date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2019/11/18
| 3,132
| 13,598
|
<issue_start>username_0: You are a professor. A student comes to you with a question on an exam they have taken and received back. The student wrote 5 as the answer to a question, and they want to defend why 5 is a correct answer and they should receive full marks. Their argument is invalid, but you notice that the answer was misread as 9 and the student was given partial credit (5 is entirely incorrect and they should have received zero credit). Do you regrade the question, giving the student zero points, or do you leave it alone?
Arguments for regrading the question:
* It would be unfair to the other students to give this student marks they did not earn.
* Pursuing accurate grading is what is important and is the objective of the course.
Arguments for leaving the question alone:
* The student came forward with a good-faith intention to learn why their argument wasn't correct, and shouldn't be penalized - this would break an implicit contract, and encourage students to not seek further feedback.
* The unfairness actually stems from the misgrade itself, and there isn't anything wrong with leaving the misgrade alone now that it already exists. After all, if the student hadn't come forward, the misgrade would still have been left alone.<issue_comment>username_1: The key to answering this question is what the syllabus says.
The syllabus is like a contract between the professor and the class describing what happens in different situations that may occur during a term. If the syllabus or departmental guidelines say how to handle the situation, then it makes things easy. (e.g. if you ask for a re-grade in one question, the entire exam is checked)
If the syllabus doesn't handle this case *and you want to handle it in a non-standard way*, make sure it is handled in the future, and then I would advise handling this situation in favor of the student this time. (That is, don't take off additional points this time.)
Note that this *does not* mean that *every* professor should explicitly spell out *every* possible situation in detail. It means establishing principles so students know what to expect from reading the syllabus, and if you want to do something differently, you then need to spell it out. For example:
* If you want to limit how long students can come back asking for exams or homework to be re-examined, it should be stated clearly.
* If you have a unique policy on how questions are re-graded on an exam, it should be stated clearly.
But, if you have no such limitations, you are always willing to make decisions interpreting rules in the best light with favor to the students, or you put appropriate instructions on each assignment, then this is unnecessary.
Ultimately you should not make a habit of contradicting your syllabus, so that should be the first point of reference in answering such questions when they arise.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: For many of the reasons you state, I would let the original grade stand. I viewed my job as one of teaching, not grading. Overall, the change in the grade will probably be a minor thing, but the effect on the student's psyche should be considered.
However, you can also take advantage of the situation to create a teaching moment. It may be too late for this already, and I'm not sure if I'd have been thinking fast enough at the time, but I would suggest making a deal with the student:
>
> You know, I should really change this mark to a zero here, but I'll make you a deal. If, over the next week, you write me a one page summary of the problem and the correct solution to it, I'll let the grade stand as is.
>
>
>
This changes the equation. The student gets a bit of hope. And maybe a bit of respect for you and your willingness to "go the extra mile" to help them. It also, sends them off to do a bit of research that can only benefit them.
---
I'll add that as a normal part of my teaching, I always let students redo work that they want to improve their grade on. Not so much on exams, but in general assignments they could always earn back part of the lost marks by providing a better solution. I would permit this even after discussing the question in class. The educational philosophy behind it is that if you "engage" with the work you will more likely learn it. Just getting marked down for errors doesn't let you integrate the learning. No student ever suggested that this was a form of "punishment".
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: **Let the grade stand, but point out your error.**
The principle I try to follow is that *students shouldn't be negatively affected by faculty mistakes* (or that such effects should be minimized).
I wouldn't suggest adding an additional assignment to maintain the grade, since this is effectively another kind of penalty. But I would suggest being transparent with the student, explaining your mistake, and showing them where they went wrong (otherwise they are deprived of the feedback that the correct grade would have provided).
If the exam were graded on a curve and re-grading this one question on Student A's test would materially improve other students' grades, I would give other students the boost (i.e. the grade they would have received had Student A's exam been correctly marked the first time) but leave Student A's grade intact.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_4: You should clearly state the policy in the syllabus and verbally on the first day of class, and when you hand back exams. A reasonable policy is that re-grades may well result in a lower grade. In my 7+ years of college teaching, I didn't do that. I would do so today.
I found students to be very persistent about getting that extra point, in spite of the fact that it won't help their final grade. Since others got two points off for the same mistake, I wanted to stand my ground. Basically, the student was telling me I was wrong for taking off two points instead of one. I was not very pleased with that assertion since it's my decision to make. I know the goals I want to achieve by taking off more points for particular mistakes, especially later in the term.
It is unethical to give a few persistent students a higher grade, just as a reward for being persistent.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: You should never penalize a student for taking the time to come to office hours (or whatever) and seeking additional help or clarification. Not only would it make it less likely for that particular student to ever ask you for that type of help again, but it could very well disincentivize other students as well.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_6: To me, it is actually odd to see all answers but one say that you should leave the points as is. I do agree however that this situation should be handled somewhere in the policy, shared with the students at the beginning of the course, and this particular instance handled leniently if no such policy exists.
When I studied, it was (implicitly) understood for all courses that when **asking for a re-grade of a question, it will be examined with additional scrutiny which could result in the final marks for that task to go *either* up or down**. Several of our instructors repeated this explicitly as well.
However, I can see how different approaches might work better for different cultures. In my country, we typically call after-exam consultations "complaints" (even though there is a second valid word translating to "insight" or "inspection"). The majority of the students came in to see if they can "find" an extra point or two, and very rarely to actually understand where they made mistakes.
I don't think there was anything inherently wrong with such a system, as it was a good fit for the culture: the policy was there to discourage "begging" for points, but there wasn't any negative consequences to asking the instructor to point out where you went wrong in your partial answer to question 5A. Additionally, for explaining whole concepts that the students did not understand, they were always welcome to come to regular consultations (not related to an exam), and ask away whatever they have trouble with.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: Let the higher grade stand but point out that it should have been given no points. You do not want to punish the student for coming for help but also want to let them know that what they answered should be given no marks so that they expect it in the future.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: It is totally fine to give the student the lower grade once you find that thee initial grade was a mistake IF AND ONLY IF this policy was clearly stated beforehand and publically (meaning all the students of this class have been warned). In fact, I would recommend doing this since it would help to prevent students going to you to try to increase their grades just because they have nothing to lose (except their time) and, on most cases, they would only go when they have some confidence they have a good justification.
Even when the student is "demanding" a better grade (and recognizing it is very tempting to reduce their grade once you find out the first grade was mistakenly high), it would not be a behavior expected from a professor, so would advise against it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: You could consider this not just from an ethical standpoint, but also from a statistical one. I remember I overheard a podcast where the commentator couldn't understand "how could correcting an error in data ever be wrong, if you know it's an error?"
They gave the example of looking at temperature data, seeing something was off, finding a 37 entered and referencing a video of the thermometer and seeing it was meant to be 73 (so clearly someone had mistranscribed the temperature entering it in, flipping around the digits on accident). The podcaster meant this as an example of something that "surely couldn't be wrong to correct", and implored (rhetorically) "how could it be wrong to change that back to 73?"
You may not know, but that actually would be wrong. And the reason is roughly as follows: you expect errors like transpositions to be essentially random; sometimes they'll write a 37 for a 73, sometimes they'll write a 97 for a 79. But the correcting of those errors could be systematic, e.g. someone noticing the temperatures seem too low and referencing some unusually low temperatures against the videotape. This bias in error correction would introduce an overall bias in the data.
In the case of correcting errors in exams after they show up to office hour, the bias that is introduced will only harm the honest students, and won't genuinely do anything to make overall the grading more accurate.
If you are concerned with improving the accuracy of your grading, do so by changing the procedures you use for grading. Don't do so at office hours.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: When marking student work I have always told them that if they believe I have made a mistake in the marking then they should identify the error and then discuss it with me.
If, after working through the question, it is shown that I have made an error and they should have received a higher grade then their grade is adjusted.
If it is found that I made an error and they should have received a *lower* grade, their current grade stands and is *not* revised downwards.
I believe that generally this encourages them to review their work in comparison to what they have been told and leads to better understanding of the material. If they find or believe they have found an error they should not be afraid that a risk exists of receiving a lower grade by doing so - in effect this would be that there is a risk of punishment for coming forward.
Furthermore, if in reviewing the work together it is found that I have made an error and given a grade that is too high, that is also a learning opportunity.
**The actual desired end result of a course is not the actual grade - although that is the metric used for academic success - but knowledge and competence.**
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: I agree with the general consensus that it is best not to penalise the error in this case. My view is that it is best not to create a disincentive for students to come to you to review their marks. For this reason, I make it a practice in my courses to *explicitly* set this as a marking rule in the course outline. That way the students are put on notice of my marking practice. For whatever it is worth, here is the blurb I use in my course outlines:
>
> **Review of Marks and Consistency of Marks**
>
>
> The course lecturer will make every effort to mark all assessment items in a manner that is consistent from student to student. If students believe that there is an inconsistency between the marking of their own work and the marking of another student’s work (e.g., they get different marks for an answer that is substantively the same) then they should raise this with the course lecturer for review.
>
>
> The only exception to this consistency principle is this: if the course lecturer finds that a student has accidentally been awarded a higher mark than should have applied for a question, or overall, during subsequent inquiry on the matter by students, the mark will not be reduced, except on request from the student. This is done in order to avoid creating any disincentive for students to discuss marking issues with the course lecturer (i.e., students do not have to worry about raising issues of consistency and then being marked down as a result).
>
>
>
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/11/18
| 408
| 1,819
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am filling in a form for a Masters application. At the top is a question asking to describe research experience (if any) and interests. It's in an engineering field, if that matters.
I have worked on a research project where something somewhat novel was designed, but unfortunately, did not publish a paper. However, I would still like to mention this and talk about it. Since committees are usually looking for strong evidence of research potential for grad programs, what is the best way to express this outside of a 1-2 paragraph description in the form? Would a simple website suffice? Would people in the committee click a link to an external page?<issue_comment>username_1: If your project is on a website, then by all means link to it. Whether they click on the link will depend on how the admission decisions are made, but it will definitely not hurt. When I was submitting applications for Master studies, the committee did look at and take interest in my published resources, even though, like in your case, they were not peer reviewed. At least where I am (Germany), applicants for Master studies are not necessarily expected to have publications. PhD is a different story.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: While a link to a website is probably fine, it might not be followed up, so make your short description clear. A link to a page on a university site or other obviously "safe" domain is preferred, of course.
And, if you have a CV to submit, you can mention it there as "unpublished undergraduate research".
But the "best" way is to have one of your letter writers mention it in their LoR. This is especially true if the project supervisor is one of the writers. But another professor who knows of the work can also make a brief mention.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2019/11/18
| 539
| 2,482
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm wondering if the growing catalogue of preprint repositories have known 'impact factors' similar to those of popular print journals. If so, can anyone highlight them?<issue_comment>username_1: Even if there are services computing them, the impact factor for a preprint repository would not be useful.
Impact factors represent how many citations an article gets on average within a certain period of time. As such, they are supposed to be a rough metric for the selectiveness of a journal. If a journal is highly selective, then only highly impactful articles should (in theory) make it in, driving the impact factor of the journal up.
Now a preprint repository is explicitly designed to *not* be selective - Every paper gets in (possibly under some conditions that are hardly comparable to peer-review). As such, the impact factor of such a repository would not measure anything of interest.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The whole point of the preprint repositories is to provide an outlet for new results that bypasses the peer review system without offering an alternative to it. Since preprints are not peer-reviewed, they should not be cited (otherwise the whole peer review system would be broken, and we might as well cite Wikipedia). As they are not cited, they cannot contribute to an impact factor.
The most a preprint can receive in terms of "impact" is exposure via social media, and most preprint archives offer such metrics (bioarxiv for instance). This can be nice to look at, but ultimately it really means very little about the traditional impact of the paper, the same way that a newspaper writing about some research does not increase its credibility or scientific importance. It can also give a false sense of achievement.
From my experience the media hype around preprints is not related to the repository but rather the authors sharing it via twitter and it being picked up by sufficiently connected users. Again, this doesn't say anything about the impact of the paper but rather how "viral" it is.
Why are you publishing a preprint? What would be your motivation to choose one repository over another? I can't see any reason not to go with whatever repository is respected in your field. If you are publishing a preprint to avoid scooping, or out of sheer altruism, it shouldn't matter so long as the information is publicly available. If you want publicity, it also doesn't matter (as explained above).
Upvotes: -1
|
2019/11/18
| 431
| 1,944
|
<issue_start>username_0: One often reads stories along the lines of "I was told I wasn't suited to a career in academia; now I'm a professor at < Big Name University >". At the same time, given the structure of the academic job market, many people who desire an academic job will never get one. I am sure many of us can think of individuals who made big sacrifices in an unsuccessful pursuit of an academic career, despite never really being a competitive candidate. Equally, we can probably also think of people who succeeded, against our prior expectations.
Given all the above, what should an advisor do/say when confronted with an early career researcher (graduating PhD student/junior postdoc) whose career goals appear incompatible with their current trajectory? How do you support and encourage your advisee, while also being realistic?<issue_comment>username_1: Honestly, without putting down.
Explain the weaknesses of their approach or profile, explain what they would have to change in your opinion to get where they want and explain what they can do if it does not work this way. The point is not discouragement, but letting them understand what their options are. Some people are able to rise far above their original level, just as some never exploit their possibilities.
Whatever you do, you can not go wrong if you understand that the choice remains theirs and yours is only to show them the map.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Advise the researcher of their options beyond their current trajectory, discuss the differences between trajectories, and establish what they *really* want. (Just because a research says they, *want a permanent academic position in five years and professorship ten years after*, doesn't mean they've thoroughly considered and understood what this will entail!) The advisee may themselves favour a different trajectory once they better understand their options.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/11/18
| 944
| 3,850
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am about to finish my masters in stats and in order to graduate I was told that I need to sign a document stating that any patents that I filed while enrolled at the university, belonged to the university. My first question is, is this normal? My second question is, I did file a patent during my enrollment, however, it was with my employer and had nothing to do with my school work, will this cause some sort of conflict of interest?
EDIT: I am in the US. Also, the patent was filed by my employer with me as the inventor.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> My first question is, is [being told to retrospectively assign patent rights] normal?
>
>
>
No: Assigning any patent rights in advance is normal, doing so retrospectively is not.
>
> My second question is, I did file a patent during my enrollment, however, it was with my employer and had nothing to do with my school work, will this cause some sort of conflict of interest?
>
>
>
No: The school seemingly have no rights, presumably your employer does. Note that retrospectively assigning rights to your school will create a problem, moreover, you could be personally liable (e.g., if you assigned rights to two parties).
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, it is normal. Universities often require this - especially of faculty, but also, often enough of students.
You have an issue that you can probably work out with the university. If the patent wasn't related to your work in the educational program, then the university probably has no real claim. But the lawyers for your employer and for your university should probably both be informed of the situation and have a chance to discuss it.
But given your statement that it has nothing to do with the university, I would expect you to get a waiver. Or perhaps just a modified document exempting that one project or (better) making it clearer that it only applies to patents that were, in some way, supported by the university.
But I wouldn't make assumptions and I wouldn't sign the document without advice of a lawyer.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: This very much depends on your local legislation.
As @username_2 says, in some countries this is considered normal. In other countries, it is not normal and any such agreements may even be void.
To give an example:
The latter would be the case e.g. here in Germany, IP of a non-employed student stays with the student and requiring them to sign over their rights as prerequisite for graduation would be considered duress and make the contract void (plus possibly making the professor liable to corruption charge due to abuse of power).
OTOH, it is usual here to negotiate signing over IP rights later on: once the student is finished with their graduation, they are in a position to freely negotiate e.g. patent licenses.
Last but not least, an employer (unlike a univeristy as a school) by default has certain rights (e.g. has a right to know of the invention and then possibly to decide whether they want to patent it and compensate you or whether they leave it up to you).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: If you filed a patent having nothing to do with the university, and then sign a paper saying that the university is the assignee for any patents you filed with the university during your time there, OF COURSE there is a possibility that one impacts the other. You may be ceding exclusive ownership on behalf of your employer -- and there have been cases where such things have been upheld in court (see <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_University_v._Roche_Molecular_Systems,_Inc>.)
If it's valuable and important, you need to be careful, and being careful means hiring a lawyer. You should certainly not sign anything that every other student has not been asked to sign.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/11/18
| 3,218
| 13,892
|
<issue_start>username_0: Today we were asked by the management of our department to give full access of our agenda in Outlook to the secretary. By full access, I mean the possibility to *look, read, write, delete (own) slots* in the agenda. It was mentioned that it's imperative *not to alter any settings* so the entire agenda will be visible to them.
The rationale is that sometimes people come in the department looking for us and by giving full access of our agenda, the secretary can advise these people on when/how to contact us.
On a personal note, I have never experienced something like that. People who want to find me can call me or send me email. I do not see why I should give access to my Outlook agenda, where I also store personal events.
**So my natural question is: Is this normal/acceptable? How can I
politely say that this, in my opinion, is an unacceptable practice
possibly violating privacy?**
My department is located in the Netherlands for what it's worth. No prior communication of this problem has been done/discussed.<issue_comment>username_1: I would probably object to it. However:
Someone has a problem that they need solved and came up with a "solution" that they didn't think through very deeply. While the solution may be objectionable, the problem remains. Perhaps you or yourself and a few others can explore the issue and come up with a better solution that doesn't interfere with your own work flows and privacy.
At a very minimum, if there is no solution but to grant access, the people given access should have very clear, written, rules about what can be modified or even revealed about your documents.
But, in today's world, there are probably solutions that you can devise that meet everyone's needs. See if you can help find them.
I think this is a case of simple carelessness.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> So my natural question is: Is this normal/acceptable?
>
>
>
This is quite normal. Especially those in management positions (and to a lesser extent, people in faculty positions are also frequently involved in management tasks) often have the secretariat managing their calendars. For example, when picking a date for a meeting, the secretariat should be able to see when the participants are available. The secretariat may also need to be able to view details of other appointments, for instance to determine if the location is not too far away from a different meeting they want to plan on your behalf, or to decide whether some less important meeting can be rescheduled to accommodate something more important.
>
> I do not see why I should give access of my Outlook agenta, where I also store personal events.
>
>
>
This is not a very strong argument. You could simply store your personal appointments somewhere else (i.e., in your personal, not work calendar). If you object on this basis, your employer would probably tell you to do exactly that.
>
> How can I politely say that this, in my opinion, is unacceptable practice possibly violating privacy?
>
>
>
It *is* a violation of your privacy, but only a very slight one. The university has a legitimate interest in making your calendar accessible to the secretariat. Legally, this would probably outweigh any privacy concerns.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: This is unreasonable. The scheduling part is reasonable, but there is no good reason I can think of to let a secretary that doesn't answer to you know who you are meeting with or exactly what you are doing every minute of the day. This seems HIGHLY invasive. I would simply make your free/busy times available without making a stink about it, and delegating the secretary appointment-making abilities.
Of course, if your chair wants to make a departmental secretary available to you to manage your calendar, this has value and you might want to consider it.
Also, you are entitled to manage your own time. If you would like to be rigid about your availability and office hours, as people who are very serious about their time management seem to be, your secretary should not be able to override it.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: My own perspective on this from the UK is that it is completely normal *outside* universities that outlook calendars are made fully accessible by anyone in the org. Many of my non-academic friends continually express surprise that I am allowed to keep my calendar private (I just share busy/free information). Even within universities, all of my professional service colleagues are expected to make their schedules accessible. On the other hand, this would seem to be a place where in general academics tend to be privileged, and I've not heard of faculty colleagues who have been forced to make their calendar public.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: Before you discuss this, please be aware that there are administrative settings available that can override any setting you set, and these settings can be set by Exchange Server administrators without you noticing at all. If they just went into their Exchange Server configuration and added the secretary to the "Full Access" list of your mailbox (which includes your calendar), there would be no discussion and you couldn't even see that this access was granted.
By law, in most of the U.S., the "personal" business calendar of an employee is owned completely by the organization, not the employee, so the employee cannot expect privacy. A U.S. organization would not breach any law if they granted someone else access to your whole mailbox.
In most of Europe, on the other hand, the employee can expect some privacy in his "personal" business calendar, and any other provision has to be written down and discussed with the employee in advance. Adding someone to the "Full Access" list would breach several privacy laws at once. If a European organization wants to give someone "Full Access" to other people's calendars, they have to get written consent from the affected employees, which is easier if a valid reason is given. European organizations, if they grant "Full Access" extensively, usually have already amended their work contract templates.
Be assured that, in both cases, the use of such access to modify entries is visible to the affected employee. In case someone creates an entry at 7 a.m. for a meeting at 8 a.m., but you come in at 9 as usual, and your boss asks you where you have been, you both can see in Outlook who created the calendar entry and when.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: It is not only "acceptable," but plain common sense, unless you consider "academic privilege" is the right to continue to manage your time in the same way 100 years ago.
Suppose someone has set up a meeting with 10 attendees, and needs to cancel it. What exactly is the purpose of all 10 people making changes, and interrupting their own work to do that, when one person (a secretary/PA) can make all the changes, most likely do the task quicker than the 10 individuals because *that is the sort of work they are employed to do*?
And how much time is wasted when one of the attendees "forgets" to delete the cancelled meeting, and therefore disrupts scheduling a different meeting in the same time slot, and/or turns up at the meeting room and wastes half an hour wondering why everyone else is late, and eventually trying to contact somebody to find out what is going on? (Good luck trying to contact the original meeting organizer after the meeting would have started - they probably cancelled it because *they had something more important to do* at that time, and they are now doing it!)
If you really think this is unacceptable, you should persuade the university to fire *all* non-academic support staff.
Industry figured this stuff out as soon as the tools to implement it were available. Maybe the stereotype of "people living in ivory towers" is actually an *accurate* description!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: You got in other answers all the reasons why your calendar should be open.
I keep my calendar private with free/busy information available, mostly for two reasons:
* I have confidential information. Simply the name of the meeting ("disciplinary meeting with Mr X - slacking off at work") or a list of participants may be problematic. Depending on your role this may apply or not.
* I am allowed by law (in France, I guess Netherlands may be close to that too) to have private items in my calendar. Nobody is allowed to have access to these items beside me. This can be solved, however, with the "Private" flag on an Outlook meeting (and restricting access to these meetings)
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_8: Consider that this is your employer's outlook license, paid and provided by your employer, to enable you working more effectively for him. So technically, you don't have any rights to a single bit in the content, and he can do with it what he wants.
Practically, many people feel this as intrusive, and I don't like it either. But as explained before, you can only hope for their goodwill.
Note that every appointment / meeting has a flag *Private*, and if you set that, the secretary will still not see anything inside it, only the invited people can see it. I use that for example for Doctor's appointments or other personal appointments that I don't want them to see.
Depending on the secratary's ethics and mindset, she can complain about that, and you have no choices (other than quitting), or she understands and will never say a word, especially when you use it sparingly or for appointments that are ouside of work times.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: Outlook has various [levels of privilege that you can give to other users.](https://technology.education.uconn.edu/share-calendar-or-change-calendar-permissions-in-outlook/#)
Give the secretary "Editor" privileges, and mark all of your private appointments with the "private" flag.
The secretary can then see when you are available, and can add or remove appointments for you but not modify or delete appointments that you have made. By setting the private flag on your private appointments, the secretary can only see that you have an appointment but not what it is about.
That setup will allow you to (mostly) comply with the requirements while maintaining as much of your privacy as possible.
---
As others have said, Outlook and the Exchange server behind it belong to your employer. Any data on their system must be assumed to be visible to your employer. As such, if you really want to keep your private appointments private then you shouldn't have them on your employer's system.
Requesting access to your calendar is reasonable. You are there to work for the company (university,) so your supervisors and higher ups have an interest in knowing when you are there and potentially available to be talked to.
Since most people are clueless about the access rights you can set in Outlook, you ended up with a request (command?) to give the secretary full access to your calendar when less would have done.
You might want to ask if the use of limited rights was even considered - maybe whoever wrote the directive knows nothing about the limited rights. Or, knows but thinks it is too difficult to explain to all of the users in your department.
---
It may also be that the Dutch translation for the various rights is as stupid as the German translation in earlier versions of Outlook. They were named something useless like "Level 1," "Level 2," etc. I've just checked, and current Outlook (Office 365) has finally gotten decent translations.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: No it's not normal.
Context: Netherlands, with some academia experience but mostly in industry, albeit in IT and software development in places where no-one wears a tie.
It is normal to share one's calendar to the extent that your co-workers know when you are available. I usually share the details also, and put down private events as private. This is because i want people to be able to see what meetings i may have so that it is easier to plan. For example if i'm unavailable at a certain date because of a meeting they know can or will be rescheduled, they could still ask me to meet them at that time-slot.
Demanding you grant secretaries access rights to reschedule your agenda is stupid because it will eventually lead to the calendar not showing the actual events. If your dentist appointment is removed, you will still go to the dentist and people at work will not know that you are not at work.
Now if you had your own secretary, who you instruct to schedule appointments on your behalf, that would be different.
It is entirely possible that management is clueless about outlook access rights, and/or not very competent. Maybe just informing them that secretaries and others should only have read-access to a persons calendar would suffice to change these new rules.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_11: This is more of a "how to use Outlook" question (do we have an Office SE?) Or a workplace relations question. Not an Academia question.
It is really fine. Several answers say no, but they are in the "not used to it" category.
This is your workplace email--they can do what they want with it. Also, it is very reasonable to give full access to a personal admin (dedicated secretary). Dept secretary not that different.
Note:
1. You can still make individual extremely private appointments (proctologist, affair-mate) completely private at the APPOINTMENT level (you click a box). Leave your routine work stuff (committees, students, etc. open to the secretary. She needs that when juggling meetings. Might even get some help from her.
2. You can keep your email confidential. (When I had a dedicated assistant, I gave full permission for that, though. Just have to use a personal email for personal traffic.)
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/11/18
| 543
| 2,332
|
<issue_start>username_0: During the review process of an article, the reviewers are (almost always) anonymous by default for obvious reasons.
Why are not authors also made anonymous?
It could help remove the weight that established authors carry in certain fields (which can tilt the scale in their favor), as well as the stigma associated to research coming from non-developed countries.
Are there any good reasons why this is not done? I can not think of any.<issue_comment>username_1: Sometimes they are. That's called double blind refereeing. It is becoming more common.
From <https://www.maa.org/press/periodicals/guide-for-referees>
>
> The Board of Governors of the Mathematical Association of America has
> mandated that our journals use a double‐blind review system.
>
>
>
This [blog post](https://blogs.ams.org/blogonmathblogs/2018/03/05/blind-review-review/) and comments discuss the history, pros and cons of double blind refereeing in parts of mathematics and computer science.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Some conferences and journals do employ "double blind" reviewing. Whether it is superior or not can be debated. Whether it is actually "needed" or not can also be debated.
But, single blind is just a tradition that makes some things easier on authors and editors. Double blind reviewing normally requires that a special version of a paper be presented for review, since the authors often refer internally to their own work and often use personal pronouns, such as "we". This makes it easy to disambiguate authors unless care is taken. There have been questions on this site about preparing such specialized version to avoid referring to essential early work by the same authors.
Double blind review also can narrow the set of acceptable reviewers. Often enough, a reviewer is chosen because their own work is mentioned in the paper, making it more likely that the reviewer will actually know of the work before being offered the paper for review. While some conflicts of interest can occur, these are normally pretty rare and can be handled via communication of rules for reviewers.
So, if an editor or conference committee agrees that there is little to be gained by double blind review and wants to avoid extra steps, they will likely just follow the traditional practice.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/18
| 5,626
| 23,960
|
<issue_start>username_0: Questions of similar topics have been asked [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/21365/being-the-right-kind-of-demanding-as-a-college-instructor) for the situation of instructing a course and here and [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/18513/is-no-late-work-a-common-policy/) for the situation of 'no late work' policies. Additional questions about balancing teaching responsibilities [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/143/balancing-coursework-research-and-teaching).
**Background**
I am a new graduate student, and part of my funding comes from TA responsibilities. For the current particular course, I am responsible for teaching lab sessions, grading homework, responding to student emails/questions, and other common duties. So far, I have not had too much trouble balancing the responsibilities of being a teaching assistant with other commitments.
**Situation**
Homework assignments are always released two weeks ahead of time and are due 9am on Monday mornings. For whatever reason - length of the homework, difficulty of a specific problem, etc. - this homework has caused several last-minute (example: midnight last night, 2am, and 6am) requests for extensions.
