time with extra certifications and there are universities that offer a discount on the second degree's payments. However, it is understood such is extremely demanding.
If what you are planning is a switch on PHD and you care what others may think, then there shouldn't be a problem either, but I advise you to say (and only if you are asked) exactly that, that you wish to pursue 2 PHD's simultaneously, and then, when you are on the other you can say that it was indeed too demanding and need to drop 1 to be able to finish the other. Otherwise, you are the paying client of the university (most PHD's around the world are paid for by the student and only so few are by scholarships), so if you want to switch then there shouldn't be a problem. And in the rare case its not a paid PHD (whihc can be the case for some european PHD's) , then just check your universities regulations to see if there is any type of penalty.
Upvotes: -1
|
2019/10/31
| 1,574
| 6,689
|
<issue_start>username_0: Should a professor tenured in field X receive research credit for research in a field other than X?
What is your experience on this question?
It is an important issue of academic freedom. If the answer is NO, then it means that tenure pigeon holes you for life in one field. That would be contrary to academic freedom.<issue_comment>username_1: Indeed, this question exposes a paradoxical aspect of "tenure"... Certainly in the U.S. system, and also Canada and western Europe, so far as I know. Namely, people get tenure basically by showing that they can energetically conform to rules and expectations (for their work, its direction, etc.) Yes, in one ideal scenario, tenure certifies the good judgement of the person, who can now follow their curiosity without worrying about getting fired for not doing what someone else wants.
However, even though in the U.S. we currently are in a period of low inflation, there is the issue of getting good raises. Also, the issue of getting punitive teaching assignments, punitive committee assignments, and possibly having one's teaching load increased at the caprice of the dept head or dean, if one is insufficiently compliant research-wise.
Well, yes, but why *shouldn't* the university feel justified in getting something for the pay they give faculty? Thus, justifying hassling "non-performing" (to expectations...) faculty? I think the point is that the whole business is a sort of gamble, and if sometimes the gamble does not pay off, it doesn't necessarily mean that the whole enterprise is misguided. Further, many universities (as entities) are smart enough to know that it is hard to judge the virtues of innovative stuff, so it's best to not over-manage.
And, as has often been said, lots of people are happy to be faculty at a university, rather than pursue far-better-paying jobs available to smart people (regardless of academic specialties), exactly because of the freedom to choose one's projects/goals. If (when? as?) universities are more corporatized, they'll catch fewer and fewer such people.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I think you have a very big misconception that this is the state of academia. Just looking at the nobel prizes, many have been won by very interdisciplinary researchers. Many nobel prizes in chemistry go to physicists who developed very specialized and sensitive measurement and manipulation methods that could be applied to very big questions in chemistry. You could argue if these noble prize winners are true experts of chemistry in comparison to professors of chemistry that studied chemistry, graduated with a PhD in this field and got tenure. But often for great science it is imho not the deep and broad knowledge that enables great and important research, but the ingenuity and awareness to ask the right scientific question that can also be methodologically tackled at that time.
If academia would discourage this modus operandi of researchers to work on questions independently of their education, then it is not much more than technology optimization in a company. Good science is applying new methods (experimental/mathematical) to unsolved questions, that's how most scientific paradigms are shifted.
In the light of publish or perish you can of course ask yourself if all universities follow the modus operandi above. Some do and require distinct number of publications, some not, but few high impact papers to get tenure. If the professor already has tenure, he likely has much more incentive, patience, freedom and risk assessment to go for the latter.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: In my view (from the US) and experience, tenure is pretty absolute in the absence of severe breaches of conduct. But changing research fields isn't a breach.
However, while a department in which you earn tenure will almost certainly honor it if you change research fields, the extra "perks" that come with the professorate may be denied you. Perhaps you don't get raises. Perhaps you don't get promoted. Perhaps you have to teach the courses no one else wants. Lots of things.
If you just quit working altogether in the department you can probably be fired - a breach. But if you teach the required load and provide some other services, your job is probably (minimally) safe. Some people, nearing retirement, give up serious research altogether. No one worries a lot about it, provided that there is sufficient activity by other people. And such a professor might be made an offer to give up tenure to make room for a younger professor. A year's salary might be offered as a sort of un-signing bonus to give up tenure. This also happens when too many professors hold positions that might be better offered to more productive people.
And in those fields in which external grant funding is a *must* and the teaching means advising doctoral students, you can't give that up and expect to keep the job. But some minimal compliance may be enough.
I have a case in mind. A colleague was tenured in CS - an associate professor. But his research was both poor and closely related to another field in which he had no academic credentials. He wanted to be promoted to Full Professor, but never was. I advised him for a while (a formal mentorship) and told him what he needed to do. He said that he understood all that and appreciated my advice, but chose not to do any of it. He served till retirement as an Associate Professor and sort of the goat of the department. He was unhappy about not getting advanced, but sufficiently happy with the situation to continue on.
Some people changing fields can switch to a different department. Whether they keep their tenure or not would be questionable, since it is really a new position, even in the same university. But it is something that might be negotiated (in some places, anyway). But it would require getting some credential to do that.
However, keep in mind that new fields arise from old ones pretty regularly. CS, for example, emerged, in part at least, from mathematics departments. So, the pioneers in CS were often trained in mathematics or engineering, say. They kept their tenure and they got credit for founding a new field.
And, there are situations in which a change of fields can lead to a certain synergy, fusing the ideas of both fields and creating something new. I don't think such situations are especially rare, but not all cases will fit this pattern.
Don't assume all will be well if you want to change fields. But don't assume that it will be catastrophic. As with many things in academia, it is up to the individual to make the case for their own productivity.
Upvotes: -1
|
2019/10/31
| 370
| 1,515
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've heard word that in the Netherlands only a professor/hoogleraar can supervise PhD students but I've found little to solidly confirm this. I've also heard that in practice, other arrangements are often made. Can anyone comment or confirm that a universitair hoofddocent (equivalent to a reader or an associate professor) cannot supervise PhD students? How do full professors handle the workload of supervising all the PhDs?<issue_comment>username_1: There is a difference between supervisor and *promotor*. You need a *promotor*, who is going to sign off your thesis. This needs to be a full professor (not associate or assistant - edit: nowadays at least at some universities in the Netherlands, associate professor is the rank needed to be the promotor, not professor - see answer by username_2 and comments). However, your main supervisor can be any PI (comparable to assistant/associate professor). Your daily supervision can even be handled by postdocs, and to some extend even by senior PhD students.
Depending on the status of your PI, if he or she isn't full professor (yet), a promotor may not be involved in a PhD students work at all.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: To add to this, my own question, for anyone looking, what username_1 said is almost but not quite right. The "promotor" comment is mostly correct, but at least at some universities in the Netherlands, including mine, Associate Professor is the rank needed to be the promotor, not Professor.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/11/01
| 801
| 3,586
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have an idea inspired by class project readings but is significantly different from the class materials and published work. I already have some promising results. I am tempted to do the research and try to write a paper on it and send to the journals. (This is in the field of CS and not much resources are needed to do the research.)
I am a Master's student pursuing an online terminal Master's degree. I have no prior experience with publishing a paper. Being an online program, I have no face-to-face interactions with the faculty, but I do have a lot of online interactions with the helpful TAs.
I am wondering what is the best way to go about this.
* Should I indicate I am associated with the school?
* Should I indicate that I am working with my professors/TAs, although I have never discussed the idea with them?
* I have done a reasonable search on the existing papers on this idea and haven't found any. But there are thousands of papers and I am worried that I won't be able to do an exhaustive enough search to see if there is anything similar to it. How is this usually handled?
* Similarly, what about related ideas? I do see that some ideas are related to mine. Should I try to reference all of them?
* Is there anything else I should be considering?
I know the chance of actually getting it published is slim. But it is worth trying and I want to do it right such that the only thing I need to worry about is to produce something with quality.
Note:
* I noticed that the original version of my question was not communicating what I meant. I apologize that it caused some confusion and responses based on that.
* I am in fact not sure if I want to get a Ph.D. and do research for the school as a way of making a living. I have not decided. Right now I just want to finish the research, write a paper, and possibly publish it.
* The motivation is not career. I just find the idea and results interesting.<issue_comment>username_1: You need more than an idea to get published in a journal.
=========================================================
A research journal contains articles written about research which has produced new knowledge. If you haven’t done the research yet, you probably shouldn’t try writing a research paper.
Instead, you’d be looking at writing a research proposal, detailing the research problem and the gap in existing knowledge and why it’s important, the specific research question you’re intending to research and how it will help address the research problem by filling in a part of the gap in existing knowledge, and the specific methodology you’re planning to use for your research, along with the resources you expect you’ll need.