**Question/problem**
The situation of late homework requests is confounding to my daily practice of empathy. I feel like I am at a split in the road or forced to choose which devil to listen to. For example, one of the requests is legitimate from a student who has been experiencing medical issues the entire semester. Another is from a student who has explicitly articulated they need a good grade to get a luxury car from their parents. I have a personal rule to actively practice empathy in my day-to-day life, but my rule completely falls apart in this situation.
In @<NAME>'s answer on another post, the use suggested:
*If people have a legitimate reason for wanting an extension of the deadline, I would simply give them the extension. If they cannot provide a good reason, i.e. they simply procrastinated too much, they have to take responsibility for their behavior, and they do not get the extension.*
But what is 'legitimate'? Additionally, I am concerned that individually evaluating the reasoning of each student - explicitly stated or not - may lead to personal inconsistencies in who I give an extension to and eventually consume large amounts of time.
I've spoken with the course instructor, but he has left it up to me. My university and department have no centralized policy. How can a TA balance empathy and deferring to the syllabus in teaching responsibilities?<issue_comment>username_1: I encourage you to get creative, while simultaneously work hard to make the same rules for everybody in order to avoid succumbing to confirmational bias.
Simply put, if the president of the preprofessional club comes to you and asks you for an extension, the tie dye wearing hippy deserves exactly the same answer in a similar situation. It's too easy to create a narrative in one's head where one deserves the extension and the other doesn't. That narrative may well align with unperceived biases.
For this reason, my policy is to allow all students to drop their lowest homework grade, and I simply don't accept late homeworks, barring some serious documented medical reason.
For all other assignments, my policy is to list all the due dates in the syllabus, make reasonable grade penalties for late submissions known in advance in the syllabus, and (barring serious documented medical reasons or real disasters like death of a close family member) stick to the rules.
I wasn't always here. I got here after some training from [Cook Ross](https://cookross.com/) on unconscious and confirmational bias that my institution contracted for leaders.
As an added bonus, one of the things we'd like to train our students in is planning and how to use their time. A very liberal late work policy isn't the most effective message.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It sounds to me like you are allowing yourself to be emotionally manipulated by your students, particularly the one (who sounds super obnoxious) who told you about the promise for a luxury car from their parents. It’s indeed important to have empathy, and I find your conscious insistence on practicing empathy every day incredibly noble and admirable — if only more people did that the world would be a better place — but at the same time, sometimes a person has a job to do and needs to put the larger interests of the mission he or she serves ahead of the emotional need to “be nice”. Indeed, being nice to people who are undeserving is often harmful to those people. You would not be doing any favors to the immature, manipulative student who wants to get a luxury car by giving them unfairly favorable treatment out of pity or “empathy”. (The student with medical problems is a completely different story, where the request sounds a lot more reasonable.)
In any case, empathy is about how you relate to people and not about the decision you make on their petition. Even on occasions when I’ve had to turn down a desperate student’s request for a grade change, and knowing that that’s the only decision I could possibly make in good conscience, I would like to think that I explained my decision to the crying student with empathy - I certainly tried my best, even if the students in that moment sometimes only seemed to care about having their request denied and might well have thought me to be a cruel, heartless person.
So what is a good way in practice to solve the dilemma? The answer you quoted in your post has it exactly right. You give an extension to the people who have a legitimate reason to need it, and refuse it to those who don’t. That’s all there is to it. “*But what is 'legitimate'*?” Exactly what you judge to be legitimate — after first pausing to take ten deep breaths, counting down to zero from one hundred, writing an email draft answering the request and saving it in your drafts folder, going on a walk or a coffee break, and finally coming back and looking at the question with fresh eyes. If at that point you still think the need is legitimate and can say with certainty, or least with reasonable confidence, that you are not falling victim to emotional manipulation from an unscrupulous student, by all means grant the request.
And whether or not you‘ve decided to grant the request at that point, be content to know that you have been true to your principles of practicing empathy, and that you are doing your small part to help make the world a better place.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: My thinking on this issue has changed dramatically over the years, and I now give extensions much more frequently than I used to. (I'm not saying this is necessarily the right course of action, though.)
I would advise you to consider some guiding principles at play here:
1) **Consider the reason that there's a deadline in the first place, and ponder the possible harm done if it is violated.** To be clear, this is not a rhetorical point. As an undergrad, I had a course where all homework assignments were due in the last week of class; suffice it to say that the three weeks leading up to that were not fun for me. Deadlines are good, because they require students to maintain pace with the course and avoid a huge backlog at the end; additionally, work in a class is often iterative, and in those cases it's imperative to stay on top of it.
Here are some examples of what I'd regard to be very good reasons to keep a hard deadline in place without extension:
* You need to post a key for the benefit of the rest of the students, which would render the assignment pointless for a student completing the work late.
* The work represents some fundamental concept that will be built upon in class, and it's genuinely important that the student have the work completed on a particular schedule.
* You're planning to grade the assignments right after they're turned in, and it may take you more time overall to extend the assignment -- either because you need to get yourself back into a grading mindset somehow, or you have to reopen something on your computer, or whatever else. Your own time is valuable, and it's well within your right to fight for it. But this logic ought to apply to *everyone*. If this is your reason, I'd advise you to drop the lowest X homeworks or have some similar policy that allows some flexibility for truly exigent circumstances, and to apply the policy uniformly to all students.
Personally, I find it often the case that there is no pressing reason to keep a *specific* hard deadline in practice, but rather that the general concept of deadlines should be maintained so students don't fall far behind. For that reason, I tend to freely give extensions. When a student asks for several, I have a conversation with them about it.
2) **It is probably better that students complete homework late than that they don't complete it at all.** Of course, this must be weighed against your responses to 1) above. Like I said, there are very good reasons to be strict about deadlines, and those reasons may well win the argument.
3) **Remember that if all that's needed to get an extension is a good reason, it's very easy to lie about those reasons.** If you adopt a policy in which "My grandmother died" is a good enough reason that warrants an extensions, and "I made a bad choice and binge watched Game of Thrones" isn't, then you're implicitly putting yourself on the hook for documentation of the good reasons. In the long run, if you differentiate between reasons but don't demand documentation, you are likely to develop a reputation that will result in some students who binge-watched Game of Thrones instead reporting to you that their grandmother died. And in fact, in this scenario, the only students who *won't* receive an untoward benefit are precisely the ones who compelled to be honest about their reason. That seems bad.
4) **Make a choice that you'd be willing to defend to a supervisor.** If you're going to treat students differently, imagine sitting in a room with both of them and an administrator and justifying your decision. If you can't easily do that, you're probably making a mistake. And if you're unsure what you could defend to a supervisor, then go find a supervisor and talk to them about the situation immediately.
5) **When unsure, defer to empathy in all cases.** I know that you're trying to do that here, and I think your heart is in the right place. Empathy is helpful for so many reasons; it's beneficial to the students' education, it's easy to defend politically, and you'll probably sleep better at night. If a student is irresponsible or taking some sort of shortcut, you're very likely to detect that in other places (such as tests). Going out of your way to enforce various "good behaviors" (such as deadlines) is, in my experience, an unsustainable career choice.
**Final thought:** I have never once regretted giving a student leeway, but I've regretted behaving strictly.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: In principle, I am relatively strict, as I found that students respect not only the lecturer, but themselves more when they are taken seriously and the requirements imposed on them are taken seriously, too.
However, if there is a legitimate concern that this particular coursework caused extra difficulties, was particularly challenging, that students may have put in the extra mile to get this done, it may be appropriate to actually honour the commitment of the students to succeeding in the challenge by giving them - as a one off - extra time.
Note that I do not talk about empathy. Your goal as a TA is their best possible education, and they will not get that if extensions are given out freely, no more than it would help a society if money were printed freely, but if you can assume that they have done their best to achieve the goal, you may consider it using your "joker" of an extension to reward them for committed work.
Why do I talk about the educational goal and not empathy? Think of a surgeon - his empathy notwithstanding, he will actively injure you and cause pain to you for the purpose of helping you. Him acting on immediate empathic impulse will be harmful to you in the long (or short) term.
As for the case who has medical issues, that should be resolved by the school by specifying which extra accommodation they should receive. You as a TA should not be the person making these decisions overall.
And as for the guy who will get a luxury car if he gets a good grade - I am almost at a loss what to say: this is a horrible example of external motivation. Probably, you could tell him that he puts you under terrible pressure and he should not do that. To be frank, he simply transfers the pressure to you that his parents have put him under.
It is very sad that you are expected to buffer this appalling incentivization, but there is a clear lack of empathy on the side of his parents - imagine if you let this guide you: students that do not have parents that can invoke such incentives to push them towards good grades (assuming this would make the difference) would then be disadvantaged. This is where you have to apply empathy with your whole set of students, not just the ones that ask for special treatment. Empathy and fairness are not identical, but they are siblings.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: **Have a policy and stick to it**.
Here are two extremes:
* "Barring medical issues, due dates are *strictly* enforced"
* "Due dates are recommendations only; homework will be accepted for full credit at any time before the final exam"
Both of these are fine, though the latter can lead to a lot of work for you. What is not fine is having a policy but allowing exceptions to some students and not to others who have equally good reasons.
**Make your policy clear-cut to avoid angst.** Something like "extensions will be granted at the TA's discretion" requires you to judge the student, their excuse, and your own plans (e.g., do you have time to grade late work this week?). This also leads to second-guessing from students, and can be unfair to those who adjusted other plans to meet your deadlines.
FWIW, my own preferred policy was "I'll take late work for no penalty if you get it to me before I finish grading (otherwise, no late work without a doctor's note)." This balances empathy (no point imposing a penalty when there is no harm done) with justice (there is always the risk that I would pick it up promptly, go home, and grade it -- which indeed I occasionally did).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: You talk about empathy towards those asking for extensions, what about those who didn’t?
Many students work their butt off to make deadlines and never think of asking for an extension. By granting extensions to some students who don’t have a valid reason (in my book that’d be medical or death/severe illness of human loved one, but your policy can differ), you’re basically telling those silent hard working ones that their time is worth less than that of others. That’s not empathy in my opinion.
In fact, this is exactly what I tell students who ask for extensions: I can’t grant you one because it’s unfair to other students taking the class. They usually understand where I’m coming from and take it better than outright refusal.
**EDIT:** perhaps to drive the point home here - you may be inadvertently discriminating against students who feel less empowered in a university setting. Unfortunately, these students often enough tend to be from certain socioeconomic/minority/gender groups - think about the potential implications of this practice!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: There are many very good reasons for keeping strict deadlines. For example, the sub-bullets in username_3's answer are extremely important. Everyone should consider those carefully.
That said: For me, the time budget of the instructor is paramount. You have many varied tasks as an academic, and it's common for faculty to have great difficulty keeping a good work/life balance, juggling research and service, responding to emails in a timely fashion, etc. Presumably you've made yourself available to help via email and office hours, etc. At some point that budgeted time is finished and you need to move on to other tasks, and not have grading/feedback tasks lingering because of late students.
I have tacked on my wall a list of time-management principles published a decade ago in the NEA Higher Education Advocate, from the article ["Overload Epidemic!?!"](http://www.nea.org/home/34620.htm). Here they are:
* Principle 1: Be able to be efficient in all things.
* Principle 2: Express your values in how you use your time.
* Principle 3: Don’t hoard responsibility, share it.
* Principle 4: For every aspect of your life, find a time and place befitting it.
* Principle 5: Be short with many so that you may be long with a few.
I think if you reflect on them, all of these principles point in the direction of not accepting late assignments. It's most efficient (#1 and #4) to do all the grading for an assignment in a batch longitudinally, so you should have them all in one place at a time, and not do mental-switching later to get in and out of the task. Sharing responsibility (#3) suggests that students should take that burden, not just you. Being short with many (#5) further suggests that you not cycle indefinitely with late students. Etc., etc.
Returning to Aaron's list, I feel that I have dedicated a lot of time and energy to my students and their coursework. I personally grade and give quite a bit of feedback on every assignment and exam. I have no TA's or graders. I commit to having assignments and exams returned with feedback the day after they've been submitted (usually requires being up to about 2 AM late Sunday nights). I don't want to delay giving/discussing answers to the whole class because one student was late. When the scheduled time for that is over, it's over, and we're moving on to the next thing. I think it would be irresponsible to spend extra mental energy on a lagging student, when I could instead prepare a presentation that would benefit the entire class.
The OP's second link has a pretty great answer inspecting the granularity of assignments. In my case, there are a lot of assignments, one every week, and the deadlines are strict (via the online learning management system), with one dropped from the grade per semester. I think this allows a tight feedback/learning opportunity about the process of the work. If there were a small number of big projects, then I would consider modifying this policy.
But keep in mind that if you burn yourself out with these nonstop moral dilemmas about assessing the legitimacy of student excuses, then you'll be in no state to help other people as you intend. Make sure to defend your time and health (both mental and physical) first and foremost. Other considerations are secondary.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: Treat their studies, including homework, as their job. If they also work in addition to studying, well... many people work two or more jobs.
If they are sick for one day, it should not greatly impact their work, unless they are leaving everything until the last minute. If they are sick for longer they should see a doctor and get a medical certificate/note/reference, which (to me) is an automatic extension for the length of time the doctor certifies them as "unfit for work".
I usually tell students as part of the introduction to the class/course that if they need more time and ask for an extension, that asking days before the deadline with an explanation of why they need/want said extension is far more likely to be granted than asking by email at 2am (barring emergencies, which is then also likely that their homework is the last thing on their mind).
Then, when/if a student should ask for an extension two days before the deadline because they are finding it very difficult, it is possible to poll the class and gives the option to offer a blanket extension.
If a student should have another reason (e.g. personal emergency) it is possibly as likely to occur at 2 am on the day the homework is due as it is to occur three days before the deadline. But I don't personally know anyone who would email me from a hospital (for example) to ask for an extension. An extension for such an emergency is always an exception.
I would sometimes respond with, "Send me your draft and then we can discuss an extension." If they have had a number of weeks to complete it then I would expect they have made some progress towards completion. That is, I try to also teach some time management.
Building in some form of time-management training also helps those with reward/incentive schemes in place for good performance. Granting extensions to help with students obtaining external rewards isn't helping them in the long term (in my opinion).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_9: **tl;dr: Change your 'deadlines' system, to make both your students' and your life easier.**
---
For what it's worth, I fully agree with Aaron's answer here.
However, I think both his answer and the currently accepted one, fail to address the underlying issue, which is the fact that it "feels" like a valid choice for the student, since there is no realistic alternative. Most 'deadline' systems tend to be very badly designed, typically consisting of a single, contrived, non-negotiable binary event, completely ignoring the interdependence other courses have on each other's deadlines, etc.
This means that, a student who struggled for an extra couple of days on an assignment for one course, has no option but to try and juggle the rest. I think talking about "fairness" and empathy, or even manipulation, is missing the point here. The point is, the current system makes coming to you to ask for one an option in the first place, and, more to the point, with no other recourse for alternative choices (better or otherwise). Therefore, you have people coming to you for extensions.
**It should not be up to you to decide to take responsibility for extending, it should be up to the student, in a way that allows them to weigh the consequences, as a responsible adult!**
But, equally, this is only meaningful if there is **a system in place which is flexible enough to allow them to do that**, without it having to be an automatic life-or-death decision.
When I was studying for my Masters, my department had the best submissions policy I have seen so far, and I felt very supported by it:
* Every submission had an automatic three day extension. No questions asked, but you had to submit a reason (for the record).
* For any day beyond the three-day extension, an automatic penalty was applied (by percentage) on their mark (e.g. 10% the first day, 20% the second etc).
Yes, many students treated the official deadline as a 'fake' one, but this means they took responsibility for doing so. Many people also went beyond and accepted the penalty. But for the most part, people felt supported, because it meant if the deadlines for two courses clashed, they had enough flexibility to decide by themselves how to prioritise things and why.
Obviously, in the event of *very* serious mitigating circumstances, it was possible to negotiate the penalties, especially if given advanced notice (i.e. given before the *formal* deadline). However, psychologically, the student now has to justify why they need a *fourth* day or more, and not an extension in general.
With this system in place, very few students had a reason to book an appointment and ask for such an extension in the first place, and it worked very well both for both the students and the academics involved.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/11/18
| 626
| 2,681
|
<issue_start>username_0: If my current recommender recycles the letter from previous recommender after each other's consent, will this be classified as plagiarism?
This is for MS programs to US universities FYI.<issue_comment>username_1: This will not be classified as plagiarism. A letter of recommendation does not pretend to be original, it is just a bureaucratic document that is supposed to give information on the extent to which the recommender recommends you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Plagiarism pertains to academic output, not administrative documents, so formally this is not an issue.
That being said, admissions committees do receive all the documentation in a package for each applicant, and if I saw a package with two substantially identical letters, it would be a bit unusual.
In some cases, especially for admission at the Masters level in a not super competitive program and with an otherwise clearly strong application, reference letters are a formality. As long as they are moderately positive, all is fine, and therefore no one will really care if they are substantially identical. Frankly, having been on such committees, we may be happy enough if the required letters merely arrive on time and have sufficient content to reassure us that someone remembers the applicant at all!
However, if admission to the program is competitive, or if the application has some warning flags (grades, leaves, otherwise less strong than typical etc), it can be very much a wasted opportunity. In such cases, on committees we very much pay attention to letters to understand what makes the applicant special, and why the warning flags (if any) should not cause concern for the future. A letter indicating by its wording and enthusiasm genuine understanding of the student's situation carries a lot more weight. And we have all experienced that some recommenders seem to turn the dial to "gush" for everyone, without really meaning anything special (or perhaps truly in the heat of the moment believing every single one of the 30 students they've written for in the past 30 years are the best ever). Therefore 1+1>2 as far as two genuinely independent, complementary but different positive recommendations, and 1+1<2 for two that are bizarrely near-identical and indicate less than the usual amount of thought.
Final thought: on committees, we do realize that busy, jaded academics don't sit down and write every letter *de novo*. In particular if your recommender #2 is renowned, known to be busy, etc., it may be a feather in your cap that they were willing to "write" a letter for you at all, and similarities with #1 may well be overlooked.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/18
| 743
| 3,195
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a Master's student at one of the TUs (Technical Universities) in Germany. I have been working as a hiwi ("Wissenschaftliche Hilfskraft", or Teaching Assistant) under a PhD for the past one year.
I have signed a new contract starting from December for another six months. Can I breach the contract now? What's the procedure if I have to breach it after the contract begins?
Would it affect my job profile? Would I still be able to work in other institutes?<issue_comment>username_1: Short answer: **Don't do it**
Long answer: Breaching your contract would have legal consequences. It also will definitely not help you getting work anywhere else. Formally the fabled 'black lists' don't exist, but in general people talk to each other and someone simply breaking their contract is exceptional enough that news will spread fast. Furthermore at least in the place I was, the paperwork is often done by the universities HR-department and payment is handled through the same state agency, independent of which other institute you work at, so this will turn up as a red flag.
You can ask your boss to cancel a contract. What you want is called an "Auflösungsvertrag". However this needs to be agreed on by both sides, so you better have a good enough reason. For example as a boss, if you told me that you want to interrupt your studies to take care of a dying relative, I would gladly sign it, but if you told me you got a better offer somewhere else, I would still insist on you fulfilling the contract until I at least can find a replacement. And don't lie, as mentioned before, bad news travels fast.
Apart from this, if there is no other clause in your contract allowing you to give notice, it's best to just bear it for another six months. Document your hours, do your job diligently and wait for the time to be up. If you worked for the same boss for a year already, you knew what you were signing up for.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Ask your student union.
You should have a student union which can help you with both legal issues and university-related problems. Your problem falls into both categories. Your peoblem is really depending on your concrete place. There could be a long waiting list of prospective Hiwis (if the prof often fires HiWis maybe there are a lot of them?) or it could be a huge problem.
Ideally, you would talk together with one student union person to a representative of the university and find together a good solution.
About being blacklisted: If the prof is just any prof (as opposed to a prof in the field you are doing research in, or one of the few recommendation letter guys), it is in my opinion retty unlikely that this message is important enough to come across to some other university. A Hiwi position is just not very relevant in the grand schema of things (sorry!). Again, local people probably know more.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Resigning from and breaching a contract are two different things. Have you read the contract? Most likely you have to give notice one month in advance. Usually resigning with due notice is not a big deal. In any case, it's your right.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/11/19
| 893
| 3,642
|
<issue_start>username_0: Recently on [social](https://twitter.com/schneiderleonid/status/1196361609943367680) media, news broke that [<NAME>](http://www.xuetaocao.org/) duplicated or manipulated images in more than 50 papers of his. These accusations were brought to the public by <NAME> and explained in great details in following [article](https://forbetterscience.com/2019/11/18/the-teachings-of-chairman-cao/)
using social media and pubpeer website they notice duplication in images.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/SoT7K.png)
as someone who finished MSc in Immunology I can't understand what is wrong with images, they look credible to me, although there might be some software that can tell difference. How is possible that so many figures got duplicated and no-one from peer reviewers noticed? What is this scientific misconduct about? If it is really one after all.<issue_comment>username_1: Short answer: **Don't do it**
Long answer: Breaching your contract would have legal consequences. It also will definitely not help you getting work anywhere else. Formally the fabled 'black lists' don't exist, but in general people talk to each other and someone simply breaking their contract is exceptional enough that news will spread fast. Furthermore at least in the place I was, the paperwork is often done by the universities HR-department and payment is handled through the same state agency, independent of which other institute you work at, so this will turn up as a red flag.
You can ask your boss to cancel a contract. What you want is called an "Auflösungsvertrag". However this needs to be agreed on by both sides, so you better have a good enough reason. For example as a boss, if you told me that you want to interrupt your studies to take care of a dying relative, I would gladly sign it, but if you told me you got a better offer somewhere else, I would still insist on you fulfilling the contract until I at least can find a replacement. And don't lie, as mentioned before, bad news travels fast.
Apart from this, if there is no other clause in your contract allowing you to give notice, it's best to just bear it for another six months. Document your hours, do your job diligently and wait for the time to be up. If you worked for the same boss for a year already, you knew what you were signing up for.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Ask your student union.
You should have a student union which can help you with both legal issues and university-related problems. Your problem falls into both categories. Your peoblem is really depending on your concrete place. There could be a long waiting list of prospective Hiwis (if the prof often fires HiWis maybe there are a lot of them?) or it could be a huge problem.
Ideally, you would talk together with one student union person to a representative of the university and find together a good solution.
About being blacklisted: If the prof is just any prof (as opposed to a prof in the field you are doing research in, or one of the few recommendation letter guys), it is in my opinion retty unlikely that this message is important enough to come across to some other university. A Hiwi position is just not very relevant in the grand schema of things (sorry!). Again, local people probably know more.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Resigning from and breaching a contract are two different things. Have you read the contract? Most likely you have to give notice one month in advance. Usually resigning with due notice is not a big deal. In any case, it's your right.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/11/19
| 920
| 3,892
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is there a way to read efficiently old papers? For example, to read all the Science and Nature cover papers since 1950?
How do you read old/fundamental literature?<issue_comment>username_1: If you are researching a specific area (doing a lit search) then your university library and an academic librarian is a good place to start. Libraries normally have access to such things and can get copies of papers. The librarians know how to go about it and can even help you manage a broader search.
All you really need is some specific idea of what you are after. A citation in a recent paper is an excellent start. Even if your own university doesn't have direct access, they likely have associations that they can work through to obtain what you want.
There was a time, pre internet, when this was the primary way of doing academic research.
I hope I've interpreted your need correctly.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Im not sure what you mean by efficiently but you clarified you wish to see/get all papers.
If you have an university ID you can probably enter the database of the Uni's library online. Or depending on your national library options you might even be able to register there and get access online.
Taking out the option of physical libraries (because internet exists and you might be in another country with no access to big university libraries or such) , you can try to look in sci-hub , or you may be able to find some repositories online (if you find 1 paper try modifying the URL to get to an upper level of the portal), or find torrents in the web lingering around (be safe and use a VPN, then remember to seed). You may have more luck searching in other languages and then translate (spanish and russian are good options as they are excellent in alternative forms to get stuff, problem with russian is the Cyrillic).
Other than that, to get specific papers you can try to ask directly the researchers for them (research gate) or if you cant find them then try their associates. However this might not work or it might take too much time.
Another resource would be to try the cheapest subscription that grands you access and then see/download everything.
It depends what you really need. Do you need all the papers or just the list of what articles each number has? the list is easy to find online, but to get the papers you can try options like the mentioned above.
**EDIT**-*HOW TO GET IMAGES FROM COVERS*
OP clarified the he/she wants to merely get the covers from the magazines as automatically as possible. This would depend on what material there is to work with in the first place. But it all comes down to knowing where are the images or which type of documents you have to work with.
1- If you have a page that shows all covers as images and you want to download them, you can use *jdownloader* or similar to download all the images of a site automatically. (and you cna paste the url of other sites/pages)
2- If you have all the papers in pdf and just want to get the first or second page you can batch edit them, I remember *A-PDF Page Cut* served for such but there are other softwares to do it too.
3-You can write a script with a function to get images from the web. *Getimage()* is the general one but the specifics depends on the programming language you use.
Ultimate, the specifics of all this might be better asked in other stack sites regarding software and programming.
**For a list of all articles published by nature**, here it is for 1950 but you cans et the filter to 'all' and get everything, however that gives many results, so you can write a script to download the names based on the links: <https://www.nature.com/nature/articles?type=article&year=1950>
You can also check by volumes, this other list goes up to 1869 : <https://www.nature.com/nature/volumes>
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2019/11/19
| 1,418
| 5,864
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm 26 and an Bachelor-Student in the Electrical Engineering field.
My interests are Control-Theory and Robotics.
My Grade are good (maybe i get an 1.x Grade for the Bachelors Degree).
My Control-Theory Prof is very convinced of my knowledge and gave me the advice to go to an University.
Im currently studying at an Fachhochschule and want to go to an University for an Master Degree in my interest field.
The Problem is, that Im not very conviced about myself. Im thinking that I have to learn everything (math, physics) from Scratch to be prepared for the Study there.
The Problem is not that Im not ready to invest a lot of time for it (I am!), but I think that i should learn the Mathematics from Scratch again for getting an feeling about whats happening (control-theory is very mathematic).
I can calculate a lot, but developing own Ideas and get behind the Ideas of other People is at some point very difficult and ends often in accepting things. I want to have an intuitive feeling for whats going on, and for that I think I should repeat the mathematics (Analysis, Linear Algebra, Integraltransformation) and start to dive in Functional-Analysis.
At this University the Master-Course starts twice a year, April and October.
I have emailed the Faculty and being told, that I have to complete the Math III Exam with is part of there Bachelors-Degree Course, and maybe another exam which i dont know (maybe theoretical electrical engineering).
My idea was, to spend the first Semester to get skilled in mathematics and consist the 2 Exams, and maybe If the time allows, to finish some other Courses which are held in the first Master-Semester.
My problem is, that Im 26 and I think Im very old. Im working since 2016 as an Working-Student at an Global Player in the Research&Development of Photovoltaic Systems.
If I see other students which maybe starts with me.. they are 21,20..
But I think Im doing right, if I want to employ in that Field, I have to learn. Im living only once, and If that is my dream, I have to forget my age.
What do you think about my Plan?
Sorry if this is very confusing to you.
Have a nice day!<issue_comment>username_1: If you are researching a specific area (doing a lit search) then your university library and an academic librarian is a good place to start. Libraries normally have access to such things and can get copies of papers. The librarians know how to go about it and can even help you manage a broader search.
All you really need is some specific idea of what you are after. A citation in a recent paper is an excellent start. Even if your own university doesn't have direct access, they likely have associations that they can work through to obtain what you want.
There was a time, pre internet, when this was the primary way of doing academic research.
I hope I've interpreted your need correctly.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Im not sure what you mean by efficiently but you clarified you wish to see/get all papers.
If you have an university ID you can probably enter the database of the Uni's library online. Or depending on your national library options you might even be able to register there and get access online.
Taking out the option of physical libraries (because internet exists and you might be in another country with no access to big university libraries or such) , you can try to look in sci-hub , or you may be able to find some repositories online (if you find 1 paper try modifying the URL to get to an upper level of the portal), or find torrents in the web lingering around (be safe and use a VPN, then remember to seed). You may have more luck searching in other languages and then translate (spanish and russian are good options as they are excellent in alternative forms to get stuff, problem with russian is the Cyrillic).