At this stage of your career, you would then likely send this proposal to various faculties at universities that have academics working on related fields as a part of applying for a PhD program.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You wrote that you have never discussed the idea with your TAs/professors. I would recommend you do just that. Tell the professor teaching the class how you thought about some course topics and extended it to this new idea of yours. The professor can tell you whether this is exciting enough to make into a research paper. If this can become a scientific paper you want the support of a professor, even if just for the formal aspects of writing and submitting a paper. Even if this will not become a research paper it would still mark you as a top student who thinks beyond the core material of the course.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/01
| 905
| 3,902
|
<issue_start>username_0: So over the last few months, I've been working on an AI model that could classify a skin lesion as cancerous or not using only an image of the lesion. At first, I thought there's no way that I could achieve anything more than 70% accuracy but after tweaking with my program for a long while, I was able to reach an accuracy of over 95% which is definitely an improvement compared to my first tries.
The other day, I was talking to a professor at my local university whom I've written a paper with and showed him my classifier. He told me that I could write a paper on it which had never come to my mind because I believe an accuracy of 95% is not nearly good enough and the methods that I used weren't new, cutting edge methods that could have a huge impact in the AI industry.
Fast forward a couple days, I found all the papers related to classifying skin lesions using ML and DL and I actually found quite a few but they all are vastly different from my model(different hyperparameters, the different architectures, different models, etc) but the accuracy in all of them are pretty close to mine(they were all very close to 95%).
My question is, do you think it's worth it to even try and write a paper about my work or is it pointless and won't help me in the future?
P.S: I've already read a similar question but that was about research in math which is VERY different. In math, the solution is sometimes more important than the finding but I'm not sure if that's the case with AI.
By the way, I'm 14, so I'm not sure whether I can do this independently or not.
Thank you so, so much!<issue_comment>username_1: As you say, applying well-studied tool X to well-studied problem Y and getting the expected result won't lead to a groundbreaking paper. But not every paper is revolutionary, and many such papers are published, particularly in AI. It is true that professors and other senior researchers try to avoid publishing such papers simply because they have limited time and need to invest it on higher-impact ideas. Only mid- and high-tier papers really count when calculating, for example, tenure decisions.
But you are not a professor, you are 14 and this is presumably your first long-term project. Writing something up and getting it "out there" is highly worthwhile, both so you can practice writing publications and so that you have something citeable when you apply to college and beyond. Even a low-tier publication, or putting it on the arXiv, is pretty darn impressive at your career stage.
I assume this is why your professor recommended that you write up something to publish. Either that, or he thinks the work is more significant than you realize. Since he is familiar with your work and we are not, I would defer to his advice in any case.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I would say the general answer to your question is similar in almost every research field. The method to obtain a result is very important and does justify a publication if it is new. One could argue that a new combination of known methods makes a new method.
As you stated, your methods were not new, but you applied known methods to a problem they have not been used for before. That does not exclude publication either. In my field, there are quite a few applied research journals that publish mainly this kind of research. Maybe not highest impact, but fully respected. Is there something like that is AI? Then you could go for that.
And let's be honest: A big fraction of publications is a new combination of known methods to a problem that was addressed in another way before. It is a bit like making music: You only have a few notes that you can combine to a new tune, but if is well done you will not complain about the fact that "already Mozart and Bach used those notes. Okay, they produced a different result, but it is time for an innovation."
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/11/01
| 3,330
| 13,702
|
<issue_start>username_0: Today I got accused by my professor of cheating and copying two reports I submitted. I had a formal meeting with the professor where he tried to push me into admitting I cheated by showing me the surprising similarities. Even though I continuously denied it, he went forward to go to a formal hearing in the university where a panel will judge the outcome. I am currently freaking out. I know I did not cheat from anybody and I feel like the similarity could be due to a similar thought process (which sounds ridiculous). Should I just say that I did not cheat and stick with it? Or should I ask if I can redo the reports (though it sounds suspicious)? The reports were 68 percent similar and I feel like the odds are against me even though I did not do anything.
Edit: the software used was turnitin and I do not hav access to the original files to get time stamps. I literally can only deny the allegations. The only reasonable explanation is that the professor taught us in a similar manner and our report writing manner was similar due to the fact we have taken the same courses a year apart and had the same professors who molded our report writing skills.<issue_comment>username_1: In this kind of hearing, evidence will be paramount. "I know I did not cheat" isn't sufficient - that's just a denial. You need more, e.g.:
* Can you show that you could not possibly have known about these 2 reports?
* Do you have drafts of the report, preferably with time stamps, as you were writing it?
* Did you work with anyone else? If so, can they vouch for you?
Offering to redo the reports won't work unfortunately - at this point, it's about academic integrity, not about the grade you get. It's likely advisable to get advice from someone familiar with your department and the academic integrity process, e.g. a faculty member you trust, or student counselors if available.
You might be interested in related questions such as [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/133206/professor-falsely-accusing-me-of-cheating-in-a-class-he-does-not-teach-two-mont) and [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/126928/falsely-accused-of-cheating-on-a-college-final).
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Firstly, use version control. It's quite likely that you've produced your report in either MS Word, Libre Office or Google Docs. All of these programs store old revisions, although Google Docs stores all of the revisions while Word and Libre Office only a limited number. If you're able to produce evidence of partial work, it'll be clear you've produced the report yourself instead of copying it from previous work.
See for example <https://www.dummies.com/software/microsoft-office/word/view-older-version-word-2016-document/> for accessing old versions of a Word document. Warning: only a limited number of revisions are stored, so don't save the document again as it will overwrite the oldest versions! If you exported your work as a PDF multiple times, look in the Trash Bin - there may be additional files there.
If you used LaTeX, you might have to use a digital forensics program, such as Autopsy, to recover deleted PDFs and scrub through a sea of deleted documents it recovers to find a previous version of this document.
Secondly, remember that you're innocent until proven guilty. It's the professor who needs to convince the panel that you cheated and not the opposite. Do not accept the professors framing of the situation.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Find an advocate to support you. Some universities have an office (ombudsman) for this. In other places a student organization provides help. You may even need a lawyer if you are able to afford one. Another professor who trusts you might be able to help.
Papers were similar. It happens. I assume that whoever did the previous work had the same teacher, with the same lectures, and the same written materials (books, etc). Students were actually *encouraged* to think in a certain way.
Instructors should make sufficient changes from year to year that this sort of situation is impossible. Lazy professors lead to spurious charges.
If you have evidence, of course, present it. Insist on your innocence. Complain to the department head or the dean.
If you have to ask for the chance to do it over, ask that someone else set the assignment and evaluate it. Ask the department head.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: You don't have the option of resubmitting the reports -- and haven't since the day you handed in the reports. If a hearing process has been started, it will be finished.
68% similarity is a high number, and unlikely to happen by pure coincidence. I suggest you examine your process of writing your lab reports with a fine tooth comb, and be ready to convey this process to the hearing board.
In preparation for the hearing, you should ask for the document which you are accused of copying in order for you to prepare. As I said, 68% is a high number, but there could be explanations. For example, if both papers cite the same sources, then the citations in the bibliography could boost the similarity percentage, and the prof did not examine the similarities carefully enough to see this issue.
Another possibility is that you didn't copy the older lab report, but that both you and the student who wrote the old report used the same sources for their preparation, and there was insufficient citation of the sources you used. In this case, both you and the student you're accused of copying from plagiarized from the same source, and the hearing board will likely still find you responsible for a violation of an honesty policy.
If this is the case, and you insufficiently cited the same sources that the other student used, I'd encourage you to have the information in-pocket for your hearing. There is subtle difference between finding an old lab report and copying it, or boosting text from a wikipedia listing without citing it, because you don't understand how to do it correctly. Both are violations, but convey different intention and might differ in terms of severity.
You may also be faced with whether the two reports are treated as TWO violations or pooled together as one violation. If the case is improper citation, and not copying from an old report, you might ask for some mitigation of penalty for the second offense, as it would have been dandy if the prof could have identified your issue before you repeated it.
Go into the hearing realizing that the committee isn't out to get you, but to correct you and make sure you learn the right way of doing things.
Good Luck with your hearing.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I've read the above answers, and they seem to give pretty good advice, but I have some more for you that isn't about procedures of college, but on personal etiquette and experience when being questioned by those who have authority.
In the military we say, "He who yells first has lost the argument."