Other than that, to get specific papers you can try to ask directly the researchers for them (research gate) or if you cant find them then try their associates. However this might not work or it might take too much time.
Another resource would be to try the cheapest subscription that grands you access and then see/download everything.
It depends what you really need. Do you need all the papers or just the list of what articles each number has? the list is easy to find online, but to get the papers you can try options like the mentioned above.
**EDIT**-*HOW TO GET IMAGES FROM COVERS*
OP clarified the he/she wants to merely get the covers from the magazines as automatically as possible. This would depend on what material there is to work with in the first place. But it all comes down to knowing where are the images or which type of documents you have to work with.
1- If you have a page that shows all covers as images and you want to download them, you can use *jdownloader* or similar to download all the images of a site automatically. (and you cna paste the url of other sites/pages)
2- If you have all the papers in pdf and just want to get the first or second page you can batch edit them, I remember *A-PDF Page Cut* served for such but there are other softwares to do it too.
3-You can write a script with a function to get images from the web. *Getimage()* is the general one but the specifics depends on the programming language you use.
Ultimate, the specifics of all this might be better asked in other stack sites regarding software and programming.
**For a list of all articles published by nature**, here it is for 1950 but you cans et the filter to 'all' and get everything, however that gives many results, so you can write a script to download the names based on the links: <https://www.nature.com/nature/articles?type=article&year=1950>
You can also check by volumes, this other list goes up to 1869 : <https://www.nature.com/nature/volumes>
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2019/11/19
| 352
| 1,342
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm confused: someone said that a PhD in Europe is free, someone said that you get paid. What's true? And how hard is to get a PhD salary in Physics in North Europe?<issue_comment>username_1: You go to their website, find a job posting, and apply. Example of a [PhD Research Fellowship at the University of Oslo](https://www.jobbnorge.no/en/available-jobs/job/178676/phd-research-fellowship-in-semiconductor-physics).
Not all positions are free, and not every PhD student is paid. You'll have to look.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Europe is not a country so PhD policies vary greatly from one country to the other.
With that being said, because you mentioned northern Europe: As far as Germany is concerned, if you do a PhD in a public university (which are the best ones) you do get paid.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: There are vast differences between the different countries in Europe when it comes to this issue. You could compile a list of countries that you would be interested in doing your PhD, then look at the relevant universities there and what they offer for PhD students. For instance in the Scandinavian countries (Sweden, Norway, Denmark), you could find a paid PhD position where you are given about 3000 USD per month (before tax, more like 2000-something after tax).
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/11/19
| 938
| 3,870
|
<issue_start>username_0: Last week, my PhD advisor commented that I can postpone my thesis defense for couple of months if I was not ready to defend. However, I was adamant of completing my defense this year. As a result, my advisor has scheduled my defense for december and I have few weeks to prepare.
Now, on second thought, I was wondering that probably her suggesting the postponing of defense was a way to tell me that I am not going to pass the defense.
In that case, is it possible that the advisor thinks that I am unsuitable for PhD defense and she just wants to pass the onus of passing on the judgement about my qualifications/research output to the committee. Probably she doesn't want any confrontations with me but doesn't approve of my research work either.
Is it possible that she aggreed to defense scheduling to get rid of an underperforming student?
I am in Canada.<issue_comment>username_1: Based on what you say, I doubt that there are any issues other than getting yourself prepared. The comments here at this writing are all valid. It seems like she just deferred to your own judgement about scheduling but was giving you a way to extend prep time *if you thought you needed it*. I don't read anything negative in to that.
Likewise, I can't see any professor scheduling a defense just to "get rid" of a student, whether a superstar, a typical student, or an underperformer. In fact, in the latter case, most would rather give the student time to come up to whatever standard is expected.
Some professors, of course, when faced with a seriously underperforming student would be more likely to counsel them to leave academia and find a more suitable career before possibly facing a failed defense and then carrying that record for the rest of their lives. But there is no hint of any of that here.
Some professors press their students pretty hard to finish, but because they judge the student ready to move on.
But, you did ask, and you were adamant. You can live with that and get ready, or you can go back to her and say you misjudged and would, indeed, like a bit of extra time, if that is what you really want.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Keep in mind that failing a student during his/her defense is an immense embarrassment for the advisor, who surely wants to prevent exposing him/herself to such situation. I have heard of advisors forbidding their students to defend, they were lound and clear. The only situation close to a student defending a failing thesis I've ever hear about happened when his advisor had some very serious personal problems and did a very lame advising job. Even in that case, a member of the committee readily pointed out well in advance for the defense that the thesis had serious flaws, and thus the defense was postponed.
A few alternatives you might consider to explain the situation:
1. Perhaps, your advisor is very busy by the end of the year, and is eager to postpone stuff. Often people will accumulate tasks by December.
2. Maybe your thesis is okay, but you likely need to prepare slides for your defense, you need to rehearse your defense, and you need to rehash it a few times. If you are not that used to public speaking and slide preparation, your advisor should instruct you to do so. He/she should be more open about it, but it could come across a bit awkward to tell you that "your thesis is good, but your presentation is not ready yet".
3. Maybe, other than the actual thesis work, you are also responsible for doing lab work/preparing classes, grading exams and so on. If you defend in December rather than in March, maybe your advisor will have no one to perform these tasks for him. Very petty, and only his/her problem, but I'd find it very plausible that an advisor in this situation would try to stall the student's defense without giving clear reasons.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/19
| 565
| 2,511
|
<issue_start>username_0: I submitted a manuscript as a Research Paper last May 12 to Journal A. Now, 6 months later, I have received a decision letter recommending "... undertake a major revision, and re-submit a revised version of your paper as a Technical Note". Talking with co-authors we disagree and would like to submit the paper to a different journal (Journal B). What should I do? Should we submit the paper to Journal B if it is still "under revision" in Journal A? I have sent a letter to the Editor of Journal A, explaining that we'll not re-submit the paper as a technical note, but I have not yet received any reply.
Thanks for the advice!<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I have sent a letter to the Editor of Journal A, explaining that we'll not re-submit the paper as a technical note
>
>
>
I would consider this to be withdrawing your submission, assuming the explanation did not include any request to reconsider your paper in another form. You can now submit it someplace else, it's not necessary to wait for your withdrawal to be acknowledged or for the software to change your status from "under revision". There is no work the journal is currently doing on your paper, they are just waiting for you - it would be very different if it were out with reviewers.
However, if you haven't already revised your paper based on the comments you received I would highly recommend doing so before you submit someplace else. Even if you disagree with the reviewers' suggestions there must be something useful you can extract from them to clarify and improve your manuscript.
If you do submit it someplace else, and afterwards the original editor comes back and changes their mind and says you could resubmit as a Research Paper (I think this is incredibly unlikely, just including this to be thorough) you will have to politely tell them that you intended to withdraw the submission and have already resubmitted elsewhere.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: To make it clear to the editor, formally withdraw it from consideration. Then it is yours to do with as you please. They have no hold over you or the paper until you formally sign copyright away. What you have sent is likely enough, actually, but a formal notice of withdrawal leaves no ambiguity.
In most places I think that giving notice is enough and their reply isn't needed. But you need to keep records. Formal mail (sneaker net) with a receipt for delivery is sometimes used for such things. And keep the receipt.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/11/19
| 634
| 2,866
|
<issue_start>username_0: I will be doing some research for a company I am about to start working for. The company is small and provides animal assisted interventions in schools. They want and need ways to measure the children's progress. I have suggested a validated measure and agreed to help with research and analysis.
Am I able to write this up and submit for publication?
I have a masters in Psych and been through the publication process before (although unsuccessful).
Basically I am worried about conflict of interest (I suppose it is in my favour to show positive results) and ethics as I am no longer affiliated with a university.
But I know there's a shortage of research in this area and I want to add to it.
Any suggestions are very welcome!
Thank you in advance<issue_comment>username_1: Two important things to consider...
A) It's up to the company. If they approve, then you can possibly write it up. If they disapprove, you cannot.
B) Human subjects research must be conducted under proper ethical controls - some sort of institutional review board has to approve of your human subjects research ahead of time, or certify that your research does not need full review.
These research regulations do not apply to certain types of data that are not considered research. For example, if a teacher is assessing the efficacy of their own lessons, and they don't plan to disseminate the results, it is not considered "research". Similarly, market studies, customer satisfaction surveys, etc, are all not "research" from a regulatory perspective.
Therefore, it's possible that your study is completely okay if it's just used internally, but not okay to be published without taking steps like obtaining proper informed consent from the research subjects and getting prior approval for the study.
*(this is from a US perspective; rules might be different elsewhere, but there are likely to be similarities and it's something you would need to investigate)*
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: There are companies who will claim all your work while you are employed for themselves. Those companies have you sign an agreement to that effect. The "agreements" can be quite limiting and extensive. Non disclosure, no expiration, lots of possibilities. Some will let you publish under your own name provided that they approve in advance of what you will write.
Since you haven't started working for them, I suggest you work out an agreement to your mutual satisfaction. It may be in a small company you can get this done, especially if the research isn't involved in the main "product" of the company.
Don't make assumptions about what is possible. Work it out. It may even be an advantage for them to have you publish freely. But lawyers will possibly be concerned that you will publish something that refutes the value of what they do.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/11/19
| 443
| 1,806
|
<issue_start>username_0: I got caught cheating on my university GE exam, and I am afraid suspension, I know I was wrong, should I just email prof to said I sorry and you can give me 0 in this exam or other advance to me that can help me avoid suspension?
Note: this is my first time, but I still afraid suspension, and my school is california state university.<issue_comment>username_1: First things first, what is GE? General Education (whatever that may be)? Second, do realize that this is more than just "wrong"; it is downright unethical. Copying in the workplace can get you into serious trouble and result in possible loss of your future work experiences/reputation. Also, don't tell the professor what to do. Don't even suggest the zero, let them handle it how they will. It was your fault, now it is up to them to make the decision.
On the lesser side of things, depending on the severity of cheating, you will definitely not be suspended. You may take an instant F in the class and have to re-take, but this is all should be outlined in their syllabus.
And finally, remove both your name and school from this posting. If a future employer sees this, they will not hire you, guaranteed.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Every university has a set of rules, which defer from one to another. In Germany, where I finished my Bachelor and Master (without cheating ;)), it's the so called PO (Prüfungsordnung, in English known as exam regulations. In there you can find a clear description of the penalty that awaits you including if you have been caught multiple times, which you say you haven't been.
In the future avoid this sort of thing because it is unethical and is unfair to all your colleagues not to mention it puts you in a position where you can screw up your future.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/19
| 2,319
| 9,671
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student at a UK university. A small part of my time is taken up by (voluntarily) organizing a monthly seminar series. The seminar is open to all PhD students in my school, and is regularly attended by 30 or so students. I took over this duty in January 2018, before which time there were other student organizers.
Whilst I am an organizer (along with two others) of this seminar, all decisions that we take are checked with a particular senior member of staff - who I will refer to as Prof X. It could be said that Prof X is our organizational "supervisor". They check our posters advertising each seminar, our emails, etc. Very little happens without Prof X's knowledge, if not expressed permission.
As part of the seminar, due to the time of day and its duration, we order a certain amount of pizza to have in a break between talks. The money for this comes out of a particular part of the school's budget. We have always done this, as did the previous organizers. We have never discussed our budget for this pizza, or how much we "can" order. We have always presumed we are within budget, and had no reason to think otherwise. We consider that the amount that we order is entirely reasonable for the number of participants.
I received a surprising email today from my head of school - who I will refer to as Prof Y. This email requested a meeting with all three of us organizers, and explicitly stated that this meeting is due to the fact that our seminar is effectively running over budget, **and moreover that this was not approved with them, the budget holder.**
This email alarmed me for a few reasons:
1. Prof Y has, in the past, regularly corresponded with Prof X about matters regarding the seminar, which have then been relayed to us organizers. It is very out of the ordinary for Prof Y to email us directly. Prof Y has in fact never contacted us at all before this email.
2. Prof X was not CC'd in or BCC'd in to this email. Upon my contacting Prof X about the email, they expressed a great deal of surprise and some concern about the fact that Prof Y contacted us in this way. Prof X did then advise that I should attend the requested meeting.
3. Whilst we organizers are the ones who request the pizza order, we have no (and have never had any) knowledge of or control over our specific budget. I think it is reasonable to assume that Prof Y knows this, and it is therefore unclear to me what the nature of the discussion at this meeting could be.
4. Prof Y is head of department. Perhaps they have disciplinary action in mind, or something of the sort. I have no knowledge of procedures or regulations in this regard, and whether we organizers are liable to face any disciplinary action or on what level.
A further complication is that, outside of the organization of this seminar, Prof X is in fact my own PhD project supervisor - I consider them an excellent supervisor and am on very good terms. I am concerned that developments in this situation could effect this.
My questions are:
* Could I be accused of misconduct?
* Should I be alarmed about the email from Prof Y? Is it likely/possible that disciplinary action is on the agenda?
* During this meeting, how careful should I be? Could I be in danger of serious repercussions here?<issue_comment>username_1: I think you should be worried that you and your colleagues might have to go without pizza the rest of the semester if you've already (unknowingly) burned through the budget, and not much else.
You could also worry that in the future you'll have to go through a more formal approval process, which will probably loosen once whoever is involved in the approval gets tired of approving it every week and eventually delegates responsibility again.
To me it sounds like everything you've done is completely reasonable. It's somewhat normal for these sorts of things to fall through the cracks.
If there are any serious consequences that come about from this, then there is some deeper dysfunction in your department that is completely unrelated to anything you've done. There are plenty of things for a PhD student to be anxious about, I'd suggest trying your best to not make this one of them. Just show up to the meeting on time and be apologetic if necessary, and also be understanding.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: As a PhD student, you have no official access to departmental funds. If someone has given you a departmental credit card, they shouldn't have, and they are officially to blame and will probably be in trouble (irrespective of the actual facts on the ground).
Otherwise, **someone**, somewhere, is signing off on a form that authorizes the spend. Again, not officially your problem. Thus I'm pretty sure it is not possible for any formal disciplinary proceedings to be brought against you. In the very unlikely situation that you are threatened I would go straight to your student's union and/or the UCU, if you are a member (graduate students can join UCU for free) and request support.
But as I said, I think formal disciplinary action is very unlikely. If anyone is going to be in trouble, it's Prof X. But a more likely explanation is that your Prof Y is done this without thinking about it and the effect it might have on you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: A student-run seminar series that regularly attracts 30 students is something every school should be proud of. I can't imagine that there will be any discussion of official sanctions. I'm sort of amazed that the head of a UK school would personally involve themselves in anything like this.
I'd encourage you to go into this meeting with a completely open mind, but no fear. You might even watch for opportunities to request a larger budget if you need it, but certainly be ready to say "I'm sorry I misunderstood the spending rules".
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: There is a UK context to this situation which others may not have picked up on, and also some researchers within UK universities may not have been exposed to the current situation within their own institution.
Putting it bluntly many UK universities are under extreme financial pressures currently, due to various factors which (depending on institution) stem from changing demographics, changing fashions in subjects of study, political and governmental activity which has deterred large numbers of overseas students, league table statistics and the resultant intense competition between institutions for the shrinking pool of applicants. At the same time there has been previous and will be future industrial action by academic staff over pay, pensions and conditions which adds further to the pressure.
In several places voluntary downsizing programmes are in place and there is in the media talk of compulsory academic redundancies. As a result budgets are under microscopic scrutiny by the accountants and much activity which previous was considered "the norm" and funded for many decades past is now being questioned. Things like "postgraduate pizzas" are exactly the type of things that the accountants would find in their forensic reading of the books.
You will have done nothing wrong, and it is unlikely that your head of school is cross with you. It will be that they will have to gently explain the new environment and sadly ask you to consider running the seminar series in the new era of austerity.
---
Background Reading:
[1] [The Guardian: Nearly 25% of English universities in deficit last year, figures show](https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/mar/21/england-universities-in-deficit-figures-financial-pressure)
[2] [BBC: Number of English universities in financial deficit increases](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-48045265)
[3] [BBC: Universities at risk if they admit to cash crisis](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-47472181)
[4] [Daily Mail: Several UK universities are in such financial difficulties that they are close to bankruptcy, former government adviser warns](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6780223/Several-UK-universities-financial-difficulties-close-bankruptcy.html)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Not just in academia, but in workplace generally, when a middle manager is not called to a meeting with his people, it spells trouble for the middle manager. Prof. Y is probably trying to understand where this budget overrun is caused and probably does not trust Prof X. Or it could simply be a case where Prof. X skipped some necessary step in securing your pizza funds. After all most profs are busy with more pressing matters.
This inquiry could be about how things work in the base level too, understanding the costs and what could be done to minimize it. This could happen in a situation where Prof. X is not very open about how things work under his domain.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: The meeting will answer your question.
This is a complex situation, and nobody really has the big picture. That is the case for you, and just the same for Prof Y.
Both of you had no problem with that situation.
Until something happened that caught the attention of Prof Y. It may be something trivial, like seeing some budget numbers that were not clear to him.
Now, the email is what caught your attention. And you found you have not the full view of the budget yourself.
The situation is at least similar to this. There may be more factors like intentions, assumptions of intentions of others, irritating aspects and a lot more.
All the aspects you describe make the situation so complex that it is hard, if not impossible to predict what the whole thing is about.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/11/20
| 852
| 3,405
|
<issue_start>username_0: Many professors, specifically in China, wants students to provide at least a template (half-written letter). In US, is it similar? I've read an article from Harvard Business Review website saying that it is better to enclose a template. <https://hbr.org/2010/04/how-to-ask-for-a-reference-let-1-2> I think HBR is a credible source for US professional practice?
However, I am afraid that this practice would seem really creepy to some most honest professor. For example, I once informally ask a professor if he wants a template. He decisively refuses.
After that experience, I never mentioned about a template in US. However, later, some professors (in US) asked me in a vague way that they want a template. So I am kind of confused. What is the default way?
Here are my options:
1. Include the well-written template letter along with my materials (he might be insulted)
2. Mentioning that I am going to include a "narrative list of accomplishment in third person tense", along with my PS and CV. I would also mention that this is just to save his time and minimize his trouble; it is not to force him to write me in this way. If he does not refuse, then I send him all documents. If he explicitly says that he does not want the "narrative essay in third person tense", I would just have him writing the letter or switch that guy.
3. Ask the professor directly if he wants a template letter written (he might be insulted but he might just think that I am ignorant)<issue_comment>username_1: Asking for a template letter is bad practice, albeit probably not uncommon in some countries.
Generally speaking, I'd avoid volunteering any template, and if the professor asks for one, think carefully whether you really want a letter from them.
When you ask for the recommendation letter, just include your CV, possibly a transcript of your exams, and then ask the professor if they need further information. This may be similar to your point 2, but avoids suggesting a narrative.
You don't specify your field, but I think the above is sufficiently broadly expected in STEM fields (in my experience, even those who ask for a template, frequently recognize that it's bad practice). Therefore, I definitely disagree with the author of the linked HBR article.
Points of view similar to mine, if not even stronger, can be found elsewhere on this site. See for example:
[This very detailed answer from <NAME>](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/29228/20058)
[This comment from JeffE](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/86856/asked-to-draft-own-recommendation-letter-for-faculty-application#comment219326_86856)
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Writing a template letter looks ethically questionable to me but it is perfectly reasonable to give the professor some guidance as to what you want written in the recommendation letter. The ideal way is to have a 1-on-1 talk but if that is not feasible you can also provide some written notes.
Giving the professor the base information like your CV and transcripts is good start, but a good letter should contain more than can be seen from your grades. So something like your list of accomplishments would be useful. I would put this extra informaton in bullet points or some similar format so that the professor can't just copy and paste and has to actually write a letter for you.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/11/20
| 533
| 2,231
|
<issue_start>username_0: When I was in elementary school, I was in a single classroom the entire day. I would have different teachers come in and give classes, but we as students wouldn't change our classroom. When I was in high school, we were in two classrooms, first half and second half of the day.
There seems to be a term for every single possible classroom arrangement, but I haven't found one for this. I've seen it once called "Homeroom," but the Internet seems to disagree (<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeroom> amongst other places). Any suggestions?
Additional context: The company I'm working for is building a school software so terminology is critical when initially setting up courses/classrooms etc. We've spent a ton of time researching terminology, but this one has us completely stuck.<issue_comment>username_1: I'm not sure I've ever had a situation where *all* of the classes where taught in the same room. Disregarding the obvious such as gym classes, in elementary school we did have a solitary classroom for most of the subjects though.
I am however not familiar with a specific term that exist to describe this though, perhaps you can simply refer to it as having a "designated classroom" that is specific to the class as opposed to having subject specific classrooms? This is a fascinating question, will need to explore this one further.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Something close may be a “floating teacher model”.
A room is predominantly occupied by one instructor then another comes in during the primary instructor’s prep period to teach his or her lesson. There’s no reason one room would be restricted to only two teachers in this practice. “Cart” teachers or “mobile” teachers are also commonly used terms for these roles. While there *is* research on this practice, I haven’t come across any where *all* teachers are subject to moving between rooms. That’s not to say a universal term for the structure does not exist.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: This is (or was) the norm in Germany, that students stay put and the teacher moves from class to class. It is called a "floating teacher" arrangement. <https://woman.thenest.com/floating-teacher-10350.html>
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/20
| 1,447
| 6,319
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently a researcher (a postdoc) in a research group at a scientific institute. I obtained my Ph.D. degree 2 years ago and right away I got employed at this institute and started as a postdoc. I dare to say that I did a nice job during my Ph.D. and also I am working quite well here and my supervisor is happy with my outcomes.
Yesterday, after a discussion with my supervisor regarding some results he told me that now it is time for me to gradually start my own research (along with doing my job here) in order to strengthen my academic career so that I can have my own research group in the future. I am a bit stressed now because the main path of my research has been always chosen by my supervisors and also I always had their support. On the other hand, this has always been my dream to have my own research and become a pioneer in a scientific matter.
I have some interesting scientific topics in mind that I can follow but I am afraid that I cannot do a nice job alone. I think what I need is just a strong startup then I will get into my stride. Could somebody give me some good advice?<issue_comment>username_1: This is a great question, even though it connects to the very general question of how you get established as an independent researcher.
It is never too early to have your own research interests and take your own ideas seriously. It is not really different from having hobbies, only that here you take the hobby idea seriously.
Ideally in your post-doc you are behaving as though you have a lab of your own within someone else's lab. Maybe that is a good place to start, taking small projects from start to end. It is probably better to begin with something small that you can finish before you complete the post-doc. This can also give you the confidence to work on more projects.
Another way to think about projects is to consider funding sources. A bit of weird way to go about it, but I find that it can give you some concrete goal to aim towards. This depends on the field, but it can help to write a proposal about your idea in the form of a grant, and then decide if you'd like to submit it or not. The important part (for yourself) is seeing that you understand the investment and skills required by the project.
I don't think there's ever a situation where you will receive no feedback from anyone. The supervisor provides a buffer between funding bodies and journals and their students (depending on the supervisor...), so it's not a huge leap to try to do without this mediation. You still have the critical feedback of reviewers and colleagues, and eventually, students.
As a final point, you can consider collaborations with other, more experienced researchers where you contribute equally and are on the same level as the researcher you collaborate with. This way you can learn from more experienced researchers while being essentially independent. This can make the transition much smoother.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This is a really good question and something that a lot of researchers struggle with. I've [written an article](https://www.avidnote.com/how-to-start-a-new-research-project/?utm_medium=forum&utm_source=stack&utm_campaign=post) about this my self. There are many different ways to discover a new research topic. The first thing you need to ask yourself is, what interest YOU as opposed to what is currently trendy or where all the funding is going. Being aware of funding is of course important, but it should be CONTRIBUTORY factor and not a DETERMINING factor. After all, you are going to work with your new research project for many months or years, exploring something that is interesting *to you* makes it so much easier in the long haul.
**To answer your question concisely, I would say:**
1) Look through conference proceedings on topics that you've researched in the past, look at the titles. Do you see anything that interest you? Set aside one hour, make a batch of tea, and skim through these articles to find something that sparks your interest.
2) When reading through this material, always ask yourself, *hmmm is there something that I could contribute here?* If not, maybe it's better to keep searching until you can answer that question affirmatively.
3) Finally, remember to take walks to free up your mind. It is often during these times of recreation that we come up with out most creative ideas. Maybe even schedule a bus/train trip in the upcoming weekend to a neighboring city that you've never visited. Just sitting in the bus/train, meandering and gazing out the window will definitely keep you busy with all sorts of creative ideas.
Keep at it and best of luck with finding your new research project! :)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: **Specialize, focus and diversify your research agenda solely on 2-3 open questions/problems the next years**. There is not really another path. Especially in fundamental sciences it's hard to plan an academic career, so you have to take risks, therefore diversify them. And this is also encouraged by the academic system to achieve results beyond the state of the art and knowledge. With many publications you might get a staff position, but to get tenure as a professor you need to become one of the few experts in your field for a distinct method or sub-topic. But don't understand this as a 2nd PhD, it's now your duty to acquire funding, PhD students and build a scientific network around you. You need to acquire people now that work with or for you. You showed with your PhD that you can work alone on a scientific question, for tenure you need show that you can set up aresearch agenda for younger scientists and bigger projects with several partners and that you are able to manage successfully and financially projects aparat from teaching duties. **You also have to show autonomy**, staying with your supervisor your whole post-doc time is disadvantegous.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Pick your favorite topic in your chosen field. Explore the underlying assumptions. Push these assumptions along different dimensions to see if and how they breakdown. Do a little investigation on the work done by others working on these extremities, and see if you find something that interests and inspires you, to do more.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/11/20
| 510
| 1,823
|
<issue_start>username_0: It has become increasedly more common that when I try to access an article from the publisher's website I get redirected to a sort of online reader instead of a plain old pdf file to download. Elsevier calls it [enhanced reader](https://www.elsevier.com/librarians/article-news/evaluating-research-has-just-gotten-easier-with-the-new-sciencedirect-pdf-reader), Wiley [enhanced pdf](https://hub.wiley.com/docs/onlinelibrary/benefits-and-functionalities-of-readcube-enhanced-pdf-DOC-12142), and Springer luckily has not caught on yet.
I don't like this approach and prefer to download the 'un-enhanced' pdf file to read or save it locally (but I will spare you the soapboxing).
**Is there a way to circumvent this system and automatically rewrite links to point to the true pdf file instead?** I am thinking to something like a browser extension or a Greasemonkey script, if it exists. If it worked on the websites of the major publishers it would already be a time saver on the long run.<issue_comment>username_1: The userscript [Publication Auto PDF](https://greasyfork.org/en/scripts/38628-publication-auto-pdf) seems to do the job.
It does not rewrite the pdf link, but downloads the pdf directly when one visits the abstract page, so it saves even one more click.
It works under a browser extension that runs userscripts (Greasemonkey / Tampermonkey / Violentmonkey / Firemonkey).
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As a lighter-weight alternative to the "[Publication Auto PDF](https://greasyfork.org/en/scripts/38628-publication-auto-pdf)" script linked by username_1, I've written a couple of very [simplistic userscripts](https://gist.github.com/username_2/beaed274ec473fbe0f929d1ea88e4158) that rewrite the links at ScienceDirect and Wiley Interscience.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/20
| 977
| 4,185
|
<issue_start>username_0: How can I make sure that my research paper gets published in the first attempt. Getting a paper accepted as it is compulsory for my master’s degree and the deadline is in a month.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> How can I make sure that my research paper gets published in the first attempt
>
>
>
Write a good paper. That’s it really.
That is, unless you’re ok with compromising on venue. Most disciplines have low rank journals/conferences that will accept papers based on very low standards (in some cases, just paying a fee). That’s generally a bad thing for science and your work in particular, but it may be your only real option if you have to graduate.
I personally think that requiring publications in order to graduate leads to perverse incentives such as these and should not be done.
If this is not an option, you can submit your work to workshops. There you can present it to a smaller crowd who’ll be more forgiving and if that counts you’re all good.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: While I like the [answer of username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/140337/75368), it isn't quite complete. The more accurate answer is that you cannot guarantee anything about publication. The rules and practices and decisions are up to others, not to you. Certainly writing a good paper increases the chances, but most *reputable* editors will still ask for a review report (or three). The reviewers will accept or not. If they accept then they will take time.
Etc. Etc. Etc.
There are no guarantees. The most you can do, in reality, is to submit a good paper and hope for the best. Then take the fact of submission to whoever it is that has control over your graduation and see what can be done.