When you go into this, have your facts ready, and find some way to keep your calm. If you are freaking out as you say, this can easily be misconstrued as acting in a guilty manner. When you are in front of them, treat it like a soldier would at a military board. Listen to their questions carefully, do not interrupt them, answer their questions truthfully, support your statements if possible, and correct any inconsistencies in their facts as you find them.
In short you are having a logical argument with them, and if you can find a weakness in their argument you can use that to unravel their argument or cast doubt on it's validity.
Most importantly though, you cannot do this if you are freaking out.
Also, remember, if one of them yells first or gets upset, you've won the argument. You kept your cool, and now have a means to attack their argument, or show that it is not logically sound, but emotionally driven.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: The other answers seem to have summed up the main part. I'd only add that, depending on where you are, threatening a lawsuit might actually be a good course of action as well. Where I'm from (in Eastern Europe) many professors would probably drop the whole thing if you get them to believe you will actually sue the university as it's not worth the trouble and risk to them. In the US trials seem to be a somewhat trivial matter but where I'm from the professor could get fired if you do in fact win the trial. Going through the trouble of getting a lawyer involved also seems to make people think you actually believe that you're right.
Do keep in mind it could backfire as if he does decide to pursue he will do his absolute best to prove you cheated and you will have lost time that could have been spent preparing evidence in your favor. Think of it as a last resort. In case you go that route, even if bluffing, make sure you document as much as possible just in case you do decide to sue.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: In addition to other excellent answers, I suggest you use make the following argument:
### Rare events are likely in large populations
... to explain why it is reasonable for your version of events to have occurred.
The panel would be thinking: "It's extremely unlikely for independently-written reports to have such a high degree of similarity - @Ballislyf must be lying to us."
And you tell them: Yes, it's extremely likely if you're looking at just two report-writers. But in both this and the previous semester we had at least n students taking this lab; so actually, we have n \* n pairs of students. And whenever some pairs of students all have non-similar reports, that only increases the probability of the remaining pairs to produce similar reports. Thus the probability of finding at least one pair of students with similar reports is in fact much much higher.
If you know a bit of math - and you probably do - you can work out an upper bound of this probability and present it.
Something to consider: The analogy of winning the lottery, or being struck by lightning. If a student misses a deadline saying they were struck by lightning and their laptop died, you would probably think they're just lying. But - some people do get struck by lightning; and some of them are students; and they often have homework on their computers. So - this must happen sometimes.
There are few problems with this argument:
* Students aren't randomly-sampled from anywhere, nor are their reports uniform samples from the space of possible reports.
* You don't know how slim the "faux-probability" of similar reports is.
* To have *two* separate lab reports be similar between the same students is less probable than just *one*, and seems more damning. That might need extra explanation.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: From turnitin.psu.edu:
>
> False Positives
>
>
> A false positive, that is a paper with a high similarity score that is
> not the result of a student committing plagiarism, can occur for the
> following reasons.
>
>
> If a rough draft is stored in the Turnitin repository, you may get a
> false positive for a final draft.
>
>
> If a student submits a paper to Turnitin.com independently of the
> course to check for plagiarism, the version uploaded for the course
> will be a “copy.”
>
>
> It is possible your student is being plagiarized. The Originality
> Report identifies matches, but does not necessarily identify which is
> the “copy” and which is the “original.”
>
>
> A student could be expanding previous research for a new assignment,
> but copying text from the original research.
>
>
>
Does any of this apply to you? If so, you can use this as your defense during the hearing.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: I am a professor. Even if you don't have any "hard" evidence that you wrote it yourself, one thing that would be convincing to me, if I was on this committee, was that you knew the material you handed in. E.g. you could take an oral exam on the material. So, make sure you really know what you handed in and why you wrote it the way you did.
And as written on another answer, try to stay calm. Have some faith that the committee will find the truth.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: Here's a little more detail on Turnitin's process. It's a little too much for a comment, and offers some hints as to what's going on.
Turnitin (produces a "similarity score" using a black-box algorithm, but the marker can see duplicated passages, and in many cases their sources\*. In the reports I marks, a similarity score of around 20% is common for reports on projects that run every year - titles, references, standard terminology, etc. Over about 35% generally seems to indicate some use of choice phrases from the literature, often combined with a limited vocabulary that ends up repeatedly using the same wording. To reach 68% would require many sentences in which only a few words are changed from the sources.
If the score is 68% I'd expect the marker to do some digging into what the "copied" passages match. If you match an earlier interim report of your own - no problem. Here we have guidance and systems to take care of that. But that should be commonplace, so I doubt it's what's going on here. The software is only a tool, and one that has to be used carefully; so far I see no evidence from what they've said that the necessary checks have been carried out, but that's something that should come out in the investigation.
---
\*Published sources and sources within the same institution are identifiable; coursework from other institutions is only identified by institution name (and perhaps year).
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/11/01
| 357
| 1,554
|
<issue_start>username_0: Context:
I am an undergrad, and working in a research group over 7 months now. I have asked my P.I (group leader) whether he would write me a recommendation letter one month before the deadline of Master's programs, and he said that he would.
Now, the deadline was yesterday, and he haven't write me any letter. I have reminded him the letter regularly via email, and he responded positively, and when I reminded him again just one day before the deadline, he said that he will write it after finishing a report, and still there is no letter.
What is the most logical course of action in this case?<issue_comment>username_1: I'd say your best course of action is to notify the institution that you are applying to that there has been a delay, and to find someone else who can write you a recommendation within a week's time. The admissions department is likely to have a little bit of grace period for you to work with, but probably not more than a few working days. That said, they may not accept the late recommendation, but it is worth trying.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If you worked closely with a senior postdoc or graduate student, you can ask that person to write you a letter. While they would not have the name recognition that your advisor does, they would be able to provide actual examples of your research skills, problem-solving abilities, and writing that the actual PI probably cannot match.
Admissions committees have seen lame PIs before, and would like to know if you can do the work.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/11/01
| 475
| 2,079
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been reading about many theories, some are more solid that the others.
I wonder if there is a way for non-professional to know the rank ( how trusted) this theory?
Example Strings Theory, i read that it is not proved yet and there is a good chance it could be wrong.
there are other theories like White Holes
How can I as non-professional know how trusted this theory without doing all the research?<issue_comment>username_1: No, there is no rank for theories.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: No, there does not exist any ranking and you may be confused about some things.
1. A **theory** is a contemplative and rational type of abstract or generalizing thinking about a phenomenon, or the results of such thinking.
2. A **scientific theory** is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can be repeatedly tested and verified in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results. Where possible, theories are tested under controlled conditions in an experiment. In circumstances not amenable to experimental testing, theories are evaluated through principles of abductive reasoning. Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and embody scientific knowledge
3. **Scientific laws** are descriptive accounts of how nature will behave under certain conditions.
4. A **hypothesis** is a *proposed* explanation for a phenomenon.
That is in broad.
To determine how *trusted* something is, it means it is widely accepted because it has been widely tested. If you want to know how 'trusty' something you read is, you can revise how many times it is cited, how widely is accepted, who are its detractors and why, how where there tests done, etc.
There is no easy magic ranking and I hope you see why. However, I think your question is important for the professionals to read and remember that some people might be very confused on some stuff as they have become quite distanced from the general vulgo/mases.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2019/11/01
| 410
| 1,591
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am 30 years old. I have spent 4 yrs in undergrad, 2 in masters and 5 in PhD with half a year of work experience in between. I have just finished my PhD and will start with a postdoc position early next year. Considering I spend 2-3 years in a postdoc. By the time I apply for TT positions, I will be 33yo. I have heard that hiring committees prefer younger candidates (<30) than older ones. Considering I have a good application, should I be worried about the fact that I will be too old for applying for tenure track positions by the time I complete postdoc?
I would be applying for TT positions in India, Canada and US.<issue_comment>username_1: I think that most places would ignore your age. In some places age discrimination is frowned upon, and can be illegal, though usually for much older applicants. But frowned upon in any case.
The few places that might are acting foolishly since it is your accomplishments and likelihood of success that should be the determining factor.
If you are in a place where this is endemic, think about finding a better place, though that is disruptive, of course. My former spouse didn't finish her doctorate until she was about 40 and went on to a great career in the US.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Hiring committees do care about how many years it’s been since you got your PhD, but they more-or-less don’t care at all about what happened before you received your PhD. I think you’ve misunderstood what people meant by “younger.” I took 7 years in grad school and it caused no issues whatsoever.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/11/01
| 406
| 1,789
|
<issue_start>username_0: Otherwise the editor and the reviewers will think that one's work was rushed. Do you concur?<issue_comment>username_1: Submit it when it's ready: that would be the actual interval of time to complete the work, along with all the competing responsibilities you or your coauthors may have.
What *I've* read is typically to submit a revised article in *less than a month*: although, where I read this was in emails from journal editors. Of course, those editors are flexible when the work will take longer to complete (for example, if new experiments are necessary) and different journals have different expectations.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I suspect this may depend on the field.
It also depends strongly on the nature of the comments that you received. If the comments are something that are easy to address (adding some refs, clarifying some points in text, etc.), then there is something to be said for resubmitting as soon as possible (while seriously addressing the points made by the referees). Your referees will typically be thankful for this, since the article (and their own thoughts on it) will be still fresh in their mind. This means that it will be a lot less work for them to reassess the article. (I often aim to resubmit in a day or two in these cases.)
On the other hand, if the referees have more profound comments that may require you to produce new results to address (new experiments or new calculations). Then, of course, you should take as much time as is necessary to adequately address the comments.
The most important thing in any case is to take the referees seriously. Even if you think that the comments of a referee are misguides, that usually means that you have not explained your point clearly enough.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/01
| 521
| 2,292
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is it usual that the chance for a PhD student that aims to apply for the second semester of the educational year (i.e. spring semester) and sends his/her application for professors may be lesser than who want to apply via connection with professors for the first semester in an educational year (i.e. autumn semester)? In other words, does volumes of accepted PhD students in the autumn semester influence on reduction of acceptance rate and opportunity for a Prospective PhD student who aims to apply in the next spring semester or each semester has its own capacity for accepting PhD students?<issue_comment>username_1: Submit it when it's ready: that would be the actual interval of time to complete the work, along with all the competing responsibilities you or your coauthors may have.
What *I've* read is typically to submit a revised article in *less than a month*: although, where I read this was in emails from journal editors. Of course, those editors are flexible when the work will take longer to complete (for example, if new experiments are necessary) and different journals have different expectations.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I suspect this may depend on the field.
It also depends strongly on the nature of the comments that you received. If the comments are something that are easy to address (adding some refs, clarifying some points in text, etc.), then there is something to be said for resubmitting as soon as possible (while seriously addressing the points made by the referees). Your referees will typically be thankful for this, since the article (and their own thoughts on it) will be still fresh in their mind. This means that it will be a lot less work for them to reassess the article. (I often aim to resubmit in a day or two in these cases.)
On the other hand, if the referees have more profound comments that may require you to produce new results to address (new experiments or new calculations). Then, of course, you should take as much time as is necessary to adequately address the comments.
The most important thing in any case is to take the referees seriously. Even if you think that the comments of a referee are misguides, that usually means that you have not explained your point clearly enough.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/02
| 1,594
| 5,500
|
<issue_start>username_0: In an interview made for the 25th anniversary of the Institut de Mathématiques de Jussieu-<NAME>, its head Professor <NAME> [says at 1:25](https://youtu.be/DK6AqJuCh0E):
>
> *Les doctorants que nous formons aurons une lourde tâche: celle de reprendre le flambeau de l'école mathématique française, qui est rentrée dans un creux démographique.*
>
>
> [Personnal translation: *The graduate students that we educate will have a daunting task: that of taking up the mantle of the French school of mathematics, which has entered a demographical dip.*]
>
>
>
What are references backing this claim, and how pronounced is the effect ? For instance, will there be an actual shortage of talent and even some areas taking a toll, or just slightlty less competition for a while ?<issue_comment>username_1: As suggested by Buffy in the comments, I've now written to Professor Merel and have obtained his answer. Since he didn't mention that I could give it here I'll keep it private. I'll just say that a relevant reference is [this publicly available page](http://postes.smai.emath.fr/2020/OUTILS/bilans.php) on the Opération Postes website. **Edit** (given the comments): the plots on that page show a very subtantial decrease in the number of offered positions in the space of 10 years. On the other hand, it is known that the number of new PhDs per year has not decreased.
Upvotes: -1 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Here is some additional info compared to the other answer (which does not have a lot of detail).
Loïc's comment is mainly about *fundamental* (AKA pure) mathematics. The IMJ-PRG is a pure math research institute. There is a trend in French academia that funding is going more and more towards research that has immediate applications, with some level of disregard for fundamental research. This is the case in pretty much all fields of science (maybe with the exception of computer science). It goes without saying that the situation is dire in social science and the arts, apart from economics, management, and law. (I did not choose these at random, they are legally treated separately from the rest.)
The French ministry periodically releases some demographic information. [Here is the latest one for faculty in Section 25, i.e. pure math.](https://cache.media.enseignementsup-recherche.gouv.fr/file/statistiques/32/6/25_1128326.pdf) Even if you can't read French, the graphics speak for themselves. On the first page, the first graphic is about professors, the second about lecturers (*maîtres de conférences*), the third about the total. The brown line is pure math, the light blue line is "Group 5" (pure math + applied math + CS), the dark blue line is Science, the black line is the whole of French academia. The graphics are normalized at 100 in 1998. You can get graphics for other years and fields [on this page](https://www.enseignementsup-recherche.gouv.fr/cid85019/fiches-demographiques-des-sections-du-cnu.html).
To summarize: **the number of faculty in pure math has decreased by 15% in France between 1998 and 2018**. This is enormous. The number of students increases every year. Administrative tasks are always increasing. This puts an enormous amount of stress on the remaining faculty. (As a comparison, [the number of faculty in applied math increased by 11.4%](https://cache.media.enseignementsup-recherche.gouv.fr/file/statistiques/33/0/26_1128330.pdf).)
The situation is also dire for new doctors: finding a permanent position is an ordeal, even more so than in similar countries. In the PDF I linked, Figure 3.2 on page 4 is especially telling: in 2018, there were 420 candidates for 22 lecturer positions, and 136 candidates for 14 professor positions. This does not include candidates who were rejected from the "qualification" (94.7% of candidates for professorships and 88.7% of candidates for lectureships are "qualified").
Note that this graphic also shows that there is not much shortage of talent. The number of candidates per position (column "Ratio B/A") decreased between 2014 and 2015, but it's increasing since 2015. The decrease in 2014–2015 was due to the fact that there was an exceptionally low number of available positions in 2014.
A remark, for intellectual honesty: not all French math researchers are faculty. Some are full-time researchers employed by the CNRS. *Update*: [According to the CNRS's official statistics](https://www.dgdr.cnrs.fr/drh/omes/documents/pdf/2018/Livret%20global_FIM_CH%202018_SECTION.pdf), the total number of researchers in Section 41 (pure maths + applied math, no, it's not the same section as the CNU) is 373: 210 junior and 163 senior. To compare, in 2018 there were 1321 faculty in pure math and 1776 in applied math. That's 3097 total, so CNRS researchers represent about 12%. I cannot say what the distribution between pure and applied is. "Common knowledge" tells me that it's around 10% for pure math.
PS: [The ministry's website](https://www.enseignementsup-recherche.gouv.fr/cid118435/personnels-enseignants-du-superieur-bilans-et-statistiques.html) has a wealth of information. There are statistics about pretty much everything, as well as explanatory notes about the conjonctures. I highly recommend it to anyone who wants to learn about the evolution of French academia. However, be careful about aggregates: data about a "Group" (e.g. pure+applied math + CS) may not tell you everything about a "Section" (e.g. pure math).
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/11/02
| 601
| 2,258
|
<issue_start>username_0: When I read a scientific paper I usually would like to know the point in time when it has been written or publicized. I would expect such a date written near to other meta data like the the author's names.
Unfortunately often these papers lack in such a date. I can't see why. Okay such a paper may be the work of years, but it is publicized at a single point in time. When I wrote my thesis I wrote down the date when I have submitted it to my university for approval.
Such a date is very useful for finding, classifying and evaluating papers.
An example would be this:
<https://www.cs.ox.ac.uk/files/6487/pwvault.pdf>
The papers I read are in the field of computer science. This may be different in other areas.<issue_comment>username_1: The particular paper you linked is a conference paper. Its date of publication will be the date of the conference, which in this case was ESORICS 2012, held September 10-12, 2012. One suspects that what you have linked is a preprint - that is the form of the paper submitted to the publisher before it is published. Computer science is often communicated through conference papers, rather than journal papers.
Journal papers almost always do have a date of publication on them, and often a date received. But again, it could be that your are generally seeing the officially unpublished version, rather than the publishers version.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Scientific papers are usually published in journals and conference proceedings. Publishers report at least the publication year and month, but may also report more information, like the submission date, the revision date and the date of the first online publication.