Only a predatory journal will "publish" it in one try and that is because it wants money from you for doing so. But that isn't likely to help you, especially if you want to build a career.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: **Here's what I would do:**
Create a spreadsheet that contains a list of all of the journals that you are interested in publishing in (include only the kinds of journals that are acceptable in your area/department - if you're unsure, look at the journals that other students have published in), then create a new column for acceptance rate, and another column for average time for acceptance. I assume what you need is for it to be accepted for publication (and not necessarily having been published), correct?
You can then search for data on all the individual journals that you listed; what is the average acceptance rate and what is the shortest average time to get a response. You then publish in the journal that has the highest acceptance rate and the shortest average time for decision on acceptance. If that data is not available on the journal's website, you can always ask the editor and usually you can get a response.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: First, unfortunately there is no general express service for students. While many would certainly be okay with this under severe circumstances, it would probably be easy to abuse the system.
I would advise you to first talk to other students. Hopefully you are well-connected -- there could be somebody who can waive this requirement (provided you did X). This could be written in the official paper or not.
Next, I would advise you to talk to your advisor about this. Maybe in your certain field there is a journal for publications of students? Or your university has an own journal which could treat your publication more urgently? In my field, publications take really a long time -- if there was such a rule about publications, it is likely that this problem have happened before to some other student. Then, your advisor should know what (or if) one could do.
If all fails, you should try to find statistics about the acceptance time of possible journals and choose your journal accordingly.
Or you maybe could send the paper to a journal, find a "real" job while they are reviewing, and when they accept it, you do the final exam (if there is one). If this is possible or not, depends on the university.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/11/20
| 3,005
| 11,675
|
<issue_start>username_0: Why do some journals change the final software and do not provide a template for the final draft(e.g. contains the same font as in the gallery proof)?
I often hear that some of my colleagues get unacceptable proofs (often even from Elsevier journals).
I am checking an Elsevier paper (<https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0141029619305024>) which was in the state of Galley proof (after acceptance)
* letters in math equations look different: (converted all math equations to vectorgraphics)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/51HOJ.png)
* letters have inconsistent size even in the continuous text
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/kIYlk.png)
* made a screenshot of the rendering of jpeg-graphics if the jpeg-image contained two images (a) and (b)
* where they converted all simple \*.eps-graphics (nothing complex) to \*.jpeg with 110dpi (text is almost unreadable) also declare a min of 500dpi in the author guidelines
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/thLYe.png)
* changed the font from the font declared in the template("Times") to "[Charis SIL](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charis_SIL)", now the continuous text is in Charis SIL, but the equations, the variables in the text and the figures are in Times
The font color is generally dark gray, but in math equations it is black
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/u6zl2.png)
* the variables in micro-environment are not aligned with the surrounding text (sometimes smaller letters are even higher then capital letters)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/sd7DC.png)
* several **manual** line-breaks are awful (some lines contain more space than letters) also a short word is following
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/wQ99f.png)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZTZ8M.png)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/1mEMz.png)
* some lines start with "," or "."
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/3vsg5.png)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/MtEgK.png)
* converted a table (conatining text and two eps-graphics) to jpeg with obvious [compression artifacts](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compression_artifact)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/39Uk5.png)
* added space between "mm" and "²"
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/DPBav.png)
* removed spaces
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/o3Ef7.png)
* some citations are outside the page border
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/BCHH1.png)
According to the pdf metadata, it was created with [Prince 10 rev 7](https://www.princexml.com), which only supports SVG as a vector format.
Why don't they convert all eps/pdf-files with inkscape to svg (can be done fully automatic as a batch-process e.g. `pdftocairo.exe -svg "Input.pdf" "Output.svg"`)?
In my field, if I use a space instead of a small space, it is unacceptable or at least unprofessional. (As a reader, such mistakes are evident and disruptive.) And it is so super-important to add it as vector, but then the proofs ruin everything! Why do they have guidelines for authors if the journal *introduces* illegal (according to the guidelines) mistakes on their own?
Why do some journals change the final software and do not provide a template for the final draft?<issue_comment>username_1: **Because they are incompetent**.
That's about it, really. But don't lump all publishers/journals as one - the typesetters for one journal might not be the same as that for another journal, even one published by the same publisher, and of course there are good and bad employees everywhere.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Publishers will adhere to their own style sheet. Just because you supply a photo-ready version of your document, there should be no expectation that it will be published as is. There should be absolutely no expectation that your font choice is followed, as fonts are a matter of journal style. Further, the journal fonts might not even be open source or free, and journals would not be entitled to distribute them. Same with math layout. Same with choice of emphasis. So, a typeset error might not be an error at all -- it might be a copy editor's correction to make the manuscript match the journal's style sheet.
Real errors do happen, though. Anybody can make a mistake, or have a bad day (there are EASILY a half dozen errors in the question here!). Automatic conversion algorithms can mess up. A typesetter might not be working in their first language.
Publishers are famous for errors in tables, as tables often involve hand entry.
As for the things mysteriously captured as images, I can't imagine why. The instructions for elsarticle say
>
> Keep it simple. (Advanced constructions with for example TikZ or
> pstricks will be rendered as images.
>
>
>
Since you specify in comment that your Latex table had eps images in it, it makes some sense that your table was rendered as an image. While the layout staff probably should have done better on this, and given you a high-resolution rendering, it really is out of their normal workflow, and violates the "keep it simple" directions in the instructions to authors. I suggest that you could have submitted your own rendered artwork for the table, following guidelines for figure submissions (which is likely how you will resolve the issue with the typesetters), but also point out that your resulting published table style might not perfectly match the journal's style sheet.
This is why you get galleys prior to publication. Take the opportunity to correct the galleys very seriously, and certainly address all author queries.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: One issue that I have run into is the outsourced typesetting staff ignoring the provided images and using Acrobat to clip the image out of the author PDF, which rasterizes it at what seems to be the screen resolution.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: It's all about how the education system treats this topic. Most people are happy with a fast-written Word document as long as what they want to discuss in the paper is there. They neglect the fact that proper presentation is essential.
Sadly proper typesetting isn't something that is actively thought at universities, which is a rather interesting situation given that universities in general aim to promote science and everything that comes with it including paper publication. So if you don't get into it on your own the chances are you will end up with a Masters or PhD degree without ever having done a proper paper in terms of typesetting.
I remember at my university that there was a workshop for typesetting using LaTeX specifically for writing proper publications, seminar papers etc. It became mandatory years later (kudos to the teachers for noticing the poor level of typesetting in assignments the students were turning in) but before that most people didn't even know it existed hence a gap in typesetting skills was present
I know plenty of people, who think decent typesetting is rocket-science. It's not. But the fact is that this air of mystery that surrounds it makes many people quiver. Quite often this results in using Word or similar word processing tools, which are easier to use for simple things but fall flat once you start getting into proper typesetting. Most teachers at the university will not have a problem with you using Word and some even require it (mind-boggling, right?).
I started learning about typesetting, LaTeX etc. quite early on during my studies even though no one required it from me. I just had it with papers with poor typesetting. Sometimes it's so bad that your whole concentration goes into analyzing the typesetting issues instead of the actual topic in the paper, which is sad since the author(s) has(have) put work into doing the research.
In addition we have to consider outsourcing. Due to lack of experience, time etc. many people outsource the writing (in terms of typesetting) to others, who may or may not have the expertise to do it.
Finally proof-reading is something that is often neglected. People concentrate on what's discussed in the paper but forget that the presentation is also very important. Just like when buying a car - will you go for the slick looking one or will you pick one, that looks as if it just got dragged out of a scrapyard because it was too much of a junk for it. If my professor saw the examples you have given, he would have told me to buzz off and redo it all.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> Here is another complaint. The typesetters are simply not doing their
> job.
>
>
>
This was the email that the editor of the journal, where our paper was accepted, sent to the chief of the Elsevier production team (and put us in cc) as a result of our complaint regarding the mess that the typesetters induced on our manuscript.
Here is the story. After receiving the first proof, we rejected the correction of the manuscript because there were many systematic errors, e.g. the bold symbols were not bold, some of the mathematical symbols were wrong,.... After sending it back to the production team and putting the editor of the journal in cc, we received the above email by the editor of the journal. After spending another 2 months, we finally got another manuscript but just insignificantly improved. So we quit and spent many hours to correct all the mistakes and inconsistencies.
You can follow the same procedure but don't expect too much.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: I have read your question several times to understand what you are complaining about. Many answers are discussing poor quality of published material.
>
> I have an Elsevier paper (will add link here when published) for proofreading
>
>
>
This note may shine a slightly different light on the issue. Maybe the scenario was:
* Editor has recieved `.docx` manuscript with MSWord's equations used and graphics embedded.
* Editor turned the manuscript to the most-common file format or his most-loved file format using the fastest (and simplest) tool they have.
* You, as a proofreader or reviewer, are to assess the article quality - the quality of motivation, methods, arguments and conclusions.
* When editor decides the paper is ready for publishing, the typesetter shall get the materials for typesetting and actual publishing.
I think you are at the third bullet point now and it would be a waste of effort to typeset the manuscript that is about to be changed several times before actual publishing.
Upvotes: -1
|
2019/11/20
| 369
| 1,557
|
<issue_start>username_0: I know it sounds stupid but I have applied for a Postdoctoral Research Assistant at a university in London and I have received an invitation for a Skype interview. However, I am a fresh MSc graduate having finished my masters two months ago. One of the job requirements says "PhD and/or equivalent professional experience" as essential skill, yet they invited me for a Skype interview.
Now I am wondering if this was a mistake or am I just shortlisted??
Any help would be appreciated. Thanks in advance<issue_comment>username_1: PostDoc stands for post doctorate so typically that means you've already obtained a PhD. Then again, it's not fixed in stone if the applicant is deemed to be of such a high caliber that they would consider that person to be eligible for that position. But this is very *rare*.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Unfortunately I expect this is a mistake on the university's part. Many people apply for postdocs in the final year of their PhD, so perhaps they misinterpreted your CV and thought you were in that category.
There is likely to be a requirement in the formal job description that candidates must have, or be near to completing a PhD, so even if you were to attend and do well at the interview, I highly doubt they would be able to make you a job offer anyway.
My advice is to send them an email thanking them for the invitation to interview but clearly state that you do not have a PhD nor are you a current PhD student. It is likely they will rescind the interview offer.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/11/20
| 1,343
| 5,725
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am not a psychologist. But I studied studies about psychology. The ones I read have in common that their results are never contradicting legislation. If a scientist realized that some criminal activity contributed significantly to the well-being of those executing those actions and was able to combat long-lasting trauma of the ones executing, would he be able to publish his findings? Would he refrain from publishing them due to the results being unpopular and therefore risking his reputation?
The study could simply be conducted by interviewing criminals in jail.
The reason for this question is to enable me to understand better whether studies are biased and the results do not show the real picture but a distorted, watered down view to please legislation and to preserve reputation instead of finding and describing truth.<issue_comment>username_1: Let me distinguish between a scientist and a "scientist". The former is honest and follows truth. The latter is a propagandist, usually in service to some cause other than truth. For example, the tobacco companies and the petroleum companies employ a lot of "scientists", though they may also employ scientists. But they have an obvious agenda, and it has little to do with truth. So, in such cases, the work of the "scientists" is promoted and that of the scientists is suppressed (non disclosure agreements, and such).
But in general, in most places, science isn't under control of political or economic powers with a non-truth agenda. So yes, contrary studies will get published, provided that they can be conducted.
But a complicating factor is that governments and economic powers *do* control a lot of the funding around research and some of the rules that govern it. This can be a problem. It means that a lot of science just won't get done in the first place.
For example, in the US, the NRA and others have made it impossible for the government to fund most studies on gun related violence. They also, for many years, made it impossible for law enforcement agencies to treat domestic terrorism in the same way it treats other forms. The first case is about funding. The second about regulations.
Therefore, a lot of research just doesn't happen. People decided, generally, to give up research on gun violence since funding was unavailable and there seemed to be little future in building a career on that topic.
However, if the research does get done, somehow, I have no doubt that it can be published. Most places, anyway.
A different situation would occur in countries with authoritarian governments. In such places, certain research can be dangerous. People have died mysteriously.
---
But if you need to decide whether something is valid or not, you can, in addition to making your own judgements, look at the source of the information. If the person has a "post truth" agenda you would be well advised to be cautious.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It is important to identify what you call a crime. To avoid arguing about relativity of crimes with respect to the law (valid laws can be unethical and immoral according to ethics and intuitive morals; but even the latter can change quite quickly and abruptly), I will limit myself to distinguish victimless crimes and crimes harming 3rd parties.
There are victimless crimes, in which case, probably the fallout, if the study is solid and scientifically well-founded, is limited and containable in modern western societies.
However, if you talk about crimes harming third parties, you can be behind creating a situation where people will use the "Alex" paper in Nature/Science as defense for the crimes against third parties that they are perpetrating. You may then be removing a taboo from crimes which otherwise would be strongly societally sanctioned. This can have unforeseen and uncontainable consequences.
Related examples (not in the context of crime) is the emergence of "flat-earth" "research" (harmless) or the now debunked "vaccination causes autism" work which might have been a contributing factor to the current "vaccination scepticism" and may actually thus have quite number of lives on its conscience.
In the latter case, however, *if* the study had been correct, it would have at least contributed to perhaps abandoning a harmful practice.
In your case, even assuming that your study would be scientifically sound, you would (under the victimful crime assumption) contribute to remove a taboo that hitherto protected potential victims. You would therefore be trading off the well-being of the perpetrators against that of the victims. This is not your decision to make. There is a good reason that such power is only given to legislation. The very least you should do in this case is to have an in-depth discussion with the ethical board at your institution.
One interesting variation can be found in the hacking community: there, there is a view that forcing bug fixes through "responsible disclosure" (i.e. offering a reasonable time window of secrecy during which they are fixed) is acceptable. There are different opinions on that, as that community basically has decided on its own that it becomes the arbiter of how/when pressure is applied to achieve the goal of more safety. At least, on the whole, the intention is ultimately constructive, even if individual would-be-victims may not have the resources to actually solve the problem - or the would-be-victim is not even the one whose actions had created the problem in the first place or can do much about it. Here, we are clearly moving in a grey area.
Since we do not know what crimes you have in mind, I can not come up with more a specific response.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/11/20
| 1,219
| 5,401
|
<issue_start>username_0: There are many questions on this site that deal with *what* can be negotiated once one has received an academic job offer. However, I cannot find anything addressing the mechanics of when and how to conduct the negotiations.
The typical timeline from the university side is:
* Advertise a job
* Interview candidates
* Informal offer by phone/email
* Formal offer in writing
* Acceptance
At what point in this process does one typically start negotiating? Do you do it at the informal offer stage ("Gee, I'm flattered that you like me but there's no way I'll be coming at that salary...") or do you wait for the formal offer in writing? Do you submit a laundry list of all conceivable requests and see which ones they accept? Or do you simply tell them that you don't regard their current offer as sufficient, and see what they can do? I'm particularly interested in hearing first-hand accounts, from either side of the table.<issue_comment>username_1: To answer your question, according to [some](https://case.edu/postgrad/career-developmenttips-job-seekers/negotiating-salary), the best time to negotiate is ***after*** an offer has been given by the potential employer. For one thing, they have already ruled out other candidates and they have now essentially decided on giving the position to you. The hiring process is arduous from their perspective as well and the last thing they want to do is to decline someone they have already decided upon because that person negotiated their salary with a reasonable increase.
You would need to know as much as possible about the expected salary before you could negotiate. The key to negotiation is always having sufficient knowledge. If you know that the offer that they gave you is not on par with other similar positions at that university/field, then you have something to point to. You can find salary information from sites like Glassdoor but more importantly, sometimes these are published by the universities themselves. For a lot of public universities, you can easily get his information by simply contacting the central finance department to get averages. In some cases, the universities themselves publish this information on their websites. **A good tip to find salary figures is to search Google for:**
site:theuniversity'swebsite "salary" "write the position here"
This will give you hits for all of the pages that mention a salary figure along with the position that you are interested in. Here is an example of that using Heriot Watt
site:hw.ac.uk "salary" "professor"
That query gives a couple of results with actual salary figures.
You also need to state why you should be given a higher salary. Chances are that they have already budgeted to be able to increase the salary for negotiation purposes. You still need to provide a good argument for why you deserve a higher salary. Does your publication level/quality warrant a higher salary? Do you have documents showing that you've received accolades for your research or teaching? Will your involvement increase the profile of the department due to your research networks? etc
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I found it typical that you would be asked for your requirements. If you ask for a lot, then you will need to negotiate. But if you ask for a lot, be prepared to say why. It isn't enough to just say "I want...". But if you have needs for initial research support or travel or whatever, then say that at the informal discussion phase.
If your "needs" aren't ridiculous, then you probably won't just be dropped, but they may not be able to meet all of them. But they may have alternatives. I once asked for a very high salary and explained that I had an international circle of collaborators and needed to travel beyond normal limits. They came back with an offer of a lower salary and the promise to cover the travel (and they did). There are a lot of ways to cook fish.
There are some places, however, that have fairly rigid scales for new junior faculty, and no real way to get around that. If there is a range and you request numbers at the higher end of it, make sure that your background and potential support that.
Even after you get an initial offer it is unlikely to be considered by the institution as the final offer. There is still room in most cases, but you need reasons to push it up, not just desires.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: If you've reached the on campus interview stage there should be some informal discussion of the job offer parameters then: salary range, teaching load, startup funding, ...
You and the institution will each find out then if you are on the same page.
If the interview leads to an offer you may be able to negotiate adjustments. By that time there should be nothing nonnegotiable. Of course you are still free to accept better offers from elsewhere. You might be able to sweeten the pot a little by saying that you have such an other offer but would rather take this one if ...
This is based on my experience hiring in mathematics (it never came up in my job searches). We have had candidates we could not hire because we could not come close to meeting their needs, but we usually found that out before making a formal offer in writing. We never had to deal with a laundry list at the last minute, and would have been put off by a candidate who sprung one on us.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/11/21
| 573
| 2,387
|
<issue_start>username_0: **As a Professor, how do *you* identify new papers to expose yourself to new ideas?**
Most of what I read now is derivative of old favorites or my own work. Journals in my area don't do a good job of grouping my somewhat interdisciplinary interests. I have found more new interesting work through popular sources like newspapers, Pocket, and magazines reporting on journal papers than any other source in the last year.
I want *new* favorite papers, unconnected to my present pet ideas. This is hard for me, and for several of my peers, when I asked. **How do *you* do it?**
I'm interested in useful strategies (a unconventional search ritual?), services (Pocket for journal articles?), or products (tinder for papers?). I'm interested in things outside of what a google search about this will provide. Yes, I have heard of researchgate and google scholar.<issue_comment>username_1: CS/AI perspective
I get to them by
a. reviewing (you get stuff outside your field every once in a while)
b. Collaboration with colleagues outside my field (can be really fun but can take a while as you get used to each other’s discipline and its idiosyncrasies).
c. Going to seminars, listening to talks in conferences outside my field.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Checking through "academic social media" like Google Scholar, Researchgate, etc, and apparently Twitter (not sure how this works if you use it not only for work). Sometimes there are interesting suggestions from people I have no connection to (many suggestions are useless though).
Also, following (on the same platforms) people with similar interests, or that share parts of your interest, will allow you to see their work, as well as work they "like".
I also like walking around in poster sessions and having a short look at every poster(title). I see many people following a strict list of posters they want to see - however, I feel that I discover a lot of interesting things just by walking around.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Go to conferences and go to talks outside your immediate area. Review lots of papers (and do a good job so you get even more reviewing duties). Become an editor of a journal. Offer to come for seminar talks at other universities and talk to the people there.
These are all ways to go outside your comfort zone and see what others are doing.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/11/21
| 2,268
| 9,548
|
<issue_start>username_0: Currently, I am a part-time research assistant in the field of physics. My supervisor is brilliant and very nice. He always encourages me and says that I have done a great job so far. I don't know why I feel like I did not do a good job and I am very bad at research. I got stuck on something for almost three months with no progress at all, which made me start to dislike doing research.
I was dreaming about doing an MSc. and a Ph.D., and because of those feelings, I am having doubts if I enjoy doing research. Is it that I did not learn well how to do research, or that it is not meant for me? Is it possible to like doing it again with time? I want help in answering these questions to know if a Ph.D. is the right path for me...<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Is it that I did not learn...how to do research or that it is not meant for me??
>
>
>
**No it isn't**: It sounds like you're experiencing imposter syndrome,
```
[a] psychological pattern in which an individual doubts their accomplishments
and has a persistent internalized fear of being exposed as a "fraud",*
```
which [needn't prevent good research](https://academia.stackexchange.com/search?q=imposter%20syndrome).
---
\* Source: [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impostor_syndrome).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Two ideas that might help.
The first is that you are new at this. Like any skill it is likely to improve with practice and time. As you progress you get insights that lead to further insights. But those insights don't come at regular intervals, can't be scheduled, and are harder for beginners. Frustration is common.
Second is that if you are really doing research then you are exploring the unknown and it is, well, unknown. Three months on a problem without success is not very long really. It is hard to predict how hard any given problem is. It might take years to crack any given nut. But it is also true that it isn't helpful to become so obsessive about a given problem that you ignore the possibility of progress on other, related, problems. That other work can lead to the insight you need on the harder problem.
“If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?” ~~<NAME>
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: **You should and have to find out yourself if you want to do this lifelong**. Being a researcher is very different from many other jobs:
* you have to show high integrity and autonomy your whole work life, breaking your integrity (e.g. academic misconduct) can break your tenured position and the possibility to be ever hired again as researcher (see cases <NAME>, <NAME>).
* investigating if for example some predicted particle really exists can take your whole life time or you may just work on a small sub-problem to verify the hypothesis and will be retired/dead when there is finally outcome (this pushed me away from astrophysics)
* You might have great ideas and impetus for a distinct question//problem, but your topic is simply not trendy/important enough to get much funding and can be come very repetitive to get money writing and submitting proposals on and on.
* Same issue with publications, I had colleagues who had to submit articles to over 10 peer reviewed journals to get it published finally. This are extreme cases, nonetheless repetitive work is happening in academia, especially because reproduction and reproducibility of results is one of the most important corner stones of research, especially in academic and fundamental sciences.
This all can become **very** frustrating. There are of course also very positive things, but I will not list them as you should find them on your own to judge yourself. If you don't find or see them...don't work in academia if you don't love the job and working more than 40 hours/week
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: My own story:
=============
I'm a software developer not a researcher because while I like solving problems (I've programmed for fun starting when I was 12 and continuing for the last 26 years because it's *fun* to me), I don't feel a strong enough drive for my solution to be *novel*. It's something I fought with for a long time, especially since I left a PhD unfinished and thought about trying it again years later. I mean I like the *idea* of coming up with something new and groundbreaking, but when it comes down to it I don't care enough about that novelty to do the *research* to find out what others have done, the things they've tried, what worked, what didn't, and where the gaps in the research are. So while I'm perfectly happy to think up "brilliant" ideas, I'm not motivated to do the actual research. And so I've learned research isn't for me.
Do you like learning everything there is to know about a problem?
=================================================================
So one big question is: do you *like* reading paper after paper and learning everything there is to learn about a problem so you can make a (in the grand scheme of things) small (while still valuable) novel contribution to it? Is it something you'd do for *fun*? Actually is it something you do for fun *now*, even if in a limited capacity (e.g. reading books and working on new approaches after soaking in everything you can from those who went before you)? If so, research may be for you. If not (and remember novel *ideas* are almost worthless because most turn out not to work; viable solutions are what is valuable, and that requires hard work), then research may not be for you. But you'll have to make that call. And it's okay either way. It's not for everyone (it wasn't for me), but I'm glad some people follow that path. But if it's not for you, I wouldn't push yourself down that path. It's a demanding career with long hours and relatively low pay (when you compare hours worked to total salary)--not something to do if you don't love it; you can make more money with less stress doing something else if your heart isn't in it.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Undertaking scholarly research almost invariably involves periods where you do a lot of work and then hit a dead end, where what you have done is not publishable. This means that it is not uncommon to "waste" several months pursuing leads that don't pan out. It is also common for a research assistant to struggle to make rapid progress through research tasks assigned by a much more experienced (and in your words, brilliant) researcher. Neither of those things sounds to me like strong evidence of any defect in your capacity to develop into a capable researcher. Moreover, the fact that your supervisor feels that you are doing a good job constitutes pretty good evidence that you are at the level where you are expected to be right now.
Since your post says you have dreamed about doing an MSc or PhD, I am assuming that you only have an undergraduate degree (or perhaps are still an undergraduate student). At that level, probably every research assistant is "very bad at research". Becoming competent in scholarly research takes immense amounts of learning, time, and practice, which is the whole reason we have PhD programs. Most academic researchers do not get to the point of being "good at research" until several years post PhD.
In short, you are probably correct that you are "bad at research" (almost all undergraduate-level research assistants are), but it is also likely that you are no worse at it than you are expected to be at your academic level. The feedback of your supervisor shows that you are meeting expectations at your current level, which suggests that there would be no inherent impediment to developing into a capable researcher. However, there is one giant red flag in your post, which is that you are not enjoying your research even under conditions that sound extremely desirable (nice supervisor who treats you well and gives you positive feedback). If you decide to pursue a career in research then you will not always work under such desirable conditions, and so you should make sure that you find the work sufficiently interesting and fulfilling to endure periods where you have to struggle through bad times.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Do you like doing research? You'll know better than anyone because you must be the best-positioned on the planet to tell what you like and what you don't.
That said:
>
> I got stuck on something for almost three months, so there is no progress at all ...
>
>
>
This happens quite often in research. You've encountered it now, and if you stay in research, will likely encounter it again in the future. It's virtually inevitable that there'll be points where you don't know what to make of your results and/or what to do next. If this discourages you, you might not want to stay.
As another example, here's something that happened to me during my Masters. We were working on duplicating another group's measurement of [effect]. After one year we succeeded. Now we were going to use that method on a new dataset, and *then* we find out that the original group had used a definition that was nonstandard (e.g., they used N=6 when N=4 is the "industry standard"). This throws their entire measurement of [effect] into doubt.
Faced with this situation, do you think "Oh boy, we're going to discover something new!", or "Damnit, I've wasted one year of my time"? If the former, you might want to stay; if the latter, you might want to do something else as a career.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/21
| 767
| 3,363
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have submitted a paper to a Springer mathematical journal. The reviewers asked for a revision, and after revising the paper, the editor's decision, alongside with the reviewers' one (of course), was to **accept the paper**. In the email that I have received it was stated: "You will receive an e-mail in due course regarding the production process". But after that, a whole year has passed and nothing happened. No info after that email. After logging into my author's account, on the main menu in section Completed I can only see:
- Submissions with a decision: 1
- Submissions with a production completed: 1.
1. Generally, what does **production completed** means? I read about MyPublication service on the Springer website but I never had a chance to see the questionnaire. Just to mention, I did not get any info, nor doi number, nor anything similar. Only that the paper is accepted, a year ago.
2. Should I write to the journal? To the Editor, the Editor-in-Chief, or some service to inquire about my paper?
There is a similar question ([Springer special issue status](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/135763/springer-special-issue-status)) but it regards the special issue status. In my case it is a regular one. Also, the comments and answers on that thread were not helpful in my case.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, after a year you should definitely write to the editor and ask for an update.
Production completed likely means that the paper is actually ready for immediate publication either in print or online. But check, nevertheless. Print, especially, takes a while to get out the door. But even online publication takes a while to move from staging to final servers.
But, yes, ask.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Firstly, one year is too long to wait for this --- for a production email you should have written back to them after a month or two. In any case, since it has been a year, before contacting the journal, you should do a quick literature search to see if the paper has already been published. (Because that is also a possible meaning of "production completed".) If the paper has already been published then you are probably too late to worry about it. If it is still in production, you *might* still have time to look at the proofs before publication.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes, you should ***definitely*** ask. Something similar to this happened to me in the past. My paper was just stuck in some administrative function. Sometimes a simple e-mail can speed it up.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Production should **not** take a year. In fact in my experience any paper that takes more than ~3 months to get from acceptance to publication online is seriously out of the norm.
I recommend writing to the journal asking about what's going on. Something almost certainly broke - "production completed" makes it sound like they've finished what they're doing and are waiting for a response from you (did you miss their email?). I would contact the journal, not the editorial board, since the board are not usually involved in the production process. If you can't find the journal's contact email, try replying to the acceptance letter (the one that said "You will receive an e-mail in due course regarding the production process").