Your example is just a preprint, not the publisher's version, and does not contain any information. However, you can find the published paper [at this link](https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-33167-1_44), where you can freely download the [pdf](https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2F978-3-642-33167-1_44.pdf) with the publication year. You can also read the [front matter](https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/bfm%3A978-3-642-33167-1%2F1.pdf) of the proceedings to find further information.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2019/11/02
| 530
| 2,181
|
<issue_start>username_0: Consider a very small scientific field with three major contributors and a total of 15 authors, all of them had coauthored with everyone else.
In this field how could the editor choose referee for new papers, if he must adhere to the conflict of interests policies?
I know that some editors handle coauthor/students' paper or assign the paper to the previous coauthor of the author. Is that a common practice for a small field?
---
The small field was naturally extended from some important results back to 50s -70s, some of those researchers are still alive, but inactive. The importance cannot be doubt by the larger field, also because of those important results historically.<issue_comment>username_1: Even if the field is small, one can usually find referees in cognate fields with no conflicts: presumably papers by these groups have a bibliography that extends beyond these groups, else the interest is overly narrow and the paper can be rejected as such.
(Aside: the handling editor is not necessarily a “he”.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It's hard to believe a field can be completely cut off from the rest of the world *and* have only 15 active contributors. Even the pariah field of [cold fusion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion) has some 100-200 researchers. Granted because cold fusion is such a small field, even 100-200 active researchers might not suffice to find reviewers who have never worked with each other. It's also a polarized field where much of the rest of the world believes the 100-200 people still working on it are wasting their time.
That said, one can still find reviewers. I know one editor which implemented a 1-1 system: each paper would be reviewed by one person in the field and one person outside the field. As a concrete example, a theoretical paper on cold fusion can likely be critiqued by someone who knows Quantum Field Theory (which is much broader and largely independent of cold fusion).
Of course there's a bias here that you'll likely get one "accept" review and one "reject" review. The editor is aware of that however, and will take it into account.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2019/11/02
| 3,906
| 16,849
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am working as a TA for a seminar course and class presentations are considered a significant part of the total mark for the course.
Some of the students in the class — who mostly happen to be international students — do not perform the best presentation in terms of the communications of ideas with the audience.
It is mostly because of their thick accent and other flaws in their English, making the presentation hard to understand for the audiences.
What is the best marking strategies in these situations?
I am skeptical about commenting on this issue and discussing the problem with the students or reducing a part of the mark for the lack of communication quality, as I am afraid it would come across as racist.
The university is in North America and about 80% of the students are native speakers of English.<issue_comment>username_1: I think it would be a serious breach to downgrade people for something not really in their control. They will surely improve in time if they stay in English-speaking countries. But you can also do a few things to make it easier. One is to make sure these folks aren't mocked by other students. Respect for all. Another is to ask that presenters also give outline handouts prior to the talk. This can help.
You might also want to reassure people before and/or after that you respect them, knowing that these things are actually harder for them than for native speakers.
I once had a person who was an extreme stutterer. Really extreme. The course project presentation called for everyone's participation. I didn't let him off the hook and he did his best. People happily knew what was going on and so just let him struggle with his words. After it was over, I complimented him privately for his bravery.
Of course, the presentation has to be properly organized with the appropriate information, just as for any student. And you may need to set aside time, generally, for questions when people don't understand.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There are two ways to interpret the issue that is being raised. One is that the people simply have accents and not completely correct grammar in spoken English... but not to the point that it seriously impedes intelligibility. The other is that their English is so poor that it does greatly impede intelligibility.
The former is of little consequence, of course. The latter is a serious problem, in fact. It's not about bias for/against languages/nationalities, but about the context in which one operates. If one cannot communicate effectively, that's a minus. Even if/when people are "understanding", it's still not a plus, but a minus. Overcoming such an impediment should have a pretty high priority... as opposed to simply believing that such an issue solves itself in time. In particular, this will not happen for people whose English is sufficiently compromised that they spend nearly all waking hours with their fellow speakers, and thereby never practice the local language (as Dir. of Grad. Studies in Math. at my university on two different occasions, and participating in such issues for 35+ years, I've seen many cases).
In particular, outside of super-special cases, it serves no grad student well to have English be an obstacle. It will significantly obstruct their hiring on teaching-communication grounds, if nothing else. And, unavoidably, it reduces the impact of their portrayal of their research work.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Some decades ago, my professor summarized it roughly like this:
* The professional vocabulary **must** be right.
* The grammar **should** be right, but errors are acceptable if they don't affect meaning.
* The pronunciation is **optional**.
The goal was to train students to write acceptable papers, and to understand (or be understood by) other students who are benevolent and largely have the same accent.
I haven't been in academia for some years, so standards might have shifted at least in some places. Being able to present your results is part of scientific process.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: I wish to elaborate on *username_2*'s point, which I agree with:
>
> It's not about bias for/against languages/nationalities, but about the context in which one operates. If one cannot communicate effectively, that's a minus..
>
>
>
Specifically, I do not agree with a popular approach that assigns some fixed fraction of the marks to "presentation" and the remainder to "content". In my opinion, marks should instead be assigned for "effort" and "content". Majority of the marks should be for "content", and should accurately reflect the amount of content that the student successfully conveys to the target audience. This applies to all types of student work.
For presentations in particular, this does mean that if a student is unable to convey any content whatsoever to the target audience, it is fair to give zero marks for "content". Poor English grammar or pronunciation is not an issue until it begins to affect the ability to correctly understand the content that the presenter intends to convey.
This also means that if the presenter successfully conveys the content via slides and hand gestures, then an inability to convey well that same content verbally is less of an issue. More often than you might think, presenters who speak perfect intelligible English fail to convey their presentation content well.
I do not think that anyone would dare to accuse you of unfairly giving lower marks if practically the whole class cannot understand what the presenter is saying. But you must make it clear beforehand that the grading will be based on how well the content is presented.
To preemptively avoid any accusation of racist bias, you can offer to give some feedback on students' presentations prior to the actual presentation date, but students have to request in advance if they want this feedback. During these feedback sessions you can specifically point out how they can improve their delivery of the presentation. But this is extra work, and not necessary for fair grading.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Mark them in accordance with the assessment's marking criteria.
===============================================================
Each assessment item should have a sheet of marking criteria that will dictate what is required to reach each grade level for that assessment piece, usually divided up into multiple areas with different weights.
In an oral presentation, it's likely that one of the areas you'll be assessing is their communication or presentation skills; if their accent makes it difficult to understand them, you would naturally mark them down in this area, the same as you'd mark them down if they spent the whole presentation mumbling or reading off of printed notes.
The amount you'd mark them down would depend on the wording of your criteria sheet - you'd evaluate whether or not they met the requirements for each grade level in this area, and give them an appropriate mark for it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: In my view (and in agreement with username_1's answer), **it is inappropriate and rather unfair to penalise someone for their "accent"** (presumably you mean their *"pronunciation"*; having an accent which does not impede correct pronunciation, is generally not a problem). This is true even if what they say sounds like complete gibberish to anyone in the audience.
*However*, **it is also entirely fair to point out that this is a non-trivial issue**, and that the presenter shouldn't just shrug it off simply as "this is how I speak".
There is a lot of nonchalance when it comes to putting an effort to correcting one's accent, when it is actually a big obstacle to effective communication, and pointing out that, it is in fact a problem that could be worked on going forward, is more than fair.
With regard to such a presentational context specifically, while it may be unfair to comment on what their accent is like 'now' -- since they have little control over it in the short-term -- it is not unfair to point out that they *should* work on it, and that, in the meantime, it *is* a limitation they should be aware of, and try to mitigate against in their presentation. Therefore, what you *could* mark, is the extent to which the rest of the presentation showed an effort to overcome this limitation, by using appropriate visuals, quotes of the important phrases, logical flow of slides and argumentation, etc. ***If*, given their 'limitation', they failed to convey their message "because" of their presentation, rather than "despite" of it, then it is fair** (or at least "less unfair" **\*** ) to reflect this in the marking.
This should hopefully encourage the student to both improve on their presentation technique, as well as point out that language is an issue that deserves to be improved in its own right (if possible).
---
\*: there is still a degree of "unfairness" if you do that, in that other students would not have had to make the same effort, so I would treat carefully even with that. If you penalise someone on that basis, it should be minimal, and according to a marking scheme that would have affected other students equally.
---
### "Is this racist?"
Having said that, just to address the "is this racist" point. Consider this thought experiment.
>
> *You are a student, who's been chosen to represent your university in an international competition, taking place in, say, China. The competition itself is in English, but, as it happens, it turns out that this year most of your competing presenters who made it to the finals, are from Asian-speaking countries. When it's your turn to present, you naturally speak in flawless Queen's English, but as a result, the large majority of your audience and panel who is more used to "Chinese English" fails to understand you. Meanwhile, they were perfectly comfortable understanding the other presenters.*
>
>
> *You finish last, and the feedback on your card was "sorry, we just couldn't understand you; perhaps you could work on trying to sound more 'Chinese' when you speak".*
>
>
>
* Would you consider this a racist attitude? I suspect you might.
* Would you consider being disqualified on *that* basis to be unfair? I think you would.
*But*, would you also accept that, given the context, your inability to speak in a way that would make you understood, while 'not your fault', is still in fact 'a problem'?
What if the organisers had warned you of this before the competition? Wouldn't you have made sure your slides and flow of presentation could make up for that fact so as to minimize the impact? And if you hadn't made that effort, would your disqualification still feel as unfair?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: >
> I have serious reason to believe that the planet from which the little
> prince came is the asteroid known as B-612.
>
>
> This asteroid has only once been seen through the telescope. That was
> by a Turkish astronomer, in 1909.
>
>
> On making his discovery, the astronomer had presented it to the
> International Astronomical Congress, in a great demonstration. But he
> was in Turkish costume, and so nobody would believe what he said.
>
>
> Grown-ups are like that . . .
>
>
> Fortunately, however, for the reputation of Asteroid B-612, a Turkish
> dictator made a law that his subjects, under pain of death, should
> change to European costume. So in 1920 the astronomer gave his
> demonstration all over again, dressed with impressive style and
> elegance. And this time everybody accepted his report. - <NAME>
> <NAME>, The Little Prince
>
>
>
So I suggest using the content of the presentation as a basis for their marks, and ignore the accent/grammar/presentation style. You can comment on those, but don't give them worse marks for that in this case.
If the course is an English language course, then it's the complete opposite. Mark their language and accent, but not the technical part.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: For grading - I would only deduct points if it was quite difficult to understand. If a native-English speaker ALSO spoke too fast, or combined words, would you take a deduction there? I try to be very generous grade-wise with international students, because they are dealing with a lot.
Some students are ahead in their written ability than their speaking ability -- it's the difference between having time to proofread, vs creating words in real time.
Try to identify PATTERNS: not 15 instances of confusing words, but perhaps a tendency to not be distinct with the last consonants in a word, or a set of vowels that are confused. Don't give someone more than 2 speaking issues to work on: it can be overwhelming.
Many US Universities have an English Language Center (for foreign students: separate from the English department that does the writing and literature classes) to help them with conversation and pronunciation. Let your students know about these resources.
If the ELC has too limited a schedule, email that center to let them know that you have students who would like to improve, and ask for suggestions for resources. (This email can also help them have "proof" if it's a budget issue and they can't hire enough tutors to cover the hours your students need.)
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_9: Bottom line, grade according to the published criteria
------------------------------------------------------
While it varies, most major projects should have well established criteria ahead of time for the students to focus on. Items such as use of proper grammar and word choice may or may not be on it.
The type of class matters
-------------------------
You didn't mention what type of class this is, and I think that matters a great deal, especially if no clear list of criteria was provided ahead of time. If this is a class in English, Public Speaking, or Law then it seems reasonable to put a great deal of emphasis on the actual presentation. Use of the correct words and use of correct grammar would be expected in a case like this and you would expect the person giving the presentation to take steps such has thoroughly rehearsing with emphasis on those items. If outside help was not forbidden, they might even do a presentation before a test-audience who could provide feedback on those matters ahead of time. In a sense this is not entirely fair to people who do not have English as a native language, but learning how to present well to a broad-based audience is explicitly a part of the education in topics like that and it is a disservice to the students to not emphasize those items and provide incentives for the students to emphasize them.
On the other hand, in a field such as theoretical math or physics the art of the presentation is probably less important and it probably only makes sense for the presentation itself to affect the grade to the extent it impacts the ability to understand the material presented.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: The course is, as I hope, intended to improve students' presentation skills so they can deliver their results more effectively on the international stage, not only on the local backyard called university. English is not my mother tongue, therefore I need to translate the speaker's speech from their accent to English I understand and then to my mother tongue. When giving a talk, I have to translate my thoughts to English on-the-fly. I do my best to pronounce all the words correctly even with nuances (sheet vs. sh\*t, bed vs. bad); I do my best to use correct grammar structures; I do my best to avoid my-languages-homonyms misunderstanding (word-to-word translation of "Your eyes September" makes sense in Czech) yet I make mistakes. I need to be corrected when I commit such to be able to avoid them in the future.
Throughout the time I've developed shortcuts and I am "thinking in simple English" to reduce the delay between question and answer. But it took a long time and I needed to be interacting in English only with no workarounds.
I have also attended several international congresses with speakers ranging from grads to tenured professors from all over the world.
Trust me, Scottish English, French English, Korean English, Russian English,... all with their accents, grammar leaks combined with speaker stress made a lot of talks unable for me to process.
Therefore:
* Do comment on the students' grammar, vocabulary and pronunciation errors. That's how they can learn and improve.
* Do not include this in the final assessment. Give the points only according to the actual quality of their work.
* Try to give a presentation of your work in either German, French, Spanish, etc. and ask native speakers for assessment.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/11/02
| 715
| 3,097
|
<issue_start>username_0: Many universities will have a Faculty of Law whose academic staff would be largely (or entirely) composed of certified lawyers; I imagine that the same would be true of many of their PhD students.
Similarly, many universities will have dedicated legal teams that assist the university staff with dealing with legal issues (e.g. corporate compliance issues, patent law, etc).
Would the lawyers in these legal teams typically be composed of staff members and/or postgraduate students from the Faculty of Law, or would they simply be lawyers that have been hired by the university as support staff?<issue_comment>username_1: I think that in most places it would be seen as improper to hold both roles *officially*. This is because legal disputes sometimes arise with the faculty. So, the job of a legal officer needs to be clear. They represent the university itself.
That said, however, the legal staff might, in some cases, consult with the faculty of the law school on some technical or ethical or other aspects of their work. Conversely, the law faculty might on occasion need representation in civil or criminal situations and can call on the legal officers (if appropriate).
It is also not impossible (some places) for faculty members to also have a private legal practice. In such a situation they could be retained by the university to handle some case that arises. But the roles are clear. The person is acting as a faculty member separately from their legal representation.
But conflicts of interest need to be avoided in all cases.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The legal office of a university is staffed by highly qualified legal professionals who manage the (often very complicated) legal side of the many issues that come up in the process of running a large academic institution (or any similarly large organization for that matter). These professionals do not teach or do research, and do not have the academic title of professor.
They are not “just” support staff. In fact, they are not “support” anything. The choice of wording of your question is quite unfortunate. Professors are not the center of the universe, other people who are not professors also do equally or more important work (and make more money to boot).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Large or well-funded universities have dedicated general counsel like any other corporate entity, and they function in the same way that corporate general counsel do. Their job is to protect the university's legal interests, which includes things like negotiating with unions, damage control and prevention for legal problems, and defense during litigation, which is often contracted out to a specialist law firm depending on the nature of the litigation. In particular, they will often be on the other side of the table from faculty, so it would be problematic if they were faculty as well.
I suppose technically the office of general counsel is "support staff," but it's a bizarre way to refer to an office that works at the very top of the administrative hierarchy.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/11/03
| 581
| 2,577
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently a Ph.D. student and I have been reading a lot about retraction of scientific papers. I understand that scientific integrity is a big issue and that we should be as honest about the scientific process as much as possible. However, I do think that there is a difference between teaching someone a lesson and publicly shaming them. For example, I follow a lot of PIs on twitter who will unabashedly put other PIs, post-docs and phds on blast for manipulating scientific data. These PIs are very successful in their fields and have lots of citations to their names. I honestly believe that everyone at some point in their life has made mistakes, which they are not proud of - including these PIs. My problem with this model of retraction is that it puts the person's name out there and they are shunned from doing research for life. PhDs and post-docs are always overworked and underpaid. The stress and poor living conditions must take a mental toll on them to force them enough to manipulate data. Is it fair to ruin their lives beyond the scientific realm (for example by putting them on websites like retraction watch where a simple google search will display their names and misconduct)?
To the stack overflow community - do you think that's fair? As a society, can we do better and if so how? I also welcome disagreements and would like to hear your perspective.
PS - I am not condoning cheating and misconduct. I think these people should be kicked out (or at the least suspended). But putting their names on the internet - isn't that taking things too far?
Thank you for reading and sharing your perspective!<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, it is fair. Putting out fraudulent scientific information is contaminating, damaging, and retarding to all the rest of society for an indefinite amount of time into the future. Shaming and banning those who do it is an equitable response.