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/11/21
| 1,055
| 4,606
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a 6th year PhD in computational chemical engineering. I have extensively used Lammps for my Molecular dynamics simulations. However there are many aspects of the modeling tools that I have no idea about ( like the time integration procedures used, the algorithms to make parallel computing possible...etc). This makes me feel bad about myself. I know that it is not possible to know everything and an important part of PhD is research output, so not all attention can be diverted into learning everything about the tool.
But, my question is, what to do if that bothers me greatly? I don't feel like a potential expert in my research and I feel like that's something to worry about.
How does one feel like an expert or become confident about their research/technical abilities? Does that come from acknowledgement of the deficiencies and being humble of the fact that probably I won't know many aspects of many things?
Are there any advice you would like to give a new PhD graduate to ensure a satisfying research career?<issue_comment>username_1: Regarding the tool: Read the manual, search and do tutorials, try and achieve extra results with it as if you wished to get out a paper on the data obtained by specific functions for the software. As gamers say, 'Go hardcore, git gut' Become an expert by becoming an expert user of your tool or at least of the techniques.
As for the advice: Besides the possibility of impostor syndrome, set up objectives for yourself, get goals , personal ones, and work to achieve them. No one can know everything, but you can contribute to the general effort of ignoring less about the world, so yeah, your contributions may be tiny or big, but they are helping out science. Just swallow up expectations and do the ebst you can, and more important, try to enjoy it.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: If you don’t have any use for it, don’t feel compelled to learn it (unless it’s for personal enrichment). You’ll forget everything if it doesn’t actually have a use.
You aren’t a worse camper for not knowing how to use the awl/reamer on your swiss army knife. If you can learn tools as you come to need them you’re golden — no reason to stress yourself out.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: #### One *feels* like an expert by *achieving* expertise
Assuming that you are able to rationally diagnose your level of knowledge of the topics relevant to your work, the feeling of expertise will come with the actuality of *achieving* expertise. Ultimately, you will need to make a decision as to how much knowledge of this tool is useful to you, and what would constitute excessive time-allocation to learning that tool. more comprehensively. If you decide that your work does not require you to obtain deeper knowledge in the use of that tool (e.g., learning some of the things you mention) then you should accept that decision and move on to better uses of your time. However, by the same token, this would also involve accepting your limited knowledge of the tool in question. There would be no need to "overcome the feeling" that you are not an expert with the tool, because, well, *you are not an expert with the tool*.
In terms of the more general question of becoming confident about one's research/technical abilities, this is something that comes gradually as you learn more, produce published research in a field, teach that topic in courses, speak about it at conferences, etc. It is common to feel that you lack expertise when you are still a PhD candidate, or new graduate, and even for the first few years of a postdoc or academic position afterwards. In both cases, that feeling is generally accurate, because most people at that stage are *not* experts in their field. The feeling you have is merely a demonstration that your subconscious emotional responses are accurately attuned to your present level of knowledge. It is not something that should bother you *at all*, let alone bother you greatly.
In terms of advice, I urge you to bear in mind that a newly minted PhD graduate is *not* someone we would consider an academic expert in any field. Such a person is at the baseline level of competence where they are only just about to start doing research without supervision. Put your present level of knowledge in its proper perspective and proceed confident in the fact that you will learn more as your professional life evolves. So long as you work hard and make sound decisions on how to allocate your time to learning skills in your field, expertise in an area of interest will come in due time.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/11/21
| 967
| 4,116
|
<issue_start>username_0: I graduated from undergrad 5.5 years ago and have been working full time ever since. I worked in the hospitality industry in operation management for catering and hotels. I have now decided to take a break from my career path and pursue an MBA, wanting to shift my career to the next level. I left my job in May, moved back home an have been studying for the GMAT exam and work as a part time bartender at a steakhouse. In my top school application, they ask my current job. Do I put that I am a bartender? will this effect my application?<issue_comment>username_1: Regarding the tool: Read the manual, search and do tutorials, try and achieve extra results with it as if you wished to get out a paper on the data obtained by specific functions for the software. As gamers say, 'Go hardcore, git gut' Become an expert by becoming an expert user of your tool or at least of the techniques.
As for the advice: Besides the possibility of impostor syndrome, set up objectives for yourself, get goals , personal ones, and work to achieve them. No one can know everything, but you can contribute to the general effort of ignoring less about the world, so yeah, your contributions may be tiny or big, but they are helping out science. Just swallow up expectations and do the ebst you can, and more important, try to enjoy it.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: If you don’t have any use for it, don’t feel compelled to learn it (unless it’s for personal enrichment). You’ll forget everything if it doesn’t actually have a use.
You aren’t a worse camper for not knowing how to use the awl/reamer on your swiss army knife. If you can learn tools as you come to need them you’re golden — no reason to stress yourself out.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: #### One *feels* like an expert by *achieving* expertise
Assuming that you are able to rationally diagnose your level of knowledge of the topics relevant to your work, the feeling of expertise will come with the actuality of *achieving* expertise. Ultimately, you will need to make a decision as to how much knowledge of this tool is useful to you, and what would constitute excessive time-allocation to learning that tool. more comprehensively. If you decide that your work does not require you to obtain deeper knowledge in the use of that tool (e.g., learning some of the things you mention) then you should accept that decision and move on to better uses of your time. However, by the same token, this would also involve accepting your limited knowledge of the tool in question. There would be no need to "overcome the feeling" that you are not an expert with the tool, because, well, *you are not an expert with the tool*.
In terms of the more general question of becoming confident about one's research/technical abilities, this is something that comes gradually as you learn more, produce published research in a field, teach that topic in courses, speak about it at conferences, etc. It is common to feel that you lack expertise when you are still a PhD candidate, or new graduate, and even for the first few years of a postdoc or academic position afterwards. In both cases, that feeling is generally accurate, because most people at that stage are *not* experts in their field. The feeling you have is merely a demonstration that your subconscious emotional responses are accurately attuned to your present level of knowledge. It is not something that should bother you *at all*, let alone bother you greatly.
In terms of advice, I urge you to bear in mind that a newly minted PhD graduate is *not* someone we would consider an academic expert in any field. Such a person is at the baseline level of competence where they are only just about to start doing research without supervision. Put your present level of knowledge in its proper perspective and proceed confident in the fact that you will learn more as your professional life evolves. So long as you work hard and make sound decisions on how to allocate your time to learning skills in your field, expertise in an area of interest will come in due time.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/11/21
| 4,459
| 18,958
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a final year PhD student in mathematics at a university in Spain and about to submit my thesis in a few weeks. During the last months, I have been writing up the remaining details of a project. Let me make clear that this project is not the only one contained in my thesis. However, it is the heart of the thesis and the other projects contained in my thesis, while in some way independent, yield interesting results when combined with the project I am talking about in this question. Moreover, the topic of the project was proposed by my advisor, but I mostly worked on it without talking to him (he was visiting other universities and sick for a very long time, and there were other reasons as well).
The project is a classification of certain objects, meaning that it consists of two parts:
1. Giving a list of examples of said objects;
2. Showing that the above list is in fact complete.
While coming up with the examples was kind of hard at the beginning, it was pretty straightforward and algorithmic once I got the hang of it (I always told my colleagues that one could teach a chimpanzee how to do it). The mathematically involved and complicated part is to show that the produced list is in fact complete. This involves several creative ideas and is highly non-trivial.
My advisor now thinks that the thesis is too long (it is about 130 pages, part 2 being roughly 25 pages long), and that I should remove part 2 from the thesis (i.e., that I should not show in the thesis that the list is complete): according to him, a longer thesis has more potential of containing small, subtle mistakes, and obviously mistakes are bad. He said that he cannot be sure that everything is correct, since he never read all details and I need to submit rather soon. He is also travelling and busy until I am supposed to submit.
However, I do not want to cut the second part of the thesis, for the following reasons:
* I already have the proof, and I am sure that it is correct. Why should it not be included in my thesis? The alternative is to include an unproven claim in the thesis, similar to "the list is in fact complete, which we will show in a forthcoming paper".
* If I remove it and only keep part 1, my results are incomplete and the project only consists of "describing some examples", which is - as I explained above - pretty easy once one knows how to.
* Obviously, I want my thesis to be as strong as possible.
* The interplay between all projects of my thesis cannot be made as strong, as well.
* I know who the referees of my thesis are going to be, and one of them is notorious for being a very harsh grader. While I am pretty proud of my thesis in the current form, I am afraid that removing part 2 will affect the grading of my thesis.
I explained my point of view to my advisor, but he kept saying that the thesis is too long (apparently the period of time the referees are given to evaluate the thesis is pretty short) and that it is too unsafe for him to submit it as in its current form.
How should I behave in this situation? I am extremely thankful for any advice!<issue_comment>username_1: If it isn't going to damage the relationship with your advisor too much, you should submit your complete thesis. The arguments you provided from your advisor are pretty weak, and I'm quite sure that 130 pages isn't particularly long. Your arguments to keeping the length are compelling (strength of ideas, likelihood of appeasing difficult thesis committee member, etc). That said, we are only hearing your advisor's opinion second-hand. It's possible you are not giving us all the information, either because you misunderstand your advisor or your advisor has not fully detailed his concerns (which is definitely not optimal).
You said you mostly worked on this without talking to him. I may have missed it, but I don't see that you have explained your reasons to your advisor. Is there time to do this? Ask him what would happen and how would he feel if you submitted your thesis as is? This should preferably be done in person, but you may need to phone or email him.
Good luck! Thesis time is always stressful, even under the best of conditions!
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: The main thing to keep in mind is to finish your degree. If your advisor thinks that leaving that part out helps in that goal then you should consider it. It may be that a minimal but sufficient dissertation is advantageous here.
However, that doesn't mean that you *abandon* the work. You have, in fact, the basis for an additional paper that can probably be published separately from your dissertation, giving your early career a boost. Expanding the work of your dissertation is a pretty good way to get started in academia.
Think about the short term (getting done) and the long term (building a CV). A long thesis might be good or bad, but an extra paper is good.
Explore it with your advisor. I'm assuming, of course, that he is experienced and well aware of the system you are in and the likely outcomes.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: You could move part two into a appendix. That could be a compromise which could be acceptable for both your advisor and for you. You can argue that the actual thesis is now ~25 pages shorter and he does not need to read the appendix. You can refer to your appendix from your main text and keep your thesis strong. Moving technical details to an appendix is common. Whether your part two is really technical might be debatable, but could help you to get what you want.
I know of many theses that were initially too long where the author resorted to the appendix way to satisfy formal length considerations.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> If I remove it and only keep part 1, my results are incomplete and the project only consists of "describing some examples", which is - as I explained above - pretty easy once one knows how to.
>
>
>
Since you are saying that the first part is the easier one, I would suggest cutting that one shorter instead of the second part. Whether you cut 25 pages of the second part or 25 pages of the first part shouldn't ultimately make much of a difference to your advisor if he is really just worried about the length.
Additionally, you could try to find some compromise of cutting it by 15 or 20 pages instead (or whatever you think is doable without ruining your thesis) if you don't want to cut that many pages from the first part either. In my experience compromises usually work better than a straight out "No".
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: The problem with a proof that contains "creative and non-trivial" ideas is that one mistake near the start may invalidate the entire argument, and if someone produces a counter-example, then obviously the proof can never be fixed up.
From your description it's not obvious whether it *matters* from a practical point of view if the classification is complete (whatever "complete" means).
If you have created an effective algorithm which does something useful, maybe trying to prove that it is "perfect" is being too ambitious. There are plenty of *useful* algorithms (for example to solve NP-complete problems) which are certainly not "complete" - but discovering them and implementing them efficiently was probably worth a PhD.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Two reasonable goals at this point are
1. graduating with your Ph.D. and
2. publishing your mathematical discovery.
As other answers suggest, achieving the second of these goals is possible with or without including all your current results in your thesis. Thus my general advice is to focus on the first goal.
As members of the community at large, there is no way we can possibly guess at the behind the scenes politics that goes into awarding PhDs at your institution, particularly when you have a particular committee member who's rumored to be a "harsh grader" and an adviser giving unusual advice. What we can affirm is that your adviser is giving you some unusual advice about a thesis that is not that long (even in math, where the PhDs tend to be shorter than in other fields). He may have good reason for it, or he may not, and as a student it will be hard for you to judge. I'd strongly recommend repeating your question to your graduate chair and a second member of the thesis committee you trust and asking for their independent advice before making a final decision. It appears you could use an advocate in this situation, and it's unclear whether or not your adviser is acting as such.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: I think the "length" argument is a [red herring](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring) and I think it's influencing your thinking too much.
I think it's more likely that your advisor is simply *not comfortable with the second part of your thesis*. I suspect that the uncertainty that your second part is correct may actually be a feeling that your second part is wrong or incomplete (perhaps because of the "creative ideas"), but your advisor has not yet been able to show definitively that it is wrong. He's likely concerned both with his own reputation among his peers and for the success of your defense if your reviewers are similarly unconvinced.
If you are certain that your proof is correct, then it's up to you to convince your advisor of this. If you can't convince your advisor, your chance of convincing your committee is slim. It seems that the time it will take to convince your advisor is longer than the time between now and when you will defend. In that case, your advisor's suggestion to leave the second part out (especially if they feel the first part is sufficient to support you passing your defense) is quite reasonable. You mention that there are other aspects to your thesis, as well, so this means excluding only one (potentially problematic) part of one project of multiple that make up the whole thesis.
It doesn't mean that you abandon the second part of this project, only that you exclude it from your thesis.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_8: I stumbled upon your question as I experienced a similar situation back in 1999.
A thesis is a wonderful experience and a once in a lifetime project. Breathe it and Own it.
Your supervisor remains a supervisor and you have the right to diplomatically tell him what your conclusions are on the structure and logic of your thesis, rather than he tells you what should be in.
I made my thesis in theoretical quantum physics and the goal was somewhat similar to yours. I had to work on examples and see if a set of equations reproduces astrophysical observation. The thesis was meant to be mainly numerical simulations. However, from literally day one, I disagreed with the derivations of the key equations I was asked to simulate. While he agreed the derivation of the current equations was not so rigorous, he considered that ultimately they should be correct.
The reason he did not want to dwell too much on the foundations of the theory was, first, because there was already a lot of numerical simulations to do for collaborators to model stellar atmospheres and, second, because dogmas exist in science. Break them, and people will appreciate even if your are wrong ultimately. We set up a meeting and derived the equations again. These equations were derived in 1970 by a known astrophysicist who was very knowledgeable in his field but who was not a theoretical physicist. He took as a starting point an equation picked up from <NAME> in one of his 1930 book
Atombau und Spektrallinien, but Sommerfeld made an assumption which was not realistic in our scenario.
During the first year of my thesis I worked on the derivation of such equations from the ground up using quantum electrodynamics combined with Boltzmann type master equations, came up with alternative equations and showed them to my supervisor. He never really read them, too long, dogmas or whatever. I carried on with numerical simulations based on the old and -to me- wrong formulas because there was a demand for this.
As my thesis came to an end, your dilemma came up. I came with a structure, where Chapter 1 would be an introduction, Chapter 2 would be questioning the current equations and deriving them anew, where my equations would popup with orders of magnitudes of the terms I found out to show their importance. And the rest of the thesis would focus on the numerical equations of the old equations. As he read through my proposed outline, he told me to skip Chapter 2. I went home and talked to my girlfriend.
She said, and I tell you the same, this is your thesis, you believe in it, you do it.
Luckily, my thesis supervisor who was nevertheless a scientist seeking the truth eventually read my chapter and agreed that there was something going on, but to him it required more work (we were at 2 months before submission). He agreed I could include it the day after. I included them at the expense of shortening the rest of the thesis. I submitted my thesis and received feedback, defended it and got it hands up. No one can bother you because you know your thesis more than anyone else.
Coming to your situation, I believe that you do not have a publication in a refereed journal of the proof of your completeness. If that is the case, I would, as you suggest, dedicate a chapter on the proof of the completeness. Completeness of something is an important part of mathematical reasoning and characterizes you more than an enumeration of examples. Don't be shy but you can be diplomatic by saying at the end of the chapter that "While we believe this proof is solid, further investigations should be made prior to its publication in a refereed journal". That formulation is to be discussed with your supervisor as it will depend on who will be your referees and the philosophy of your research community.
Regarding your referees, don't be afraid about those who have a reputation of being harsh. Often those people appreciate those who stand up, politely but stand up.
In what this can help you? First your supervisor can remain a good friend of yours in the future as it happened with me. Second, as it also happened to me, in your life as a researcher that Chapter can help you a lot in getting jobs in other disciplines because employers appreciate the fact that you question things and stand up on your arguments more than enumerating.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: username_8' advice is solid, so I would only add a few things. This reminds me of my dissertation defense experience as well: some advice I received was good, some was bad, but all of it was important to consider.
Feedback from your adviser on your work can help with aspects such as style, correctness, or direction. However, the level of rigor in your work says something about the kind of academic you are. Despite some of the comments above, people do read theses and dissertations. In fact, you should be mindful that it will be only a quick Google search away for anyone in the world to access. Ultimately, you are the author, so unless you are 100% comfortable with it, I would not recommend submitting yet.
If possible, try to postpone your defense. I say this for two reasons. First, and perhaps most importantly, you need your adviser on your side. You only have one PhD adviser, and they can help to make or break your career. He/she claims there is not enough time, so provide more time. Second, this will give you some time to submit a paper or two to academic journals. Committees like seeing that your work has already been peer-reviewed and published. It means they don't have to work as hard and are not signing off on anything risky. Plus, publications can help your career immensely.
Of course, if you do not have the luxury of postponing (entirely possible) or you are just in it for the degree (which seems unlikely to me), I would agree with some of the others who suggest compromising by thinning it out elsewhere, and keeping the content which is most important to you. Whatever you choose to do, though, make sure your adviser is on board.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: I have two suggestions:
* Ask your colleagues whether they are willing to check your proofs that your advisor has no time to check (and include them in the acknowledgements). This way, not only can you be more sure that they are correct, you can also let your advisor know so that he does not feel as uncomfortable with you putting the proofs in.
* Give one or more talks in your department about your results, including sufficient technical detail so that others familiar with your research area can grasp your precise claims and understand the rough outline of your proofs. When asked any question, make sure you give complete answers. In some cases, when presenting (or preparing the presentation) you will find subtle issues with your original arguments, and can fix it before submitting your actual thesis.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_11: I believe you should submit your thesis in it's entirety. Your advisor is just pushing you to publish both parts and also testing you as to which you will take: easier route (only part 1) which has less chance of having mistakes since it's 25pg less. i.e. less room for mistakes
or your true work which is both parts.
Go with your head not your gut as a thesis takes brains not luck.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_12: I don't envy you your situation as regards the difference of opinion between you and your adviser. Nevertheless, it's never a bad problem to have more good material than you need, rather than less. So, well done for overperforming :)
Despite being a thesis adviser myself, I don't think I can really tell you the best course of action. For one thing I don't know all the practical contraints that apply, neither the stance of the other people involved. More fundamentally the "best" course is to a large extent dependent on what you regard as most important you.
If the overriding goal is to achieve your PhD then the most pragmatic course would perhaps to be guided by your adviser, whether his advice is optimal or not. As pointed out by others, omitting the completeness part so does not preclude making it part of further work. There may even be some benefit in doing so, perhaps there are some interesting questions that would repay time spent on a later study?
But I can understand your emotional attachment to your thesis, and in wanting to make it as good a work as possible, something part of yourself as a scientist. You might feel that is the most important. If you decide to include part 2 thenyou have to be prepared to defend it in response to questions, and you may have to do that without much support from your adviser.
In any case, I hope you are successful with your PhD, and that you and your adviser reach an understanding. That last might be the most important!
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/11/21
| 3,933
| 16,762
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently an undergraduate student and I am applying for research Masters/PhD in the US. I joined a research group before to help out on a part of a project. My coworker in this group, a PhD student has published a paper afterwards, which is irrelevant to the work that I have done, but since I have worked in his group, I was added to the co-author in his paper. I did not ask for it, but anyway, I have the publication, and I have to mention it in my application.
My fear is that, if, during the interview, I was asked about the publication, should I just say that I did not contribute to it? I do not want to lie anyway, but would that hurt my previous research group since they have added irrelevant people to the paper?
I do not think it is uncommon to have a coauthor that is not relevant to a project in my country. However, I am a bit afraid if they would take it seriously in the US.<issue_comment>username_1: If it isn't going to damage the relationship with your advisor too much, you should submit your complete thesis. The arguments you provided from your advisor are pretty weak, and I'm quite sure that 130 pages isn't particularly long. Your arguments to keeping the length are compelling (strength of ideas, likelihood of appeasing difficult thesis committee member, etc). That said, we are only hearing your advisor's opinion second-hand. It's possible you are not giving us all the information, either because you misunderstand your advisor or your advisor has not fully detailed his concerns (which is definitely not optimal).
You said you mostly worked on this without talking to him. I may have missed it, but I don't see that you have explained your reasons to your advisor. Is there time to do this? Ask him what would happen and how would he feel if you submitted your thesis as is? This should preferably be done in person, but you may need to phone or email him.
Good luck! Thesis time is always stressful, even under the best of conditions!
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: The main thing to keep in mind is to finish your degree. If your advisor thinks that leaving that part out helps in that goal then you should consider it. It may be that a minimal but sufficient dissertation is advantageous here.
However, that doesn't mean that you *abandon* the work. You have, in fact, the basis for an additional paper that can probably be published separately from your dissertation, giving your early career a boost. Expanding the work of your dissertation is a pretty good way to get started in academia.
Think about the short term (getting done) and the long term (building a CV). A long thesis might be good or bad, but an extra paper is good.
Explore it with your advisor. I'm assuming, of course, that he is experienced and well aware of the system you are in and the likely outcomes.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: You could move part two into a appendix. That could be a compromise which could be acceptable for both your advisor and for you. You can argue that the actual thesis is now ~25 pages shorter and he does not need to read the appendix. You can refer to your appendix from your main text and keep your thesis strong. Moving technical details to an appendix is common. Whether your part two is really technical might be debatable, but could help you to get what you want.
I know of many theses that were initially too long where the author resorted to the appendix way to satisfy formal length considerations.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> If I remove it and only keep part 1, my results are incomplete and the project only consists of "describing some examples", which is - as I explained above - pretty easy once one knows how to.
>
>
>
Since you are saying that the first part is the easier one, I would suggest cutting that one shorter instead of the second part. Whether you cut 25 pages of the second part or 25 pages of the first part shouldn't ultimately make much of a difference to your advisor if he is really just worried about the length.
Additionally, you could try to find some compromise of cutting it by 15 or 20 pages instead (or whatever you think is doable without ruining your thesis) if you don't want to cut that many pages from the first part either. In my experience compromises usually work better than a straight out "No".
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: The problem with a proof that contains "creative and non-trivial" ideas is that one mistake near the start may invalidate the entire argument, and if someone produces a counter-example, then obviously the proof can never be fixed up.
From your description it's not obvious whether it *matters* from a practical point of view if the classification is complete (whatever "complete" means).
If you have created an effective algorithm which does something useful, maybe trying to prove that it is "perfect" is being too ambitious. There are plenty of *useful* algorithms (for example to solve NP-complete problems) which are certainly not "complete" - but discovering them and implementing them efficiently was probably worth a PhD.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Two reasonable goals at this point are
1. graduating with your Ph.D. and
2. publishing your mathematical discovery.
As other answers suggest, achieving the second of these goals is possible with or without including all your current results in your thesis. Thus my general advice is to focus on the first goal.
As members of the community at large, there is no way we can possibly guess at the behind the scenes politics that goes into awarding PhDs at your institution, particularly when you have a particular committee member who's rumored to be a "harsh grader" and an adviser giving unusual advice. What we can affirm is that your adviser is giving you some unusual advice about a thesis that is not that long (even in math, where the PhDs tend to be shorter than in other fields). He may have good reason for it, or he may not, and as a student it will be hard for you to judge. I'd strongly recommend repeating your question to your graduate chair and a second member of the thesis committee you trust and asking for their independent advice before making a final decision. It appears you could use an advocate in this situation, and it's unclear whether or not your adviser is acting as such.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: I think the "length" argument is a [red herring](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring) and I think it's influencing your thinking too much.
I think it's more likely that your advisor is simply *not comfortable with the second part of your thesis*. I suspect that the uncertainty that your second part is correct may actually be a feeling that your second part is wrong or incomplete (perhaps because of the "creative ideas"), but your advisor has not yet been able to show definitively that it is wrong. He's likely concerned both with his own reputation among his peers and for the success of your defense if your reviewers are similarly unconvinced.
If you are certain that your proof is correct, then it's up to you to convince your advisor of this. If you can't convince your advisor, your chance of convincing your committee is slim. It seems that the time it will take to convince your advisor is longer than the time between now and when you will defend. In that case, your advisor's suggestion to leave the second part out (especially if they feel the first part is sufficient to support you passing your defense) is quite reasonable. You mention that there are other aspects to your thesis, as well, so this means excluding only one (potentially problematic) part of one project of multiple that make up the whole thesis.
It doesn't mean that you abandon the second part of this project, only that you exclude it from your thesis.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_8: I stumbled upon your question as I experienced a similar situation back in 1999.
A thesis is a wonderful experience and a once in a lifetime project. Breathe it and Own it.
Your supervisor remains a supervisor and you have the right to diplomatically tell him what your conclusions are on the structure and logic of your thesis, rather than he tells you what should be in.
I made my thesis in theoretical quantum physics and the goal was somewhat similar to yours. I had to work on examples and see if a set of equations reproduces astrophysical observation. The thesis was meant to be mainly numerical simulations. However, from literally day one, I disagreed with the derivations of the key equations I was asked to simulate. While he agreed the derivation of the current equations was not so rigorous, he considered that ultimately they should be correct.
The reason he did not want to dwell too much on the foundations of the theory was, first, because there was already a lot of numerical simulations to do for collaborators to model stellar atmospheres and, second, because dogmas exist in science. Break them, and people will appreciate even if your are wrong ultimately. We set up a meeting and derived the equations again. These equations were derived in 1970 by a known astrophysicist who was very knowledgeable in his field but who was not a theoretical physicist. He took as a starting point an equation picked up from <NAME> in one of his 1930 book
Atombau und Spektrallinien, but Sommerfeld made an assumption which was not realistic in our scenario.
During the first year of my thesis I worked on the derivation of such equations from the ground up using quantum electrodynamics combined with Boltzmann type master equations, came up with alternative equations and showed them to my supervisor. He never really read them, too long, dogmas or whatever. I carried on with numerical simulations based on the old and -to me- wrong formulas because there was a demand for this.
As my thesis came to an end, your dilemma came up. I came with a structure, where Chapter 1 would be an introduction, Chapter 2 would be questioning the current equations and deriving them anew, where my equations would popup with orders of magnitudes of the terms I found out to show their importance. And the rest of the thesis would focus on the numerical equations of the old equations. As he read through my proposed outline, he told me to skip Chapter 2. I went home and talked to my girlfriend.
She said, and I tell you the same, this is your thesis, you believe in it, you do it.
Luckily, my thesis supervisor who was nevertheless a scientist seeking the truth eventually read my chapter and agreed that there was something going on, but to him it required more work (we were at 2 months before submission). He agreed I could include it the day after. I included them at the expense of shortening the rest of the thesis. I submitted my thesis and received feedback, defended it and got it hands up. No one can bother you because you know your thesis more than anyone else.
Coming to your situation, I believe that you do not have a publication in a refereed journal of the proof of your completeness. If that is the case, I would, as you suggest, dedicate a chapter on the proof of the completeness. Completeness of something is an important part of mathematical reasoning and characterizes you more than an enumeration of examples. Don't be shy but you can be diplomatic by saying at the end of the chapter that "While we believe this proof is solid, further investigations should be made prior to its publication in a refereed journal". That formulation is to be discussed with your supervisor as it will depend on who will be your referees and the philosophy of your research community.
Regarding your referees, don't be afraid about those who have a reputation of being harsh. Often those people appreciate those who stand up, politely but stand up.
In what this can help you? First your supervisor can remain a good friend of yours in the future as it happened with me. Second, as it also happened to me, in your life as a researcher that Chapter can help you a lot in getting jobs in other disciplines because employers appreciate the fact that you question things and stand up on your arguments more than enumerating.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: username_8' advice is solid, so I would only add a few things. This reminds me of my dissertation defense experience as well: some advice I received was good, some was bad, but all of it was important to consider.
Feedback from your adviser on your work can help with aspects such as style, correctness, or direction. However, the level of rigor in your work says something about the kind of academic you are. Despite some of the comments above, people do read theses and dissertations. In fact, you should be mindful that it will be only a quick Google search away for anyone in the world to access. Ultimately, you are the author, so unless you are 100% comfortable with it, I would not recommend submitting yet.
If possible, try to postpone your defense. I say this for two reasons. First, and perhaps most importantly, you need your adviser on your side. You only have one PhD adviser, and they can help to make or break your career. He/she claims there is not enough time, so provide more time. Second, this will give you some time to submit a paper or two to academic journals. Committees like seeing that your work has already been peer-reviewed and published. It means they don't have to work as hard and are not signing off on anything risky. Plus, publications can help your career immensely.
Of course, if you do not have the luxury of postponing (entirely possible) or you are just in it for the degree (which seems unlikely to me), I would agree with some of the others who suggest compromising by thinning it out elsewhere, and keeping the content which is most important to you. Whatever you choose to do, though, make sure your adviser is on board.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: I have two suggestions:
* Ask your colleagues whether they are willing to check your proofs that your advisor has no time to check (and include them in the acknowledgements). This way, not only can you be more sure that they are correct, you can also let your advisor know so that he does not feel as uncomfortable with you putting the proofs in.
* Give one or more talks in your department about your results, including sufficient technical detail so that others familiar with your research area can grasp your precise claims and understand the rough outline of your proofs. When asked any question, make sure you give complete answers. In some cases, when presenting (or preparing the presentation) you will find subtle issues with your original arguments, and can fix it before submitting your actual thesis.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_11: I believe you should submit your thesis in it's entirety. Your advisor is just pushing you to publish both parts and also testing you as to which you will take: easier route (only part 1) which has less chance of having mistakes since it's 25pg less. i.e. less room for mistakes
or your true work which is both parts.
Go with your head not your gut as a thesis takes brains not luck.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_12: I don't envy you your situation as regards the difference of opinion between you and your adviser. Nevertheless, it's never a bad problem to have more good material than you need, rather than less. So, well done for overperforming :)
Despite being a thesis adviser myself, I don't think I can really tell you the best course of action. For one thing I don't know all the practical contraints that apply, neither the stance of the other people involved. More fundamentally the "best" course is to a large extent dependent on what you regard as most important you.
If the overriding goal is to achieve your PhD then the most pragmatic course would perhaps to be guided by your adviser, whether his advice is optimal or not. As pointed out by others, omitting the completeness part so does not preclude making it part of further work. There may even be some benefit in doing so, perhaps there are some interesting questions that would repay time spent on a later study?
But I can understand your emotional attachment to your thesis, and in wanting to make it as good a work as possible, something part of yourself as a scientist. You might feel that is the most important. If you decide to include part 2 thenyou have to be prepared to defend it in response to questions, and you may have to do that without much support from your adviser.
In any case, I hope you are successful with your PhD, and that you and your adviser reach an understanding. That last might be the most important!
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/11/22
| 953
| 4,097
|
<issue_start>username_0: I’m a college student. For a recent test, the professor originally said that the test was extremely difficult and long and therefore they were going to send us a picture of the exam an hour and a half before we had to take it. They said an hour and a half would not leave enough time for people to look up answers online. We were also allowed to bring a notecard for use on the test.
For some reason they were not able to send the pictures, so they said they would make it a take-home test. I was elated, and switched my focus to a different exam I had later that evening.
At our next lecture, the professor announced that we were taking the test in class that day, but open-note. I was obviously not prepared at all, and had not even brought the proper notes for the test with me. The result was me leaving half the test blank.
How should I proceed? Is it reasonable to fight this grade?<issue_comment>username_1: I'm a bit perplexed why they choose to do it that way. If one is doing major changes to an exam, then the students need to be informed of that in due time. I'm assuming you are not the only one who was negatively affected by this behavior? Assuming the situation is as you've described it, I would myself had lodged a complaint at the central examination office or whichever unit is responsible for that at your college. The issue is not that the teacher changed things regarding the exam, it's that the students weren't given enough time to prepare for it.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: It is generally accepted that students deserve to be tested on their knowledge under conditions that are known sufficiently in advance to allow them to prepare effectively. Coming to class and being told you have to take an exam right that minute when you were previously led to expect a different testing scenario very obviously does not meet that convention.
Simply put, your professor messed up, and in my opinion it is a no-brainer that you (and any other student who wishes to) should be allowed to retake the exam.
**Edit:** several commenters seem to interpret OP’s story as reflecting poorly on them and their level of preparedness, and seem to be implying that OP is somehow “not worthy” of having their complaint taken seriously. One of them said outright that OP “deserve[s] to fail the test anyway”. I am baffled by such victim-blaming: almost everyone seems to agree that the professor’s unannounced change to the exam schedule and procedures was unfair, and this unfairness was inflicted *on the entire class*. What difference does it make whether OP is a top student or on an underperforming student who would likely have failed the exam even under ideal conditions? The unfairness is the same, and the remedy is also the same: both the top student and the underperforming one should be given an option to retake the exam.
But let’s assume for a second that OP’s detractors have a point and that their judgment of OP’s command of the material is both correct and relevant. In that case, I would argue, **it is even more important that they be allowed to retake the exam**. The reason for this is that it is only after doing poorly on a *fair* exam that a student will have to confront the reality of their poor learning choices and poor knowledge of the material, and face their situation with a clear mind: they will not have any excuses then to cover up for their poor performance. And it’s only after giving a *fair* exam that the professor can in good conscience assign a failing grade to a student, and that the university can ethically demand that the student improve their performance or suffer negative consequences to their status in the program. The ability to take an exam under fair testing conditions is not some kind of reward for good behavior; rather, it is an absolute necessity for the credibility of the entire system.
The bottom line is, any way one looks at it — whether as a supporter or a detractor of OP, as a skeptic or a believer — one has to reach the same conclusion. As I said, it’s a no-brainer.
Upvotes: 6
|
2019/11/22
| 1,950
| 7,614
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have just submitted revisions for my first single-author paper, and it was *awful* (pronounced with all the exaggerated fervor of a whiny millenial). Nothing triggers feelings of inadequacy and self-doubt more than making your own decisions about what should be included in the greater body of science. (Perhaps it triggers feelings of empowerment in others-- good for you!)
Since more eyes means catching more mistakes, better word choices for a wider readership, and overall more awareness of what's a good idea, I'm wondering if it is even good for science to publish solo-author work.
In question form: **do single-author papers benefit scientific research as a whole?** Or mostly just the individual's personal development as an author and independent researcher? It would be great if you could endorse your answer with some kind of study.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> do single-author papers benefit scientific research as a whole?
>
>
>
Well, yes.
<NAME> had *several* single-author papers
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein#Publications>
<NAME> wrote the most influential paper in game theory on his own:
<https://www.pnas.org/content/36/1/48>
So, if the question is "are there *examples* of influential single-author papers" I think the answer is demonstrably yes. At least, if you think <NAME> and <NAME> are good scientists (I do!).
If the question is "do single-author papers advance science more than multi-author papers?", then I think that the answer is probably no. Research is, at the end of the day, a collaborative endeavor. It is much easier (and fun in my opinion) to work with others rather than alone.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: [This paper](https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6773024?arnumber=6773024&tag=1) by <NAME> in 1948 was the founding work of the whole field of information theory, which deals with the ultimate limits on reliable communication over arbitrary channels and which today still occupies thousands of people worldwide.
That said, the average number of authors per paper has steadily increased from about 1.5 in 1940 to about 5.4 in 2013, according to [this study](https://thewinnower.com/papers/the-rising-trend-in-authorship). The study mentions the increasing complexity of science and the increased difficulty to get funding as possible reasons for the trend.
This means that single-author papers (and therefore highly-influential single-author papers) are much rarer now than they were in 1940. If we measure the impact in number of citations (which has its own caveats), there are still a few highly influential recent papers with a single author, such as [this one (2007) with 71588 citations](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/iucr/doi/10.1107/S0108767307043930) or [this one (2002) with 14348 citations](https://journals.iucr.org/j/issues/2003/01/00/os0104/).
Though they are rarer nowadays, single-author papers can advance scientific progress in the same way as multiple-author papers. They still go through peer review, and ultimately what is important is the content. If you have some results that would be interesting to the scientific community, the number of authors should not be a factor in deciding whether to publish it or not.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Assume that you are not a genius (<NAME>, as mentioned in other answer).
1. If you can able to write the whole paper, in particular a decent paper (starting from ideas, implementation, analysis, and discussion) by your own, excellent, you can survive in this world, in fact, you have a good time ahead.
2. Once you wrote this paper as a single author, unless and otherwise, you have some job requirements, it is a better choice to have some co-authors (either experts or who is actively involved in the same research as yours) to improve the quality. Apart from the choice of words (what you mentioned), you will really get benefits from the technical qualities from others. Finally, based on their contribution, you can decide to put them in either acknowledgment part or co-author list.
3. At last, your single author work will get more chance to be extended or validated if your co-authors are happy to collaborate. Shannon is the father of capacity theorem in communications, there are a huge number of scientists who are spending time to reach Shannon capacity or beyond that, and these scientists/researchers are working together. Who knows, one day, my assumption at the beginning will be invalid for your case.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: This article in *Nature* reinforces the anecdotal answers, although it doesn't focus on single authors precisely: ["Large teams develop and small teams disrupt science and technology."](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-0941-9?WT.ec_id=NATURE-201902&sap-outbound-id=A77E9BB5BF9D618C1F2C218176E02995F876061A) I guess the best a single author could hope for is to introduce "disruptive" innovation, like Shannon, Einstein, Nash, etc.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: 1. The vast majority of published research papers don't advance research or only very marginally, whether from single or multiple authors.
2. The only recognized way to evaluate the quality of a research paper, i.e. to evaluate its potential for advancing research in general, is the peer-review process. Since the peer-review process does not care at all about the number of authors, one can only assume that the number of authors is not an indicator of quality in any way.
Working solo or with a team is not a matter of quality of the outcome in general, it's a matter of:
* research topic: some topics require a diversity of skills or an amount of work which cannot be carried out by a single person. On the other hand some topics require a deep thought process which is more likely to happen in a single brain.
* personal preferences and finding the right collaborators: in research like in many other things, things often happen in this way or that way just because of circumstances.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: >
> Since more eyes means catching more mistakes, better word choices for a wider readership, and overall more awareness of what's a good idea, I'm wondering if it is even good for science to publish solo-author work.
>
>
>
I think you are confusing two issues here.
One is the writing -- mistakes, word choices, formatting, organization, etc. As you say "more eyes" is better: you have made good arguments for why there should be many editors. Even excellent authors are often "too close" to the work to see the bigger picture and explain it coherently (and most authors are not excellent - a lot of published papers, even in good journals, have substandard writing in all areas, including simple English language mistakes). Even beyond the language, a scientific editor should be able to identify weaknesses and mistakes in the paper as a whole.
The other is the authorship. An author makes an intellectual contribution. The requirement to be an author has been discussed [ad nauseum](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/12030/what-are-the-minimum-contributions-required-for-co-authorship) here. Adding more authors does not always make the paper better (in fact, "too many cooks" often makes it worse), and language editors would not meet the bar for authorship. The advantages of multiple authors means that the work can be divided, and different areas of expertise can be brought to bear on a related problem. Sometimes this makes sense, sometimes it doesn't.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/22
| 1,990
| 7,820
|
<issue_start>username_0: During my research in theoretical physics I encountered a problem that required integrating a space of functions that I don't think has ever been done before. I discovered that these integrals are analytic and can be represented by a linear combination of elliptic and non-elliptic functions which I believe is a rather non-trivial result.
I think this research, while rather esoteric, is nonetheless important enough that the world should know. In my paper this result is buried beneath other more physics-oriented results. My question is this: how should I present this pure-mathematical knowledge to the world? Is there a journal that this kind of result would be suitable for or some mathematical database of known analytical integrals? Not being a pure mathematician I am unfamiliar with the correct protocol.
Thank you!
Edit: After discussing with a pure mathematician I decided to have another look thought Gradshteyn & Ryzhik and I think the result I obtained is probably just a linear combination of known integrals, albeit in a hidden form.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> do single-author papers benefit scientific research as a whole?
>
>
>
Well, yes.
<NAME> had *several* single-author papers
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein#Publications>
<NAME> wrote the most influential paper in game theory on his own:
<https://www.pnas.org/content/36/1/48>
So, if the question is "are there *examples* of influential single-author papers" I think the answer is demonstrably yes. At least, if you think <NAME> and <NAME> are good scientists (I do!).
If the question is "do single-author papers advance science more than multi-author papers?", then I think that the answer is probably no. Research is, at the end of the day, a collaborative endeavor. It is much easier (and fun in my opinion) to work with others rather than alone.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: [This paper](https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6773024?arnumber=6773024&tag=1) by <NAME> in 1948 was the founding work of the whole field of information theory, which deals with the ultimate limits on reliable communication over arbitrary channels and which today still occupies thousands of people worldwide.
That said, the average number of authors per paper has steadily increased from about 1.5 in 1940 to about 5.4 in 2013, according to [this study](https://thewinnower.com/papers/the-rising-trend-in-authorship). The study mentions the increasing complexity of science and the increased difficulty to get funding as possible reasons for the trend.
This means that single-author papers (and therefore highly-influential single-author papers) are much rarer now than they were in 1940. If we measure the impact in number of citations (which has its own caveats), there are still a few highly influential recent papers with a single author, such as [this one (2007) with 71588 citations](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/iucr/doi/10.1107/S0108767307043930) or [this one (2002) with 14348 citations](https://journals.iucr.org/j/issues/2003/01/00/os0104/).
Though they are rarer nowadays, single-author papers can advance scientific progress in the same way as multiple-author papers. They still go through peer review, and ultimately what is important is the content. If you have some results that would be interesting to the scientific community, the number of authors should not be a factor in deciding whether to publish it or not.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Assume that you are not a genius (Einstein, Nash, as mentioned in other answer).
1. If you can able to write the whole paper, in particular a decent paper (starting from ideas, implementation, analysis, and discussion) by your own, excellent, you can survive in this world, in fact, you have a good time ahead.
2. Once you wrote this paper as a single author, unless and otherwise, you have some job requirements, it is a better choice to have some co-authors (either experts or who is actively involved in the same research as yours) to improve the quality. Apart from the choice of words (what you mentioned), you will really get benefits from the technical qualities from others. Finally, based on their contribution, you can decide to put them in either acknowledgment part or co-author list.
3. At last, your single author work will get more chance to be extended or validated if your co-authors are happy to collaborate. Shannon is the father of capacity theorem in communications, there are a huge number of scientists who are spending time to reach Shannon capacity or beyond that, and these scientists/researchers are working together. Who knows, one day, my assumption at the beginning will be invalid for your case.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: This article in *Nature* reinforces the anecdotal answers, although it doesn't focus on single authors precisely: ["Large teams develop and small teams disrupt science and technology."](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-0941-9?WT.ec_id=NATURE-201902&sap-outbound-id=A77E9BB5BF9D618C1F2C218176E02995F876061A) I guess the best a single author could hope for is to introduce "disruptive" innovation, like Shannon, Einstein, Nash, etc.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: 1. The vast majority of published research papers don't advance research or only very marginally, whether from single or multiple authors.
2. The only recognized way to evaluate the quality of a research paper, i.e. to evaluate its potential for advancing research in general, is the peer-review process. Since the peer-review process does not care at all about the number of authors, one can only assume that the number of authors is not an indicator of quality in any way.
Working solo or with a team is not a matter of quality of the outcome in general, it's a matter of:
* research topic: some topics require a diversity of skills or an amount of work which cannot be carried out by a single person. On the other hand some topics require a deep thought process which is more likely to happen in a single brain.
* personal preferences and finding the right collaborators: in research like in many other things, things often happen in this way or that way just because of circumstances.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: >
> Since more eyes means catching more mistakes, better word choices for a wider readership, and overall more awareness of what's a good idea, I'm wondering if it is even good for science to publish solo-author work.
>
>
>
I think you are confusing two issues here.
One is the writing -- mistakes, word choices, formatting, organization, etc. As you say "more eyes" is better: you have made good arguments for why there should be many editors. Even excellent authors are often "too close" to the work to see the bigger picture and explain it coherently (and most authors are not excellent - a lot of published papers, even in good journals, have substandard writing in all areas, including simple English language mistakes). Even beyond the language, a scientific editor should be able to identify weaknesses and mistakes in the paper as a whole.
The other is the authorship. An author makes an intellectual contribution. The requirement to be an author has been discussed [ad nauseum](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/12030/what-are-the-minimum-contributions-required-for-co-authorship) here. Adding more authors does not always make the paper better (in fact, "too many cooks" often makes it worse), and language editors would not meet the bar for authorship. The advantages of multiple authors means that the work can be divided, and different areas of expertise can be brought to bear on a related problem. Sometimes this makes sense, sometimes it doesn't.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/22
| 2,187
| 9,642
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am at the beginning of my academic career (first "professor at uni" job after PhD). My official obligations are pretty standard: teach, do research, and faculty-related admin stuff.
Now, I have my area of research specialisation. However, on top of this, I have an ambitious goal to form myself in these **meta** topics (meta in the sense that they are not about changing my area of specialisation within my discipline, but rather about complementing and improving my general standing as a scientist and teacher):
* philosophy of my science [which might imply some basic formation in wider philosophy of science and perhaps philosophy in general]
* history of my science
* educational/teaching literature [for improving teaching methods]
* critical thinking methods [to improve research, debating skills, and to foster in students]
The list I gave is not exhaustive, but take it as a core.
As a further restriction, consider the fact that
* my memory is fragile, and I mostly learn and retain through "learning-by-doing" [so just reading a book might not be enough. I need to do something with it, e.g. teach or research or form habits]
* I want to have a life outside my job [i.e. any investment must not consume all my free time]
Given the above, the questions are, based on your experience:
1. is something like this feasible?
2. if so, how best to proceed? For instance, would you study all topics in parallel, or start with one, "finish it", and move on? Would you go DIY or take a course?<issue_comment>username_1: As you already know, you need to do something with the things you are trying to learn if you want to retain them. Students learn from reinforcement and feedback. We give them exercises and we comment on their performance. For an individual, the feedback part is harder, but the reinforcement is fairly easy. It is also easy to arrange things so that it doesn't interfere too much with your daily life.
My suggestion is that you read a lot but that you take notes as you read. When you finish a piece of work (or even a chapter in a long work) you go over your notes and write a summary of them. The third stage is to capture your most important points (reviewing your review) on index cards that you can easily carry with you as you go about your daily life. If you find yourself with a spare moment, rather than being bored, take out your note cards and review a few of them.
Don't write too much on any card initially. Never more than one side. You want the other side for ideas and questions that arise as you review the notes, so carry a pen/pencil along with your note cards.
The nice thing about note cards, as opposed to notebooks, is that you can easily rearrange them, discard them, staple a couple together, etc. But a pocket sized notebook is also helpful to carry for somewhat longer thoughts.
If you want feedback, talk to your colleagues about the things you are thinking about, prompted by your current pocket set of note cards.
See this [answer](https://cseducators.stackexchange.com/a/1168/1293) on another site for a longer discussion of the Hipster PDA.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Since you learn best by doing, I would suggest a few basic techniques that will allow you to learn these materials and retain the knowledge over the long-term. The important thing is not to overload yourself with too much disparate information at one time, and to also make sure you are doing enough to solidify each important piece of knowledge before you move on to something else. Look at this as a long-term goal --- aim to gradually build knowledge *gradually and in a "deep" manner*, where you solidify new knowledge as you go.
---
**Start with what you know, and let yourself wander outward:** I would counsel against attempting to learn a large number of meta topics at once. The difficulty with doing this is that those topics might not have obvious connections for you, and that will make knowledge retention difficult. Instead, it is often useful to start with a topic that is of immediate interest to you, which gives rise to broad meta-questions to which you do not already know the answer. It is commonly the case that aspects of your discipline border on to other disciplines, including broader issues of philosophy of science, and so there are often a lot of obvious questions at the border of your own knowledge. By answering these, and connecting it to your existing knowledge and work, you can move outward and solidify your knowledge at each step. Pick a topic on the border of your existing knowledge, and focus on that, but allow yourself to wander into its connections with other topics as you get to the margins.
Since you have not mentioned your area of speciality (or even the broad field you are in) it is not possible for me to give examples that are applicable to you. So in substitution of that, I will give you an example of my own previous learning. I am a statistician, and when I was learning probability and statistics in detail as a grad-student, I learned a lot about the mathematics of "random variables", which are a certain kind of mathematical object. There are some natural philosophical questions arising from this. Is there actually such a thing as randomness in nature? If not, does that invalidate the foundations of probability theory? If not, why not --- i.e., why would it make sense to have mathematical "random variables" if there is no randomness. If there is no randomness in nature, then what is "probability"? Those inquiries led me to the literature on philosophy and probability (plus determinism, indeterminism, compatibalism, etc.), which led me to other broader methodological issues in epistemology, and to learning the approaches of a number of broad schools of thought. One question naturally led to another, until eventually I had a good meta-knowledge that I could connect all the way back to practical issues in my subject matter.
---
**Learn the history by learning about individuals, and remember interesting titbits about them:** Just as it is useful to learn broad subject areas by starting with individual questions and working outward, when learning the history of your science, it is similarly useful to start with one person who developed something you find particularly interesting, and then gradually expand outward to learn about more and more people and groups. Also, avoid just learning about the contribution of each person to your field --- try to augment this by learning some interesting things about each individual that will help you remember them.
For example, I have learned a lot about the statistical contributions of [Ronald Fisher](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Fisher), but I also try to remember him better by familiarising myself with his contributions in genetics and eugenics. No matter how much I might forget about Fisher, it is very easy to remember that he formulated the "sexy son hypothesis" in genetics. That is not something that is super important to understanding his contribution to statistics, but it is an interesting thing about Fisher that makes it easy to remember him. Similarly, I remember [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Sealy_Gosset) by the fact that he worked at a Guinness brewery for almost all of his career. When I teach introductory statistics to students, I often mention this little titbit, and whenever I have occasion to drink a Guinness, I will usually bore my drinking partner half to death by bringing up Gosset's work on the Student-T distribution.
---
**Write about the things you learn, even if it is not an academic paper:** In some instances, there may be opportunities for you to incorporate what you learn into your publishable scholarly papers. Unfortunately, the large amount of effort involved in scholarly research means that this is not usually a feasible method of broad learning on a wide range of topics. For that reason, it is worth establishing some other avenue for you to write about what you have learned and present it to others. This could be writing articles or posts on a website or blog, answering questions on one of the StackExchange websites, giving presentations to colleagues, or incorporating what you learn into your lecture materials and teaching it to students.
Some researchers keep expository notes on things they are learning, and personally, I find that the easiest and most effective was to do this is to start writing up "partial papers" in the form of a scholarly paper whenever you get any new idea while learning a new subject. These can be expository papers that might or might not become substantial enough to warrant an academic publication, but in the meantime, they function as useful expository notes collecting and organising your thoughts on a topic you have studied. I have written hundreds of these partial papers, and most will probably never get turned into full published papers, but they are there on my hard-drive to allow me to look at my own exposition of an idea or area of analysis that was interesting to me. By framing the exposition as something that might one-day be an academic paper, I also put it in an organised manner, and save myself some work if I want to develop it for publication later.
---
**Incorporate what you learn into your teaching:** When you have learned a new thing that sheds light on your subject, try incorporating this into your lecture notes and adding it to your lessons to your students. Teaching is often a very effective method of learning, and it can be useful to solidify your knowledge.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/22
| 1,209
| 5,447
|
<issue_start>username_0: I reviewed a research paper and found it to be well-written with no technical or language issues. How should I go about writing the review report for the paper?
If I write something on the lines of "the work is well-written and well-presented" and keep the review report succinct, I am worried that the editor might think I did not review it critically.<issue_comment>username_1: A short letter saying the paper is correct and well written is OK.
The editor may want your opinion about whether it's important or interesting enough to meet the standards for this particular journal. Check your instructions.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If this concerns you, write something like:
>
> This paper uses X to investigate Y. It is well-written and the conclusions are backed by the experiments performed. I have no concerns and recommend acceptance as-is.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Just being well-written and correct is not enough. Why should someone read the paper? What are the new things that we learn thanks to this work? Why is it exciting, interesting or useful? Why should we care about it so much that it should be published in a journal? How is it advancing science? What was the state of the art before this work, and how did this paper change the world?
In your review, you should explicitly recommend either acceptance or rejection. If you recommend acceptance, your review has to convince the editor that the paper is indeed worth accepting. (Similarly, if you recommend rejection, you will need to convince the editor that the paper should not be accepted.)
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: The answer of username_3 was very nice and comprehensive. However, I would like to add some remarks.
Remember that there was a reason that the editor has chosen you to be the reviewer of the paper. Because he/she found you an expert in this scientific field not in the language or the technique of writing. Therefore you should be very strict about reviewing the paper and give feedback on every aspects of the study, including the literature, the novelty of the work, the details of the experiment (or the method that they have used), the flow of the paper, the language, etc.
Even if you find the study sound in every manner, which is very rare, then it is strongly recommended to write a paragraph about the study at the beginning of your review. This clarifies everything and then everyone understands that you have reveiwed the paper in a correct manner.
Good luck
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: You should go with what @username_3 suggested: explain why the paper is interesting, why someone should read it, etc. But there is another thing -- in my field, reviews often start with a few paragraphs that quickly summarize the work being discussed (usually in a pretty neutral way). This allows the reviewer to recap what they understood about the work, gives authors and others a chance to see if they misunderstood something -- and yes it also makes the review more substantial.
So in addition to positive feedback about the work, you can consider also including your own quick neutral summary of what you understood from the work.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: >
> If I write something on the lines of "the work is well-written and well-presented" and keep the review report succinct, I am worried that the editor might think I did not review it critically.
>
>
>
There is no such thing as a perfect paper. Even when a paper is technically sound and written in perfect English, there usually is something like an explanation that could have done better, a confusing notation, a missed connection to existing work, or a misleading emphasis in the abstract. You probably know this from your own writing that no matter how often you revised it in response to constructive critique, a reviewer can point out some obvious (minor) improvement.
As a consequence, when I am reviewing a paper (that I had not seen before) and had nothing to remark for a few paragraph, this is very likely because I became unfocused. When I receive a paper from internal review without any comments, I am suspecting that the reviewer did not put much effort into it.
And if I were an editor, an otherwise all positive review (as you are about to give) would carry more weight for me if accompanied by a list of minor issues. This demonstrates that the reviewer actually thoroughly and critically read the paper. It also somewhat makes it less likely that the reviewer is just blindly recommending acceptance of a crony’s paper. One of my own papers was clearly subjected to one more review than usual for the respective journal after receiving a short exclusively positive review.
Now, it is of course impossible to know the editor’s stance on this, unless you intimately know them. Also, things may be a bit different, if you have a reputation as a thorough reviewer and the paper in question is written by your known arch-enemy. However, I consider it unlikely that a paper’s chances are diminished by a list of minor issues clearly labelled as such. This should of course be accompanied by the things mentioned in the other answers:
* A summary of the paper in your own words.
* A short list of technical highlights of the paper.
* A short evaluation of the paper’s importance (unless the journal in question explicitly does not care abut novelty/impact).
Upvotes: 4
|
2019/11/22
| 368
| 1,498
|
<issue_start>username_0: I just took and received a very bad math subject gre score of 600, or 37th percentile.
Would it still be worth it to apply to any school that requires the subject test? I've been working at several tech startups for a few years so some of the material wasn't as fresh as it maybe would have been.
A bit of my background, I'm finishing up my masters in math at a top 10 university, I don't have any publications yet but I'm working on a thesis under a very well known professor. My grades are good and I'm a TA and grader at the university.
I guess the question is whether or not admissions committees would use the poor score as enough of a reason to reject a candidate. Or would it make more sense to wait until I can retake the exam in April and put academia/PhD aside for a year.
Thanks<issue_comment>username_1: This is very variable. Some admissions committees think that the subject GRE score is important, and some do not. Even at the same department, it may vary from year to year depending on who is on the committee.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Once you get past an automatic screening based on your score (aif there is one) I think what will matter most is the letter from your advisor, with whom you seem to have a good working relationship.