We can do better by making sure that it is widely known that this is the end result. We should all communicate and publicize this fact as much as possible.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: When these people had their papers published, they agreed to have their names associated with the papers. They took responsibility for the correctness of the papers' content. If the papers are correct, they get rewarded. If the papers are incorrect, they get punished. If they did not want their reputations to be tarnished, then they should not have published incorrect papers or they should not have their names associated with the papers.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/03
| 1,154
| 5,064
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm not sure if I'm overthinking this.
Recently I had an assignment that is intended to be completed individually in which I cannot understand one of the questions at all. Lectures didn't help as the question assumed we have known some mathematical concepts before this class.
So I searched online for solutions because I realized that I would have learned nothing by keep looking at the question myself. And not surprisingly I found a solution.
I read through it, understood the solution, and wrote in my own words on the assignment paper. However since it is a simple proof my solution is essentially the same, so I cited the webpage and explained that I have written this proof after reading through the solution.
I know this does not constitute plagiarism. What could I have done better in this situation?<issue_comment>username_1: This depends on the rules of the course and has no general answer. For some courses and for some assignments within them, this would be expected. In others, forbidden. Only the instructor can give you guidance.
But, you did the right thing in citing it. You were honest. Also, you learned something, which was the point of the assignment. But perhaps you didn't learn the right thing, which may have been the point: working through to a solution on your own.
The rules of a course should be clear. It is a problem when they aren't. But if challenged on this, just stress your honesty in citing your source. And follow the rules as you then understand them. But, sadly, instructors sometimes have unspoken expectations.
If I were your professor, and had neglected to make the ground rules clear, I'd accept your work, given the citation, but also caution you about future work if I'd rather you came to me instead of external sources. A professor can sometimes give a minimal hint to get a student over a block, but still allow for deeper learning to occur than can be done when searching out solutions. But I would also have to publish the ground rules.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This is something you should ask the instructor in person. Especially if the instructor is a reasonable person, they will want to know that you had no chance to complete the assignment. Ideally you tell them before (some profs have office hours), or at the latest when you hand in the assignment. Tell them what you did. Then they may decide to accept, reject it, remove the assignment (from your question, it seems a lot of people did not have the needed knowledge?) or tell you, in the words of <NAME>, "Perhaps check out and read up on the prerequistes for that course - sounds like you are missing one or two...". This is however best handled in a oral conversation -- the prof may have some questions to you, may not immediately understand what is going on etc
Ethically, you did the best you could, you were honest and tried to learn as much as possible.
Let me also say that this is not so uncommon -- in my studies, most lectures had no syllabus - some profs had really no idea what was our knowledge and some were not interested to know it. Some didn't care if we copied homework, some would remove impossible assignments, some would just say "bad luck" when the homework was impossible -- there is really no general answer. (You might give a better answer since you can probably judge a little bit how reasonable the prof seems.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> But what would be your response as an instructor if a student did this?
>
>
>
I can't speak for other academics, but I would have no problem with this. Unless there is an instruction in the assignment to the contrary, I do not think it is reasonable to expect the student to refrain from looking at outside materials. (Indeed, one would usually regard it as *desirable* that the student would be proactive in searching for relevant materials.) The fact that you cited your source, and wrote the proof in your own form, seems fine to me.
>
> ...what could I have done better in this situation?
>
>
>
There is nothing else you need to do in the assignment itself. The only other thing you need to do here is to follow-up by getting some more help from your lecturer, to ensure that you have a broader understanding of the material. There is a big difference between being able to read a proof and understand it (and then contemporaneously replicate it) and being able to understand the material well enough to prove something without first looking at another proof. You can get away with the former when you are doing the assignment, but the final exam is where the rubber meets the road.
The only concern I would have if I were your course lecturer in this situation, is to make sure you are taking steps to achieve a level of proficiency that will allow you to take on questions in your exam, where you do not have access to worked answers to the question you are looking at. I would recommend that you go and see your lecturer to get some help to get you up to this level of proficiency.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/11/03
| 1,254
| 5,188
|
<issue_start>username_0: This is a sort of general existential question, but I hope it's specific enough to be welcome here.
I'm a reasonably successful not-quite-exactly-young-any-more researcher in my field, but I don't yet have a permanent position. I'm aiming to move to the UK to (re)establish my career there, but I'm becoming a little despondent about my options.
I did my PhD in a UK university, and after a short postdoc in Europe I secured a fellowship in Japan. When that ended I moved to another Japanese institute. I've been in Japan for seven years in total, as an independent researcher for all of that time. My rank is approximately equal to lecturer in the UK. This all probably sounds great, but my issue having never had an academic job in the UK it seems strangely impossible to enter the system.
Part of the issue is that so far my career has been research only - I've never had teaching duties or supervised a student. As I understand it there are no permanent UK academic jobs without a substantial teaching component, so it seems that no matter what comes up I'll be massively underqualified on that front, even if I'm a good candidate as far as research goes. (Not that I have anything against teaching - I imagine it's something I could enjoy a great deal - I just don't know the first thing about it.)
My other problem is that my research field is in basic science and is quite far from any applications. It seems to be a 'hot topic' in the Japanese and US funding systems, but it seems to be quite hard to get funding for it in the UK or EU.
So my question is simply, what kind of jobs might exist in the UK for someone in my position, and what might be a sensible strategy for re-entering the UK academic system? I'd be quite happy to have a non-permanent job at first (such as a fellowship), but I'd be very unhappy to give up my research independence. My first priority would be to get my foot in the door, but presumably it's also important to get the teaching experience that would be necessary to move to a professorship position eventually.<issue_comment>username_1: It is not true that there are no research only academic posts. There are post-doctoral researchers, research assistants and research only professors in many places within the UK academic system. There are also research institutes outside universities and affiliated with universities who wholly perform research.
It's just that there are fewer advertisements for these posts as there are fewer of these types of vacancies than teaching lecturer posts. You could get the impression that they do not exist based on reading job advertisements alone.
You would need to research more carefully what institutions are performing the research in the specific area of your skills and try to find out how they advertise.
You should be aware of the UK Universities own vacancy notification site www.jobs.ac.uk as traditional advertising of vacancies (such as in scientific journals and newspapers) is no longer performed due to budgetary reasons.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If in a suitable field it may be worth looking at one of the long term fellowships, such as a [Royal Society URF](https://royalsociety.org/grants-schemes-awards/grants/university-research/) or an [STFC Rutherford fellowship](https://stfc.ukri.org/funding/fellowships/ernest-rutherford-fellowship/).
To quote from the URF page
>
> The scheme offers you the opportunity to
>
>
> * build an independent research career
> * focus on your own research, with a limit on administrative and teaching duties
> * hold your fellowship on a part-time basis to suit personal circumstances
>
>
>
Given the length of these fellowships there is usually time to build up the experience and contacts within the UK system that you need.
There are two crucial problems with this approach. First, a lot of the application work is done by the university, so you have to find one that's willing to work with you. Second, all of these fellowships are incredibly competitive, so the chances are small.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: This is going to be very field dependent. What follows will be applicable in the life sciences:
There are positions at research institutes that offer the chance to do independent research without teaching duties, but they are few and far between. They are most people's dream position and competition is particularly fierce.
However, I wouldn't feel to despondent about your chances of a teaching position - In my experience, if you have a good research record, universities will hire you into a research and teaching even if you don't have teaching experience (personally i think this is a bad thing, but still...). You will need to be prepared to learn how to teach though, and probably do a substantial amount of it.
I also wouldn't worry about being "basic science", plenty of us are basic science, and manage to eek out and existence.
One thing you might look at are the Future Leaders Fellowships, which are specifically targeted at retaining or attracting top researchers to the UK. As with the URFs mentioned by @username_2, there are very competitive.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/03
| 952
| 3,942
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm in a similar situation as this poster: <https://economics.stackexchange.com/questions/16428/career-change-to-economics-from-software-engineering> , but it doesn't look like anyone answered about grad school admissions there. I have math and CS degrees from a top school, and if I could go back I would have taken classes and research in economics, but since I've already graduated and been working for 2 years, I feel like I've missed that opportunity. I'm self-studying economics right now, but what are some ways I could get experience that would be good for a grad school application?
I'm very interested in development economics, public policy, health economics, and behavioral economics and I know what my dream research groups and research directions are, if I can get the right skills/credentials.<issue_comment>username_1: It is not true that there are no research only academic posts. There are post-doctoral researchers, research assistants and research only professors in many places within the UK academic system. There are also research institutes outside universities and affiliated with universities who wholly perform research.