I haven't been involved in graduate admissions enough recently to know whether publication before entry into a doctoral program is normal or required.
Talk to your advisor about your plans.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/11/22
| 1,090
| 4,596
|
<issue_start>username_0: Very simple question. Reading some Q&A here and experience from my own papers and reviews I'm actually wondering when and how often the associate editor managing a possible review process of a submitted paper declines to start the process.
Maybe for not reaching formal standards of the journal, or wrong scope. If these points are fullfilled, will the associate editor always start to look for appropriate reviewers?
Once I heard in a talk of a physical review letters employee they get 10.000 submissions per year and 1.000 articles are finally published. I cannot believe they start 10.000 review processes, this would be a waste of everybody's time. On the other side every physicist knows PRL is the most prestigious journal in the field and you cannot submit garbage. So I believe most of the 10.000 submissions fulfill the formal standards. Based on which criterions the associate editor will then not start the review process? Age/quality of references, abstract, his historic and topical background and expertise? I never was associate editor myself but I guess they don't read the full article, but skim abstract, introduction, figures, references and conclusion maybe?<issue_comment>username_1: This obviously depends a lot on the journal. I've never heard of an article being not being sent for review for (say) Classical and Quantum Gravity. But in the case of Physical Review Letters, rejections by the editorial desk are quite common, with the most commonly cited reason being the significance of the work is not clear (enough).
For a good PRL submission the significance of the work needs to be clear to non-field expert readers from reading the abstract/introduction. So, if its not clear to the editor what the significance of the Letter is from reading the introduction, the submission is simply not good enough for PRL.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I'll give you my perspective as an co-Editor-in-Chief and previously an Associate Editor of the ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software (ACM TOMS):
* As Editor-in-Chief, I take a brief look at each paper and decide whether it even makes sense to move forward with it. I would say that between 10 and 20% of the papers are already filtered out at this stage: They are not within scope of the journal, or are obviously not at the level we expect -- we get our fair share of submissions from second and third world countries (and some from first world countries) that are at the level of semester projects for advanced graduates.
* As Editor-in-Chief, many submissions I get are not within my research area. The ones already filtered out above are *obviously* not acceptable, but then there are many that I suspect are not good enough, but where I don't know the area well enough to make the call. These get handed on to the Associate Editors, often with a note that they should take a look whether I'm right or wrong in suspecting that the paper does not meet our criteria.
* As Associate Editor (before I became EiC), I then reject another ~15% or so based on my subject area knowledge.
So I suspect that for this journal -- a fairly reputable one with one of the highest impact factors as far as math journals go --, about 1/4 of the papers get rejected without being sent out to review. Of course, then another 1/3 to 1/2 or so of the rest get rejected after review.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: It's certainly not the case that "you can't submit garbage" to PRL. In fact I'd wager that the more prestigious a journal, the more garbage they receive. From the author's perspective, it doesn't cost them anything (except time) to submit, and the worst that can happen is a desk rejection, so why not.
The review process starts immediately. If the associate editor does not invite reviewers but elects to desk reject, that's still part of the review process. Therefore I interpret your question as asking what makes the editor send the paper out to an external reviewer. In this case it's not that hard to decide. [You read the paper to get a grasp of what it's trying to say](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/23268/how-long-should-it-take-to-read-a-paper). You don't read it in enough detail to understand everything, but you understand what its innovations are and why they matter. And then you make a decision whether it's interesting/important enough to send for review.
Note that PRL has [loads of full-time PhD staff](https://journals.aps.org/prl/staff), so it's quite believable that they start 10,000 review processes a year.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/11/23
| 513
| 1,986
|
<issue_start>username_0: In filling out my very first grad school application I've come across the Letters of Recommendation page. It says to list the "Title" of the recommender. Do I use Professor here? Or Dr.? I am stumped. Both of my recommenders are professors and that is how I refer to them, but I am just not sure which one I should be putting here since they have Doctorate degrees. I don’t want to make a mistake... I found [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/121186/professor-title-in-application) which was sort of related, but also confused me even more. If the professor has a title like X-Y Professor of Z or Professor of X and Y, do I use that full title? Or should I just write "Professor" or "Professor of [subject]"?<issue_comment>username_1: "Professor" is in some respects a more "advanced" title because many people who have doctorates are not professors. You may have writers who have a doctorate, but do not hold a professorship.
I would put "Professor," but in most places, **it does not matter at all**. (I've read that Germany for example is a stickler for titles, though.)
It would not be typical to include "Professor of [X]."
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Note that some countries (Germany and the Netherlands come to mind) only full professors are allowed to use the "Prof." title, i.e. it is incorrect (in these countries) to address the (equivalent of) an associate or assistant professor as "Prof.".
Of course, (as pointed out in other answers) nothing bad will happen if an assistant professor is incorrectly address as "Prof." in an automated e-mail requesting a LoR upload, but be aware that it may make the subject feel slightly awkward.
A mostly safe strategy is to stick to:
* "Prof." for letter writes that are full professors.
* "Dr." for other letter writers (as long as they hold a PhD).
* If the letter writer uses a particular title on their personal webpage, **use that**.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/11/23
| 485
| 2,062
|
<issue_start>username_0: I applied to two places last year; both failed. I am not sure if I ask the professor to write a letter for me again, would he be annoyed? How should I tell him?
If I tell him that I failed, would that cast a negative impression of me on him?<issue_comment>username_1: Two rejections are not so many, especially if you applied to highly competitive universities/departments. [Some](https://www.onlinephdprograms.org/faq/how-many-phd-programs-should-i-apply-to/) suggest applying to as many as 10 different places (of course, assuming you find so many research departments that interest you).
Just ask your professor again, I would not expect him to be annoyed. Even though we cannot know for sure how he will react, the uncertainty about his reaction should not block you from pursuing your academic goals.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I doubt your professor would be annoyed enough to deny you a letter (or several), but you also need to evaluate your plans for advancement. While two applications that aren't successful isn't a large number, and you may have been shooting at too high a target, you may be doing something wrong in your applications.
An application for an academic program, as for a job, needs to show both a suitable background and a strong likelihood of success. If you don't show both of those you won't be successful.
I would ask someone, perhaps your professor, or perhaps some office dedicated to advancing student careers, for advice. Take them everything you have used in your applications and ask them for advice in refining it. Also, as for their advice as to the kind of institution you should be applying to. If you have only applied to Cambridge and MIT and have not been accepted, then you are obviously aiming for too tiny a target. A broader approach is much more likely to be successful. If you have the background and good letters then applying to top universities is probably worth it, but if you apply *only* to such places your chances diminish. Greatly.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/23
| 4,491
| 17,797
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a newly minted PhD researcher from Sweden who just finished my defense this summer (after a really stressfull and draining final year). Ever since then I have been thinking about my future in academia. I basically decided I wanted to build a startup together some friends of mine and we are now in the middle of developing a [note-taking app for academia](https://www.avidnote.com) to make it easier to write and organize notes when writing research articles. We've received a bunch of really encouraging feedback so far from the people who have signed up for the free test version. However, I realize that the more time I spend on this, the less time I have to build my academic profile, publish papers and so forth.
**So my specific questions are:**
* Are there any successful examples of people who have managed to both be part of a growing startup and continue on in academia?
* I've currently chosen to work in academia only part-time (making basically 1/3 of the salary that I made as a PhD student, just *barely* enough to pay the bills so I don't take from my limited savings) but I keep hearing the advice that it's better to go all in and remove any safety net? Is this good advice or is it better to do it gradually?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't have examples for you, but having something on the side while pursuing an username_2 career is pretty common. Many people are book authors, for example. Both username_2 books and otherwise. Writing software with the hope of selling it is also pretty common. I've done both, actually.
A fair number of people in finance are active investors also.
But, both academia and running a company with employees is difficult. Both are full time jobs and it may be possible that neither helps much with the other. So, you may need to focus on one or the other as your *primary* interest and just "dabble" in the other.
Some textbook authors have become millionaires, actually.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: In my experience, those who succeed in academia tend to work quite hard at it. If you just want to teach classes, and not worry about research, then I think that working part-time might make sense. But if you want a career as a researcher, then without a full-time effort you might find it difficult to keep up with your field at all.
From what I have read, those who succeed at startups work still harder at them. You might read [Paul Graham's essays](http://paulgraham.com/articles.html) on this. He describes his days as a founder of Viaweb -- at one point, he had to have a root canal done, and he had been working so hard that sitting in the dentist's chair felt like a break.
I know of two examples of startups started by research mathematicians. One is [NTRU](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTRU), started by three very successful number theorists, which sold cryptography software. From what I recall, the startup was only modestly successful, but the founders are all still very successful username_2s.
Conversely, there is [<NAME>](https://wstein.org/). For awhile he worked simultaneously as an username_2 and a startup founder, and he has since resigned his username_2 post to work full time on his business (which I understand is doing well).
In summary, I suspect that succeeding at academia and at a startup simultaneously would require a huge amount of motivation to work *very* hard, together with very good luck. You might be able to do both for a year, if you have a lot of energy, but in the long run I suspect that you would probably want to choose.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: There is a huge literature on the topic of [username_2 entrepreneurs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_entrepreneur) (and entrepreneurial username_2s). A recent review of the literature can be found [here](https://ore.exeter.ac.uk/repository/handle/10871/25689). Similarly, there are many books on the topic (e.g. [here](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/148420624X) and [here](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/1118859081)). Plus millions of blog posts (e.g. [here](https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2016/02/16/the-tough-life-of-an-username_2-entrepreneur/)).
I think it is hard to generalise. For example, [this paper](https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/orsc.1070.0295) highlights the multitude of dimensions involved in the extent and success of entrepreneuring, some outside the control of the individual. [This paper](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1468-2273.2007.00368.x) distinguished between three groups. First, the ‘entrepreneurial username_2s’:
>
> These are individuals who planned to stay in a university but also spent time working in spin‐out companies. They had experienced a number of operational difficulties in trying to develop this new career type and many felt that although the government and universities said they want them to work like this, they had been slow to adjust their own policies and procedures to take account of this change.
>
>
>
A second group, consisting of:
>
> individuals who were in the process of developing a new kind of career as technology‐transfer professionals. Notably they were younger than those in the first group, and more junior within their departments. The majority wished to stay working in a university context but did not see themselves staying at the laboratory bench.
>
>
>
Finally, the third group:
>
> made up of younger people who have either recently completed their PhD or have been employed on postdoctoral research contracts. Most seemed unsure where their future direction lay and were using [a research program] to develop the knowledge, skills and resources that they saw as vital to the development of a successful career. ... The scientists in the third group were well aware of the traditional scientific career path and its status but saw it as largely unavailable; a relic of the past that was now only offered to the lucky few. Their aim was to find, or develop, a career path that would allow them to use their science, provide opportunities for growth, and offer a degree of security unavailable to the large numbers of postdoctoral scientists who find themselves in a seemingly endless spiral of short‐term contracts.
>
>
>
Relatedly, [this paper](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166497210000313) offers and tests a model of career path, concluding that:
>
> entrepreneurial self-efficacy, type of research, perceived role models, number of years spent at an username_2 institution, and patents are significantly related to the formation of username_2-entrepreneurial intentions, regardless of cultural context.
>
>
>
A similar approach is taking by [this paper](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jsbm.12181).
The bottom line is that success as entrepreneurs depends on many conditions, some outside the control of the username_2. There are different models in which username_2s engage in these activities, some involving moving away from academia. All in all, beyond anecdotal evidence, of course there are successful entrepreneurial username_2s. Whether you can be one or not is something you must confront with the evidence above and your own insights.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: **Summary:** a whole-hearted career is usually not achieved in part-time. Neither in academia nor in industry.
The exception I can see, though, is if the start-up is closely related to the founder's field of research. In that case, the professional experience from both academia and business may sucessfully add up, and can be transferred from one to the other, e.g. username_2 research going into high-tech business, and business experience providing knowledge such as "this works in practice and also over extended time".
(I'd definitively not take the full plunge in your situation - unless a founder grant comes up that pays you for developing the business full time. But that is something that *you*'ll have to decide for yourself.)
---
*Disclaimer: I'm business owner, still quite close to academia (see below) and doing research, but not a start-up founder (in the sense that I'm not planning fast/explosive growth for the company)*
IMHO there are some business models and circumstances that go well alongside academia/research and give synergy effects while other combinations don't combine as well/just exist in parallel without synergy.
E.g. my business now is pretty much the same as what I did as researcher: chemometrics, i.e. data analysis specialized to chemistry.
In contrast, your business idea is related to academia (you spotted a need there), but that experience is unlikely to help your civil engineering username_2 carreer (nor vice versa).
This will probably make the transition/distinction between academia and business harder/sharper for you. However, there's still quite a lot of room for you to decide how much of a sharp transition is is to be.
---
>
> [Working part-time vs.] I keep hearing the advice that it's better to go all in and remove any safety net
>
>
>
That's of course up to you to decide. And as a startup founder, you may as well get used to making decision of that "size".
The most obvious advantage of going all in is **developing the business faster**. This may mean more profit/success earlier, and it *may* tip the scales to becoming successful at all.
I went the gradual way, very much so: I first had my business as a side-line that served also as having an immediate plan B to counter username_2 job insecurity, at the same time putting together quite some savings (by working while sticking to a student lifestyle - this easy when working in academia as large parts of the colleagues around are unpaid or on part-time wage), both with the primary goal of creating a level playing field for username_2 job negotiations. After some 10 years of experience in my field I finally decided it's time to move more seriously into business, and took the offer of my employer to "phase out" with a part-time contract looking a bit longer after one research project. Since then, I've had more part-time contracts at other username_2 institutes, which I mentally treat as clients, though: they had grants that called for employees but did not allow sub-contractors.
In that situation, the **part-time** academia/part-time self-employed has some **burocratic disadvantages**: I need non-standard working contracts that explicitly put formal boundaries around what is supposed to be the results of the employed work (otherwise e.g. copyright for software I write for a customer or for my company may end up being with the [username_2] employer) - and university HR departments may will probably block anything they are not used to ("We never do anything but standard contracts").
**Consequences**
Back to the recommendation of plunging in: I'd also recommend to keep in mind how much skin those who advise you have in the consequences of that decision (i.e. Is it your parents who advise and would maybe take you into their home again if the business fails and you're deep in debt? Or who even say that they'd bail you out up to xxx SEK? Is it some friends for whom *your* financial desaster won't have the slightest consequence? Is it someone who could easily afford to loose, say, 1/4 mio SEK or 25 k€ or even more on the start-up experiment telling you what they'd do in your place?)
Of course if you go wholly in at a stage in life where you have hardly any savings, there isn't as much that is lost if that business fails. But you may be ending in a personal bankrupcy. Also, some business models have clients that take a deep look into the financial position of the owner, or that may require substantial financial stamina - my experience with universities as late paying customers suggests that the latter may be the case with your business as well.
There are also cultural aspects here: I'm in Germany where society is in general comparably risk-averse and failing as business owner (and much less personal bancruptcy) is not really the done thing.
Plus, what are the consequences in terms of **social insurance** of (not) having a side job? Here, the social security system in large parts revolves around the so-called normal employee. One of the peculiarities is that for self-employed the governmental health insurance has a minimum contribution (which was recently lowered so that the proportional zone starts now already at ≈1040 €/month), another one is that for self-employed all sources of income count while for employees only the wage is subject to health insurance fees.
In consequence, the recommendation here for most is to start a business from a part-time position if feasible (unless one is really sure that it will generate good income from the 1st year on, or one is paid by a business founder grant etc.).
All this aside, some startup statistics:
* the vast majority (> 3/4) of start-ups have their founders actually put savings into the business ([EU Startup Monitor 2018](http://startupmonitor.eu/EU-Startup-Monitor-2018-Report-WEB.pdf), numbers in the US are AFAIK similar).
* [It is normal for a startup to take years becoming successful.](https://www.startups.com/library/expert-advice/how-long-will-it-take-for-my-startup-to-be-successful) This doesn't mean the business won't be able to pay, but if you have the financial freedom to decide whether it's good to take out money to pay yourself vs. leaving that money in the business as investment you're obviously in a much better position than if you *have* to take out the money for your own survival.
And having a small but steady and sufficient income from some other source may give you that freedom.
**Part time positions** for business founders are again something that is often much **easier available in academia** than in industry, particularly if the reason for asking for a part-time job is that one wants to found a business in that profession: to academia that is usually not a competitor but a source of pride "that's our former colleague who's now a founder" or, if it's a spin-off, also something that counts in evaluations of the department.
Your situation of founding something totally different from your profession may help you to get an industry part-time job (paid with an industry wage) in parallel to your own business. So if you decide that keeping a foot inside academia isn't for your love of username_2 research but for practical financial reasons, you may consider a part time job in industry as alternative.
---
* [Professional experience in the field of business is an important factor for start-up success](https://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/article/younger-older-tech-entrepreneurs)
I'd expect your business to be at lower-than-average chance of success (unless someone else in your team has substantial experience in your business) and would therefore keep a "survival" side-job.
---
**Academic career**
Last but not least, you'll have to specify what a successful career in academia is for you.
Personally, I like doing research - so for me a lifetime position as a researcher (as opposed to research manager such as professors usually are) would be a successful username_2 career. You may call that the eternal postdoc.
Even though I certainly do a lot of burocracy as business owner, I most probably would have spent similar amounts of time with grant writing and (other) burocracy had I stayed in academia as "advancing" from postdoc to PI would have been basically unavoidable.
Oh, and I teach (mostly industry clients but also at universities and research institutes) and I still do reseach and method development - in some ways I now have more freedom in that than the username_2 freedom I experienced in some research institutes. So I still have the parts of username_2 work that I like most.
What I think is *not* going to work is at the same time trying to get a startup successfully going and going for a highly competitive username_2 career (professorship/starting your own username_2 group - see also [What ratio of PhD graduates in STEM fields ultimately end up as (tenured) professors?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/17431/725)).
---
**Unrelated business field and academia**
This is only hear-say, so please take it as such. I've been told anecdotally by a chemistry professor close to retirement that it is not unusual for people being somewhat burned out/fed up with their profession after finishing their PhD and in consequence running an unrelated business (think pet shop by PhD in chemistry) for a while - until they return to their original profession. I don't recall whether anything was said about returning to username_2 research vs. working in industry (but a chemist with PhD in industry is likely to do research as well)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: People who go into startups tend to become completely consumed by those startups, or else the startups fail.
As such, what I've observed amongst my colleagues is that the professor generally either quickly ends up in only a consulting/advisory role or else jumps ship to the startup.
What seems to work very well, however, is for graduating students or postdocs to become the core members of the startup. The folks graduating from the lab generally are the most deeply familiar with the specific technology, and they're in a good situation to invest themselves fully in the startup. The professor then typically lends their name and their expertise at a lower level.
In short: it's best to choose one or the other, but one can generally de facto split the difference because there's usually more than one person involved.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/23
| 4,300
| 17,006
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a student and I have been assigned to read a research papaer in the robotics field, understand it, elaborate it and write an essay about it. I have never done something similar, so I am a little bit lost.
How should I read a research paper in order to do this? Is there a particular way of reading a paper or I just start from the top and follow the order of the pages? And is there an effective way to elaborate it?
Thanks in advance.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't have examples for you, but having something on the side while pursuing an username_2 career is pretty common. Many people are book authors, for example. Both username_2 books and otherwise. Writing software with the hope of selling it is also pretty common. I've done both, actually.
A fair number of people in finance are active investors also.
But, both academia and running a company with employees is difficult. Both are full time jobs and it may be possible that neither helps much with the other. So, you may need to focus on one or the other as your *primary* interest and just "dabble" in the other.
Some textbook authors have become millionaires, actually.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: In my experience, those who succeed in academia tend to work quite hard at it. If you just want to teach classes, and not worry about research, then I think that working part-time might make sense. But if you want a career as a researcher, then without a full-time effort you might find it difficult to keep up with your field at all.
From what I have read, those who succeed at startups work still harder at them. You might read [Paul Graham's essays](http://paulgraham.com/articles.html) on this. He describes his days as a founder of Viaweb -- at one point, he had to have a root canal done, and he had been working so hard that sitting in the dentist's chair felt like a break.
I know of two examples of startups started by research mathematicians. One is [NTRU](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTRU), started by three very successful number theorists, which sold cryptography software. From what I recall, the startup was only modestly successful, but the founders are all still very successful username_2s.
Conversely, there is [<NAME>](https://wstein.org/). For awhile he worked simultaneously as an username_2 and a startup founder, and he has since resigned his username_2 post to work full time on his business (which I understand is doing well).
In summary, I suspect that succeeding at academia and at a startup simultaneously would require a huge amount of motivation to work *very* hard, together with very good luck. You might be able to do both for a year, if you have a lot of energy, but in the long run I suspect that you would probably want to choose.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: There is a huge literature on the topic of [username_2 entrepreneurs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_entrepreneur) (and entrepreneurial username_2s). A recent review of the literature can be found [here](https://ore.exeter.ac.uk/repository/handle/10871/25689). Similarly, there are many books on the topic (e.g. [here](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/148420624X) and [here](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/1118859081)). Plus millions of blog posts (e.g. [here](https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2016/02/16/the-tough-life-of-an-username_2-entrepreneur/)).
I think it is hard to generalise. For example, [this paper](https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/orsc.1070.0295) highlights the multitude of dimensions involved in the extent and success of entrepreneuring, some outside the control of the individual. [This paper](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1468-2273.2007.00368.x) distinguished between three groups. First, the ‘entrepreneurial username_2s’:
>
> These are individuals who planned to stay in a university but also spent time working in spin‐out companies. They had experienced a number of operational difficulties in trying to develop this new career type and many felt that although the government and universities said they want them to work like this, they had been slow to adjust their own policies and procedures to take account of this change.
>
>
>
A second group, consisting of:
>
> individuals who were in the process of developing a new kind of career as technology‐transfer professionals. Notably they were younger than those in the first group, and more junior within their departments. The majority wished to stay working in a university context but did not see themselves staying at the laboratory bench.
>
>
>
Finally, the third group:
>
> made up of younger people who have either recently completed their PhD or have been employed on postdoctoral research contracts. Most seemed unsure where their future direction lay and were using [a research program] to develop the knowledge, skills and resources that they saw as vital to the development of a successful career. ... The scientists in the third group were well aware of the traditional scientific career path and its status but saw it as largely unavailable; a relic of the past that was now only offered to the lucky few. Their aim was to find, or develop, a career path that would allow them to use their science, provide opportunities for growth, and offer a degree of security unavailable to the large numbers of postdoctoral scientists who find themselves in a seemingly endless spiral of short‐term contracts.
>
>
>
Relatedly, [this paper](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166497210000313) offers and tests a model of career path, concluding that:
>
> entrepreneurial self-efficacy, type of research, perceived role models, number of years spent at an username_2 institution, and patents are significantly related to the formation of username_2-entrepreneurial intentions, regardless of cultural context.
>
>
>
A similar approach is taking by [this paper](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jsbm.12181).
The bottom line is that success as entrepreneurs depends on many conditions, some outside the control of the username_2. There are different models in which username_2s engage in these activities, some involving moving away from academia. All in all, beyond anecdotal evidence, of course there are successful entrepreneurial username_2s. Whether you can be one or not is something you must confront with the evidence above and your own insights.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: **Summary:** a whole-hearted career is usually not achieved in part-time. Neither in academia nor in industry.
The exception I can see, though, is if the start-up is closely related to the founder's field of research. In that case, the professional experience from both academia and business may sucessfully add up, and can be transferred from one to the other, e.g. username_2 research going into high-tech business, and business experience providing knowledge such as "this works in practice and also over extended time".
(I'd definitively not take the full plunge in your situation - unless a founder grant comes up that pays you for developing the business full time. But that is something that *you*'ll have to decide for yourself.)
---
*Disclaimer: I'm business owner, still quite close to academia (see below) and doing research, but not a start-up founder (in the sense that I'm not planning fast/explosive growth for the company)*
IMHO there are some business models and circumstances that go well alongside academia/research and give synergy effects while other combinations don't combine as well/just exist in parallel without synergy.
E.g. my business now is pretty much the same as what I did as researcher: chemometrics, i.e. data analysis specialized to chemistry.
In contrast, your business idea is related to academia (you spotted a need there), but that experience is unlikely to help your civil engineering username_2 carreer (nor vice versa).
This will probably make the transition/distinction between academia and business harder/sharper for you. However, there's still quite a lot of room for you to decide how much of a sharp transition is is to be.
---
>
> [Working part-time vs.] I keep hearing the advice that it's better to go all in and remove any safety net
>
>
>
That's of course up to you to decide. And as a startup founder, you may as well get used to making decision of that "size".
The most obvious advantage of going all in is **developing the business faster**. This may mean more profit/success earlier, and it *may* tip the scales to becoming successful at all.
I went the gradual way, very much so: I first had my business as a side-line that served also as having an immediate plan B to counter username_2 job insecurity, at the same time putting together quite some savings (by working while sticking to a student lifestyle - this easy when working in academia as large parts of the colleagues around are unpaid or on part-time wage), both with the primary goal of creating a level playing field for username_2 job negotiations. After some 10 years of experience in my field I finally decided it's time to move more seriously into business, and took the offer of my employer to "phase out" with a part-time contract looking a bit longer after one research project. Since then, I've had more part-time contracts at other username_2 institutes, which I mentally treat as clients, though: they had grants that called for employees but did not allow sub-contractors.
In that situation, the **part-time** academia/part-time self-employed has some **burocratic disadvantages**: I need non-standard working contracts that explicitly put formal boundaries around what is supposed to be the results of the employed work (otherwise e.g. copyright for software I write for a customer or for my company may end up being with the [username_2] employer) - and university HR departments may will probably block anything they are not used to ("We never do anything but standard contracts").
**Consequences**
Back to the recommendation of plunging in: I'd also recommend to keep in mind how much skin those who advise you have in the consequences of that decision (i.e. Is it your parents who advise and would maybe take you into their home again if the business fails and you're deep in debt? Or who even say that they'd bail you out up to xxx SEK? Is it some friends for whom *your* financial desaster won't have the slightest consequence? Is it someone who could easily afford to loose, say, 1/4 mio SEK or 25 k€ or even more on the start-up experiment telling you what they'd do in your place?)
Of course if you go wholly in at a stage in life where you have hardly any savings, there isn't as much that is lost if that business fails. But you may be ending in a personal bankrupcy. Also, some business models have clients that take a deep look into the financial position of the owner, or that may require substantial financial stamina - my experience with universities as late paying customers suggests that the latter may be the case with your business as well.
There are also cultural aspects here: I'm in Germany where society is in general comparably risk-averse and failing as business owner (and much less personal bancruptcy) is not really the done thing.
Plus, what are the consequences in terms of **social insurance** of (not) having a side job? Here, the social security system in large parts revolves around the so-called normal employee. One of the peculiarities is that for self-employed the governmental health insurance has a minimum contribution (which was recently lowered so that the proportional zone starts now already at ≈1040 €/month), another one is that for self-employed all sources of income count while for employees only the wage is subject to health insurance fees.
In consequence, the recommendation here for most is to start a business from a part-time position if feasible (unless one is really sure that it will generate good income from the 1st year on, or one is paid by a business founder grant etc.).
All this aside, some startup statistics:
* the vast majority (> 3/4) of start-ups have their founders actually put savings into the business ([EU Startup Monitor 2018](http://startupmonitor.eu/EU-Startup-Monitor-2018-Report-WEB.pdf), numbers in the US are AFAIK similar).
* [It is normal for a startup to take years becoming successful.](https://www.startups.com/library/expert-advice/how-long-will-it-take-for-my-startup-to-be-successful) This doesn't mean the business won't be able to pay, but if you have the financial freedom to decide whether it's good to take out money to pay yourself vs. leaving that money in the business as investment you're obviously in a much better position than if you *have* to take out the money for your own survival.
And having a small but steady and sufficient income from some other source may give you that freedom.
**Part time positions** for business founders are again something that is often much **easier available in academia** than in industry, particularly if the reason for asking for a part-time job is that one wants to found a business in that profession: to academia that is usually not a competitor but a source of pride "that's our former colleague who's now a founder" or, if it's a spin-off, also something that counts in evaluations of the department.
Your situation of founding something totally different from your profession may help you to get an industry part-time job (paid with an industry wage) in parallel to your own business. So if you decide that keeping a foot inside academia isn't for your love of username_2 research but for practical financial reasons, you may consider a part time job in industry as alternative.