It's just that there are fewer advertisements for these posts as there are fewer of these types of vacancies than teaching lecturer posts. You could get the impression that they do not exist based on reading job advertisements alone.
You would need to research more carefully what institutions are performing the research in the specific area of your skills and try to find out how they advertise.
You should be aware of the UK Universities own vacancy notification site www.jobs.ac.uk as traditional advertising of vacancies (such as in scientific journals and newspapers) is no longer performed due to budgetary reasons.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If in a suitable field it may be worth looking at one of the long term fellowships, such as a [Royal Society URF](https://royalsociety.org/grants-schemes-awards/grants/university-research/) or an [STFC Rutherford fellowship](https://stfc.ukri.org/funding/fellowships/ernest-rutherford-fellowship/).
To quote from the URF page
>
> The scheme offers you the opportunity to
>
>
> * build an independent research career
> * focus on your own research, with a limit on administrative and teaching duties
> * hold your fellowship on a part-time basis to suit personal circumstances
>
>
>
Given the length of these fellowships there is usually time to build up the experience and contacts within the UK system that you need.
There are two crucial problems with this approach. First, a lot of the application work is done by the university, so you have to find one that's willing to work with you. Second, all of these fellowships are incredibly competitive, so the chances are small.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: This is going to be very field dependent. What follows will be applicable in the life sciences:
There are positions at research institutes that offer the chance to do independent research without teaching duties, but they are few and far between. They are most people's dream position and competition is particularly fierce.
However, I wouldn't feel to despondent about your chances of a teaching position - In my experience, if you have a good research record, universities will hire you into a research and teaching even if you don't have teaching experience (personally i think this is a bad thing, but still...). You will need to be prepared to learn how to teach though, and probably do a substantial amount of it.
I also wouldn't worry about being "basic science", plenty of us are basic science, and manage to eek out and existence.
One thing you might look at are the Future Leaders Fellowships, which are specifically targeted at retaining or attracting top researchers to the UK. As with the URFs mentioned by @username_2, there are very competitive.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/03
| 1,363
| 5,738
|
<issue_start>username_0: I gave a departmental seminar yesterday. It was a short 20 minutes presentation of my PhD thesis. I had presented two of my published works during the seminar. My research topic was to model an experimental manufacturing techniques. I have published two papers (in decent journals) and will be submitting few more.
One of my departmental senior professors privately told me that I am doing too simple research as compared to my labmates.
I know that I am an underperformer in my group, but I never thought my research to be simple. Now, I am worried how my research will be perceived by prospective future advisors and faculties. My advisor says not to heed to the professors comments and that I have done a good job. However, deep down, I feel that the professor might have a fair point. I don't know what can I do now. I have already submitted my thesis and will be defending in couple of weeks, though that professor won't be in my committee.<issue_comment>username_1: Perhaps the best route is to split the difference. Note the concern of one professor, but take heart from the support of your advisor. There are a lot of possible explanations.
Perhaps the professor making the comment is overlooking some aspects that are harder than they think. Some things that look easy from the outside are harder when you get into the details. And, perhaps, that professor is just so brilliant that the crux of your problem seems obvious to them. There are such people, of course.
Perhaps your current research really is simpler than that of others in their circle. But you are still early in the profession. You will probably do better work as you advance. The dissertation shouldn't be viewed as your life's best work, only the first.
There is no real reason to *worry* at this point, and certainly not to panic. But long term, consider the advice you were given. Perhaps a bit more experience will help you judge its merits or lack.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: **A single point of feedback says nothing about your future prospects.** There are just too many possible sources of noise in the data. Maybe the professor had a paper rejected, or a scoop of his favorite ice cream dropped from the cone just before your talk. If the same feedback would arise repeatedly, that might be an issue.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Is it possible you're on the Autistic Spectrum? I did really poorly in the academic side of things due to my brain being wired differently and now that I am diagnosed, it greatly helps me understand why and opens doors for help in such areas as I excel at hands-on/practical things on a level way better than the average person. But explaining it still isn't easy.
For example, I was always good at maths in school and could fly through maths books but could never "show my working" and I'd explain things in more simplistic terms.
It's not uncommon for those of us on the spectrum to do poorly at Academics but excel in the field, and if you are, there's a lot of helpful resources available these days. (Especially if you're in the UK)
Until I got my diagnosis, I never thought much of myself or thought I would get anywhere and now I'm in a pretty good position.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: If you have published twice, presuming these are peer-reviewed journals, you probably have three reviewers and an editor on each paper that think your work is good enough to publish, and your own advisor. So consider the score 9 in favor, 1 against.
There is a real phenomenon in Academia, in which if you figure out a way to **present** something simply, from the outside some will say it is too obvious.
Well, presuming it is original and useful, if it really was so obvious, why didn't anybody do it before you? Perhaps it is only simple because you found a way to *make* it simple.
The mark of a PhD is to be able to make original contributions to the field, and most universities, in my experience, use peer-reviewed publications as the proof of having done that.
I say don't worry about it. I peer-review papers in my field, I've done six this year. I rejected four of them. Worry about that, people like me will reject work that is too obvious, simple, or common sense. But if it is original, I don't care if it is a *simple* idea, if it works then people should know about it. That is my criteria, I am NOT impressed by names (of individuals or institutions), I am NOT impressed by complexity or massive formulas, I am ONLY impressed by functionality and whether I think others in the field don't already know about what you are doing and **should** know about it. If you meet that criterion, I'll approve it.
I might have extensive revisions for you, but that is to help you get an important idea out there; I'm not going to bother writing a lot of corrections if I'm recommending rejection.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Your job as a graduate student is to show that you are capable of doing research. It is the advisor's job to guide you in the choice of research topic. They themselves typically don't know in advance how difficult or easy this will be. If the topic is in fact easier than some of the topics that other students are researching, that is more of a (probably minor) failing of the advisor than it is a failure on your part.
Furthermore, it is your advisor's opinion that matters the most. They are the most important gate-keeper standing between you and the Ph.D., and they will write the most important letters of recommendation for you. If they are satisfied with your research, you don't have anything to worry about (though you probably shouldn't ask the other professor for a letter of recommendation).
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/03
| 776
| 3,346
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have done 2 research projects on a topic, say "A". But now I am changing my field of work slightly, to say topic "B", and will do my masters thesis on "B". How useful will my projects on "A" be while applying for PhD in "B"? Will an arXiv/journal publication in "A" be comparable to one in "B", **from the point of view of PhD admission committee (for graduate schools in US/UK, in particular)** ?
I am a Physics master's student. The topics I mentioned above are related High Energy Physics/Gravity. "A" was mostly computational while "B" is purely theoretical.
I understand that any research is good and will add this in my CV in any case. I just want to know how good it actually is. The answer to my question will help me get an idea of graduate schools which are in my league and I could focus on those.
Thanks in advance!<issue_comment>username_1: I doubt that your admission to a program anywhere would hinge on the difference here. Doing any sort of research is a plus. You need an application showing academic success and future promise. You seem to be showing that.
Also note that arXiv is quite different from journal publishing. The former will be less valuable (if a journal article doesn't later result) due to the lower standards of "publication". But if you want qualification, I'd give the difference no more than a couple of points out of 100. But that is just a wild guess, of course. It is the admissions committee that will make the only valid judgement for such things. And they will take a fairly broad view, not focusing minutely on the details of any one thing in most cases.
But if you have done work in another field, closely related or not, don't neglect to mention it.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: The topics you mention (theoretical and computational aspects of high energy physics) are similar enough that any publication you get from one will be equally valuable when applying for the other. In fact, demonstrating that you have experience of both theoretical and computational work can only make your application stronger than if you had experience in only one.
Bear in mind that having a journal publication is not necessary for admission into any PhD programme that I am aware of (certainly not in UK physics). While a publication in either field that you mention would certainly boost your application, don't worry if nothing publishable comes out of your Master's. Just do good, solid work and ensure you have a strong grasp of the foundations of the field.
If you do write a paper, be sure to do it under the guidance of your Master's supervisor. They will help you organise the content and choose an appropriate journal. Submitting to arXiv is fine as long as you quickly follow it up with submission to (and hopefully acceptance in) a peer-reviewed journal.
Your supervisor (if they are active in the field) will also be able to advise you on which institutions to apply to for your PhD. When I was deciding where to apply, I mainly looked at the institutions of the authors whose papers I was frequently citing. That at least ensures your research interests will align, which is far more important than any other deciding factor (including perceived prestige of the university).
Source: I am a PhD student in physics in the UK.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|