---
* [Professional experience in the field of business is an important factor for start-up success](https://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/article/younger-older-tech-entrepreneurs)
I'd expect your business to be at lower-than-average chance of success (unless someone else in your team has substantial experience in your business) and would therefore keep a "survival" side-job.
---
**Academic career**
Last but not least, you'll have to specify what a successful career in academia is for you.
Personally, I like doing research - so for me a lifetime position as a researcher (as opposed to research manager such as professors usually are) would be a successful username_2 career. You may call that the eternal postdoc.
Even though I certainly do a lot of burocracy as business owner, I most probably would have spent similar amounts of time with grant writing and (other) burocracy had I stayed in academia as "advancing" from postdoc to PI would have been basically unavoidable.
Oh, and I teach (mostly industry clients but also at universities and research institutes) and I still do reseach and method development - in some ways I now have more freedom in that than the username_2 freedom I experienced in some research institutes. So I still have the parts of username_2 work that I like most.
What I think is *not* going to work is at the same time trying to get a startup successfully going and going for a highly competitive username_2 career (professorship/starting your own username_2 group - see also [What ratio of PhD graduates in STEM fields ultimately end up as (tenured) professors?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/17431/725)).
---
**Unrelated business field and academia**
This is only hear-say, so please take it as such. I've been told anecdotally by a chemistry professor close to retirement that it is not unusual for people being somewhat burned out/fed up with their profession after finishing their PhD and in consequence running an unrelated business (think pet shop by PhD in chemistry) for a while - until they return to their original profession. I don't recall whether anything was said about returning to username_2 research vs. working in industry (but a chemist with PhD in industry is likely to do research as well)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: People who go into startups tend to become completely consumed by those startups, or else the startups fail.
As such, what I've observed amongst my colleagues is that the professor generally either quickly ends up in only a consulting/advisory role or else jumps ship to the startup.
What seems to work very well, however, is for graduating students or postdocs to become the core members of the startup. The folks graduating from the lab generally are the most deeply familiar with the specific technology, and they're in a good situation to invest themselves fully in the startup. The professor then typically lends their name and their expertise at a lower level.
In short: it's best to choose one or the other, but one can generally de facto split the difference because there's usually more than one person involved.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/23
| 4,348
| 17,169
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am applying for PhD programs at graduate schools in the US and I am wondering how I should refer to researchers that I name in my statement of purpose? In particular, I am wondering whether to refer to people that have titles of 'Assistant Professor' or 'Associate Professor' as Prof. or Dr.? I have heard that the prefix 'Prof.' tends to be reserved for full, tenured Professors - is that true?
(note, that I have edited the question due to its similarity to [this one](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/37037/101), to focus specifically on the context of a statement of purpose for US grad schools)<issue_comment>username_1: I don't have examples for you, but having something on the side while pursuing an username_2 career is pretty common. Many people are book authors, for example. Both username_2 books and otherwise. Writing software with the hope of selling it is also pretty common. I've done both, actually.
A fair number of people in finance are active investors also.
But, both academia and running a company with employees is difficult. Both are full time jobs and it may be possible that neither helps much with the other. So, you may need to focus on one or the other as your *primary* interest and just "dabble" in the other.
Some textbook authors have become millionaires, actually.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: In my experience, those who succeed in academia tend to work quite hard at it. If you just want to teach classes, and not worry about research, then I think that working part-time might make sense. But if you want a career as a researcher, then without a full-time effort you might find it difficult to keep up with your field at all.
From what I have read, those who succeed at startups work still harder at them. You might read [Paul Graham's essays](http://paulgraham.com/articles.html) on this. He describes his days as a founder of Viaweb -- at one point, he had to have a root canal done, and he had been working so hard that sitting in the dentist's chair felt like a break.
I know of two examples of startups started by research mathematicians. One is [NTRU](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTRU), started by three very successful number theorists, which sold cryptography software. From what I recall, the startup was only modestly successful, but the founders are all still very successful username_2s.
Conversely, there is [<NAME>](https://wstein.org/). For awhile he worked simultaneously as an username_2 and a startup founder, and he has since resigned his username_2 post to work full time on his business (which I understand is doing well).
In summary, I suspect that succeeding at academia and at a startup simultaneously would require a huge amount of motivation to work *very* hard, together with very good luck. You might be able to do both for a year, if you have a lot of energy, but in the long run I suspect that you would probably want to choose.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: There is a huge literature on the topic of [username_2 entrepreneurs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_entrepreneur) (and entrepreneurial username_2s). A recent review of the literature can be found [here](https://ore.exeter.ac.uk/repository/handle/10871/25689). Similarly, there are many books on the topic (e.g. [here](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/148420624X) and [here](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/1118859081)). Plus millions of blog posts (e.g. [here](https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2016/02/16/the-tough-life-of-an-username_2-entrepreneur/)).
I think it is hard to generalise. For example, [this paper](https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/orsc.1070.0295) highlights the multitude of dimensions involved in the extent and success of entrepreneuring, some outside the control of the individual. [This paper](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1468-2273.2007.00368.x) distinguished between three groups. First, the ‘entrepreneurial username_2s’:
>
> These are individuals who planned to stay in a university but also spent time working in spin‐out companies. They had experienced a number of operational difficulties in trying to develop this new career type and many felt that although the government and universities said they want them to work like this, they had been slow to adjust their own policies and procedures to take account of this change.
>
>
>
A second group, consisting of:
>
> individuals who were in the process of developing a new kind of career as technology‐transfer professionals. Notably they were younger than those in the first group, and more junior within their departments. The majority wished to stay working in a university context but did not see themselves staying at the laboratory bench.
>
>
>
Finally, the third group:
>
> made up of younger people who have either recently completed their PhD or have been employed on postdoctoral research contracts. Most seemed unsure where their future direction lay and were using [a research program] to develop the knowledge, skills and resources that they saw as vital to the development of a successful career. ... The scientists in the third group were well aware of the traditional scientific career path and its status but saw it as largely unavailable; a relic of the past that was now only offered to the lucky few. Their aim was to find, or develop, a career path that would allow them to use their science, provide opportunities for growth, and offer a degree of security unavailable to the large numbers of postdoctoral scientists who find themselves in a seemingly endless spiral of short‐term contracts.
>
>
>
Relatedly, [this paper](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166497210000313) offers and tests a model of career path, concluding that:
>
> entrepreneurial self-efficacy, type of research, perceived role models, number of years spent at an username_2 institution, and patents are significantly related to the formation of username_2-entrepreneurial intentions, regardless of cultural context.
>
>
>
A similar approach is taking by [this paper](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jsbm.12181).
The bottom line is that success as entrepreneurs depends on many conditions, some outside the control of the username_2. There are different models in which username_2s engage in these activities, some involving moving away from academia. All in all, beyond anecdotal evidence, of course there are successful entrepreneurial username_2s. Whether you can be one or not is something you must confront with the evidence above and your own insights.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: **Summary:** a whole-hearted career is usually not achieved in part-time. Neither in academia nor in industry.
The exception I can see, though, is if the start-up is closely related to the founder's field of research. In that case, the professional experience from both academia and business may sucessfully add up, and can be transferred from one to the other, e.g. username_2 research going into high-tech business, and business experience providing knowledge such as "this works in practice and also over extended time".
(I'd definitively not take the full plunge in your situation - unless a founder grant comes up that pays you for developing the business full time. But that is something that *you*'ll have to decide for yourself.)
---
*Disclaimer: I'm business owner, still quite close to academia (see below) and doing research, but not a start-up founder (in the sense that I'm not planning fast/explosive growth for the company)*
IMHO there are some business models and circumstances that go well alongside academia/research and give synergy effects while other combinations don't combine as well/just exist in parallel without synergy.
E.g. my business now is pretty much the same as what I did as researcher: chemometrics, i.e. data analysis specialized to chemistry.
In contrast, your business idea is related to academia (you spotted a need there), but that experience is unlikely to help your civil engineering username_2 carreer (nor vice versa).
This will probably make the transition/distinction between academia and business harder/sharper for you. However, there's still quite a lot of room for you to decide how much of a sharp transition is is to be.
---
>
> [Working part-time vs.] I keep hearing the advice that it's better to go all in and remove any safety net
>
>
>
That's of course up to you to decide. And as a startup founder, you may as well get used to making decision of that "size".
The most obvious advantage of going all in is **developing the business faster**. This may mean more profit/success earlier, and it *may* tip the scales to becoming successful at all.
I went the gradual way, very much so: I first had my business as a side-line that served also as having an immediate plan B to counter username_2 job insecurity, at the same time putting together quite some savings (by working while sticking to a student lifestyle - this easy when working in academia as large parts of the colleagues around are unpaid or on part-time wage), both with the primary goal of creating a level playing field for username_2 job negotiations. After some 10 years of experience in my field I finally decided it's time to move more seriously into business, and took the offer of my employer to "phase out" with a part-time contract looking a bit longer after one research project. Since then, I've had more part-time contracts at other username_2 institutes, which I mentally treat as clients, though: they had grants that called for employees but did not allow sub-contractors.
In that situation, the **part-time** academia/part-time self-employed has some **burocratic disadvantages**: I need non-standard working contracts that explicitly put formal boundaries around what is supposed to be the results of the employed work (otherwise e.g. copyright for software I write for a customer or for my company may end up being with the [username_2] employer) - and university HR departments may will probably block anything they are not used to ("We never do anything but standard contracts").
**Consequences**
Back to the recommendation of plunging in: I'd also recommend to keep in mind how much skin those who advise you have in the consequences of that decision (i.e. Is it your parents who advise and would maybe take you into their home again if the business fails and you're deep in debt? Or who even say that they'd bail you out up to xxx SEK? Is it some friends for whom *your* financial desaster won't have the slightest consequence? Is it someone who could easily afford to loose, say, 1/4 mio SEK or 25 k€ or even more on the start-up experiment telling you what they'd do in your place?)
Of course if you go wholly in at a stage in life where you have hardly any savings, there isn't as much that is lost if that business fails. But you may be ending in a personal bankrupcy. Also, some business models have clients that take a deep look into the financial position of the owner, or that may require substantial financial stamina - my experience with universities as late paying customers suggests that the latter may be the case with your business as well.
There are also cultural aspects here: I'm in Germany where society is in general comparably risk-averse and failing as business owner (and much less personal bancruptcy) is not really the done thing.
Plus, what are the consequences in terms of **social insurance** of (not) having a side job? Here, the social security system in large parts revolves around the so-called normal employee. One of the peculiarities is that for self-employed the governmental health insurance has a minimum contribution (which was recently lowered so that the proportional zone starts now already at ≈1040 €/month), another one is that for self-employed all sources of income count while for employees only the wage is subject to health insurance fees.
In consequence, the recommendation here for most is to start a business from a part-time position if feasible (unless one is really sure that it will generate good income from the 1st year on, or one is paid by a business founder grant etc.).
All this aside, some startup statistics:
* the vast majority (> 3/4) of start-ups have their founders actually put savings into the business ([EU Startup Monitor 2018](http://startupmonitor.eu/EU-Startup-Monitor-2018-Report-WEB.pdf), numbers in the US are AFAIK similar).
* [It is normal for a startup to take years becoming successful.](https://www.startups.com/library/expert-advice/how-long-will-it-take-for-my-startup-to-be-successful) This doesn't mean the business won't be able to pay, but if you have the financial freedom to decide whether it's good to take out money to pay yourself vs. leaving that money in the business as investment you're obviously in a much better position than if you *have* to take out the money for your own survival.
And having a small but steady and sufficient income from some other source may give you that freedom.
**Part time positions** for business founders are again something that is often much **easier available in academia** than in industry, particularly if the reason for asking for a part-time job is that one wants to found a business in that profession: to academia that is usually not a competitor but a source of pride "that's our former colleague who's now a founder" or, if it's a spin-off, also something that counts in evaluations of the department.
Your situation of founding something totally different from your profession may help you to get an industry part-time job (paid with an industry wage) in parallel to your own business. So if you decide that keeping a foot inside academia isn't for your love of username_2 research but for practical financial reasons, you may consider a part time job in industry as alternative.
---
* [Professional experience in the field of business is an important factor for start-up success](https://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/article/younger-older-tech-entrepreneurs)
I'd expect your business to be at lower-than-average chance of success (unless someone else in your team has substantial experience in your business) and would therefore keep a "survival" side-job.
---
**Academic career**
Last but not least, you'll have to specify what a successful career in academia is for you.
Personally, I like doing research - so for me a lifetime position as a researcher (as opposed to research manager such as professors usually are) would be a successful username_2 career. You may call that the eternal postdoc.
Even though I certainly do a lot of burocracy as business owner, I most probably would have spent similar amounts of time with grant writing and (other) burocracy had I stayed in academia as "advancing" from postdoc to PI would have been basically unavoidable.
Oh, and I teach (mostly industry clients but also at universities and research institutes) and I still do reseach and method development - in some ways I now have more freedom in that than the username_2 freedom I experienced in some research institutes. So I still have the parts of username_2 work that I like most.
What I think is *not* going to work is at the same time trying to get a startup successfully going and going for a highly competitive username_2 career (professorship/starting your own username_2 group - see also [What ratio of PhD graduates in STEM fields ultimately end up as (tenured) professors?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/17431/725)).
---
**Unrelated business field and academia**
This is only hear-say, so please take it as such. I've been told anecdotally by a chemistry professor close to retirement that it is not unusual for people being somewhat burned out/fed up with their profession after finishing their PhD and in consequence running an unrelated business (think pet shop by PhD in chemistry) for a while - until they return to their original profession. I don't recall whether anything was said about returning to username_2 research vs. working in industry (but a chemist with PhD in industry is likely to do research as well)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: People who go into startups tend to become completely consumed by those startups, or else the startups fail.
As such, what I've observed amongst my colleagues is that the professor generally either quickly ends up in only a consulting/advisory role or else jumps ship to the startup.
What seems to work very well, however, is for graduating students or postdocs to become the core members of the startup. The folks graduating from the lab generally are the most deeply familiar with the specific technology, and they're in a good situation to invest themselves fully in the startup. The professor then typically lends their name and their expertise at a lower level.
In short: it's best to choose one or the other, but one can generally de facto split the difference because there's usually more than one person involved.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/23
| 782
| 3,130
|
<issue_start>username_0: I know how many hours I am paid for each week but have recently been asked to do a bit more teaching and told that, based upon what I was already doing, they were allowed to ask me to do a bit more.
So it seems they have a way of figuring this out. Perhaps even rules about it. I didn't know this. Are there standard rules? I know the work week is theoretically 36 hours so I wonder how much of that is assigned to teaching according to HR departments?
I might just ask them, but I don't know if they'll tell me. It all seems very much like they are making the rules as they go, or at least moving the goalposts depending on the specifics of the situation.
Thoughts?<issue_comment>username_1: I suggest talking to your head of dept or equivalent as HR usually have little experience of teaching, the preparation necessary or the effort involved in marking...
So department head or equivalent as they should know exactly what you are expected to do at the moment and what the increase is.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Most UK universities will have something they call the "workload allocation model (WAM)" or "work allocation framework (WAF)" or something similar. At least in theory these are supposed to ensure you have a fair amount of work allocated. In general, the aim is to either a) ensure the hours officially allocated to tasks you have to perform are within your contracted hour (averaged across the year) or b) that everyone in the dept has a comparable allocation.
They generally either have an hourly allocation per task, or a points based system (to draw attention away from the total amount of work allocated and focus on fair sharing between faculty members).
So, for example, I get 3 hours allocated for every 1 hour lecture, 20 minutes for each exam script i mark, 5 hours for every 3 hour practical, 72hrs a year per PhD student, 120 per postdoc I supervise, 120 hours for the committees I'm on, etc.
These are sometimes a bit of a joke, as no one i know has anything less than 120% of their time allocated.
Its worth noting that while the WAM can in theory be used to examine the balance of teaching, research and service for one person, it is primarily targeted at balancing total workload between individuals.
I also second what <NAME> said - this is primarily the job of your HoD, and HR likely have nothing to do with it.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: This is going to be institution-dependent. For example, [CCSU says in section 10.2](https://csuaaup.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/CSU-AAUP-BOR-Contract_Indexed-and-TOC-1.pdf):
>
> The instructional load for full-time teaching members shall be twelve
> (12) load credits per semester in Connecticut State University. Except
> where otherwise provided in this Agreement one (1) hour of classroom
> activity (including lecture and laboratory) equals one (1) load
> credit. Existing courses with more than one (1) load credit per class
> hour will remain unchanged. The department and appropriate university
> curriculum committee may establish higher load credits for courses.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/11/23
| 1,685
| 7,398
|
<issue_start>username_0: I just wanted to get some input from the community about an issue I have run into with my main PhD supervisor.
I started my PhD about two years ago (hard science field), and about six months ago I finished a preliminary draft for most my first article. The draft is about 70 % complete, but I can't write the last part yet because I am still waiting on some final results.
I sent the draft to my main supervisor as I wanted to get some feedback on the parts I had written so far. Just before summer I had a meeting with my supervisor, and it turned out that my supervisor had not read anything in the draft even though I had sent it several weeks before. As such, I felt that the meeting was rather unproductive as I basically had to spend the short time I had allocated explaining what I had actually done research-wise instead of getting feedback on my draft. This also disappointed me a little bit as my supervisor had specifically informed me before that it was preferable that I summarized my findings in article-form instead of just sending random updates whenever I had some progress.
Fast forward until now. This semester I have spent working at another institution, and my supervisor recently came to visit me. Several weeks before this I had informed my supervisor that I would like to discuss my paper draft, and was told that this should not be a problem. However, it turned out yet again that my supervisor had not read antyhing. Instead I was told that as some of my co-supervisors had taken a look at the draft and said it needed a better focus and a thorough rewrite (which I fully expected anyways), there was no need for my main supervisor to read it. However, although my co-advisors have given me good tips on some of the issues in the draft, I still feel like I have not received proper guidance in how I can restructure the entire focus of the article based on my current findings.
As I have spent a lot of time writing this draft, and would like to receive feedback from my main supervisor on how to improve the paper, I find it disappointing that my supervisor has shown so little interest in reading my draft. It is my understanding that reading drafts is one of the main duties of a supervisor. I am now at the stage of my PhD where I can do most of the research independently, but I still feel I need input on my writing.
Is this something I should be more firm about with my supervisor? We have had a very good working relationship so far, but this issue is really starting to bother me. If anyone has any tips on how I can deal with this, then i would greatly appreciate it!<issue_comment>username_1: This sounds like a case of your supervisor being too busy and pushing work they consider less *essential* to the background. I'd suggest that, since you have alternate sources of feedback here, that you explore those and just push on toward the end.
I think it would be harder to avoid something you represent as a "complete" draft or a "final" draft. At that point I hope the supervisor moves your work up to the first level of importance.
Even feedback from a third party might be valuable if you can find a way to get it.
But there is no reason for you to stall your own progress. But trying to force someone to do something they don't see as essential in the moment doesn't sound like a plan for success. Especially when they have the power.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Write to your supervisor asking for clarifications on the writing process and how is the supervisor input supposed to be. Suggest to your supervisor that the authorship is under risk if you are the only contributor, that you are not going to waste your time with the paper (which can have an effect in the future) or that you might get interested in your own research topics if this one does not go forward. It's important that you have everything in writing.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: Unfortunately, your description sounds familiar and is not umcommon. PhD advisors often have more tasks they can manage in their limited time, so they have to set priorities which means that some things are done and others more or less forgotten (new things keep pouring in...). So if you desperately want or need the feedback you have to make sure to rise in the list of priorities.
From an advisor's perspective, it is rather common that your students tend to leave you alone for too long with things they imagine you do not have time for. That can be a big mistake because you effectively take away the decision if it is worth looking at your text away from the advisor (who has probably forgotten about it). It only makes sure to drop in priority until forgotten.
It depends a bit on the character of your advisor and your relationship, but one possible strategy could be to ask in shorter intervals. The idea is to literally get on the advisor's nerves and make it impossible to be forgotten. Some people are grateful for the reminders (I would be), and they still can ignore them (especially when they come as emails). But this way you shift the decision making to your advisor. And a reasonable person would understand that after the 5th (or so) reminder in a short time you really need the feedback - and the advisor will eventually find the time. But keep in mind: For that, the advisor has to postpone something else which is equally pressing. And there always are enough really pressing issues, so yours has to be one, too.
Finally, I would like to highlight one aspect: The feedback you got is valuable already. If your text lacks focus and needs to be rewritten it sounds as if you do not really have a 70% version of the text. In such circumstances it might be unreasonable to push the advisor for some feedback on basic things other people can help you with. Given the limited time of your advisor, I would recommend to use her/his abilities in the last 10% to 20%. If done properly, your text will then make a really big step forward and you get from your advisor what most others could not teach you. I promise that the last 20% will take at least as much time and work as the first 80% ([Pareto principle](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle)), so you will still have the chance to test the right strategy to activate your advisor.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: This is a common problem which is very hard to solve.
I suggest telling your supervisor that they need to set a timeline for completion of the project. If the supervisor sets the deadlines for themselves, they *might* be more likely to stick to the deadlines. If you do this, be sure you meet the deadlines set for you.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: You might have done something to cheese-off your supervisor or co-supervisors. <NAME> has a great guide on how to do just that, and I highly recommend you watch it if you haven't already: <https://youtu.be/ROLwP09Ar-0?t=182>
If you have not done anything to cheese-off your supervisor/co-supervisors, then maybe look into changing your supervisor. You could also try confronting your supervisor directly and asking them in a civilised and polite tone to explain what is going on. Go in with an open mind, as they may be having personal trouble of their own. Good communication can solve a lot of these problems. Ask your supervisor how you can help them help you.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/11/23
| 1,224
| 5,019
|
<issue_start>username_0: Earlier this year I had a paper accepted to a well-recognized journal in a particular (humanities) subfield. I *finally* received proofs of the article, and was (more than a bit) upset at the edits. A lot of the changes were at the sentence level: phrasing, punctuation, word choice.
These edits often 1) obscured my intended meaning (e.g. turned ONE grammatically correct sentence into TWO sentences that, because of the addition of a weird transition phrase, no longer says what I intended), and/or 2) over-simplified or diminished the prose (e.g. adding "to be" constructions, adding awkward and unnecessary "ultimately"s, "for example," etc.).
**So, how should I respond?** Ultimately, I'd like to have 95% of the changes reversed. I would be *mortified* to publish the piece in its current state.
I've published several times and never had this issue - usually edits are small (more proofreading than anything). Because I was sent PDFs, the process of sending back my "corrections" will be arduous (on some pages every sentence now needs fixing). I don't want to alienate the journal or the staff member who made the edits.<issue_comment>username_1: This sounds like the work of a copy editor not the "editor" in charge of the paper. Such folks usually know the language pretty well, but not the subject matter. So, the errors they make are semantic in nature - pretty serious.
My suggestion is that you correct the ones that *need* correcting; those that affect the meaning. But probably let the others go.
Write a report back to the editor (the real one) detailing each change and saying why. Leaving the minor ones go gives you a shorter report and more likelihood that they will be accepted.
I've had this happen too. But fight for the important ones primarily. A few more probably won't hurt, but 95% will probably get you on the wrong side of someone.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree with @username_1 that the changes are probably from a copy editor.
I disagree some about requesting just the minimal changes that "affect the meaning".
This is a humanities paper, so style may matter much more than in a math/cs/science paper where one could argue that "correct" is sufficient.
Write a polite(!) letter to the editor asking about rejecting many of the changes since you think they often change the meaning. Perhaps include a few examples. Then you'll have to do what the editor suggests in order to publish in this journal.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> I finally received proofs of the article, and was (more than a bit) upset at the edits.
>
>
>
How to respond? Do not respond while upset. Wait until you can respond in a calm way.
This is a perfectly normal occurrence. Remember the journal relies on getting your work for free in order to get subscription fees to pay its expenses. They need you more than you need them. Do not hesitate to ask for anything that will help your publication improve.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Write a response to the production staff that spells out which changes you'd like to revert. Feel free to use text if you can't indicate it on a PDF, e.g. "Page 2 column 1 paragraph 3, change 'write' to 'written'". If it goes as high as 95%, then just say use the original file but indicate the 5% of changes that you want to keep. That said, I'm skeptical it reaches 95% - that's 19 out of every 20 changes - and there's a good chance you didn't notice all the changes that were made.
The copyeditor is not likely to fight you over these changes - after all, they know that you understand the intended meaning better than them. In fact chances are the production staff will simply implement your requested changes and move on to the next paper. Don't get angry. It's kind of pointless, and if they're already going to revert the changes, it'll lead to the same result anyway.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: Unless the editor made a provably incorrect statement with their changes I do not do anything. Do not like it but the editor gets the last say. Push too hard and they may decide not to print what you submitted at all.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_6: I've had the same experience when publishing a book: copy-editors who not only didn't add value, they actually made the text a lot worse.
This was a technical book, and it's understandable that they didn't realise that an XSLT *stylesheet* is one word, while a CSS *style sheet* is two. But before doing a global edit to use the same term throughout - a global edit that can't be easily reversed - they should have checked.
They also tried to apply an editorial policy about the use of pronouns (I, you, we). But I had been very careful in my choice of pronouns, using "I", for example, only where I was expressing a personal opinion or describing my personal experiences, and they destroyed all the nuances.
I managed to get all the harmful changes reversed but it was an enormous waste of everyone's time.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/23
| 526
| 2,194
|
<issue_start>username_0: In one of my PhD thesis chapters, I have a derivation of a theory that I have proposed in the paper. I just found out that I have made an error in the calculation, and my derivation is flawed. The chapter is yet to be submitted in a journal, so it has never been peer reviewed. I never saw the flaw before this. Do I bring it up during my defense? And what do I say if the committee asks me about it? Can that have a negative outcome on my defense result?
I am feeling scared now!
Should I mail my advisor? My defense is on Monday afternoon and I don't know what to do!<issue_comment>username_1: First, tell your advisor immediately. Your defense might need to be rescheduled. Suggest that if you think it wise.
Next, of course, try to provide a correct derivation.
If you have to go to the defense in the current state, yes, admit and point out the error and state that you are working on a patch. The committee might let you finish as is and clean up the problem later. They might also delay your finish until you have a correct result (or proof that it is not correct). I doubt that this is grounds for complete failure as it would be if the error is pointed out by someone else.
But your advisor might override any of this advice. That is your best source.
I've been on a final defense committee where we decided the work wasn't ready due to some flaws. The candidate just had to go back to work and we scheduled a future date. But it turned out that the meeting itself was valuable for the candidate as he got some feedback that helped him to the end.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In addition to username_1's answer: How bad this is also depends a little bit on how central the proof is for your work: Does it severely influence the main hypotheses of the work? If so, rescheduling the defense is necessary. If it is only of minor importance, there might be a possibility to correct this after your defense: At least at my university, this possibility exist for exactly the purpose of correcting minor mistakes, and the committee frequently asks the PhD candidate to make use of this option.
But yes, talk to your advisor about it.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/23
| 595
| 2,567
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm wondering whether it'd be worthwhile to spend an extra semester in my undergrad or two getting my grades up. Unfortunately I've taken all the courses relevant to my field, so this would mean using unrelated courses to boost my GPA.
But I'm not sure if the unrelated courses would actually serve to raise my GPA in the eyes of grad school application boards: would they be pleased with the higher GPA, or would they disconsider it since it was obtained using irrelevant courses?
My GPA isn't too bad, but I luckily can afford to spend another semester or two getting it up if it'd make me a more competitive applicant (and might as well if I get rejected from the schools I want to go to).
Edit: apologies, I had no idea that some countries don't employ the GPA measure. GPA stands for "grade point average" and is essentially your average grade across all the courses you've taken during your time in undergrad (and possibly Master's).<issue_comment>username_1: First, tell your advisor immediately. Your defense might need to be rescheduled. Suggest that if you think it wise.
Next, of course, try to provide a correct derivation.
If you have to go to the defense in the current state, yes, admit and point out the error and state that you are working on a patch. The committee might let you finish as is and clean up the problem later. They might also delay your finish until you have a correct result (or proof that it is not correct). I doubt that this is grounds for complete failure as it would be if the error is pointed out by someone else.
But your advisor might override any of this advice. That is your best source.
I've been on a final defense committee where we decided the work wasn't ready due to some flaws. The candidate just had to go back to work and we scheduled a future date. But it turned out that the meeting itself was valuable for the candidate as he got some feedback that helped him to the end.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In addition to username_1's answer: How bad this is also depends a little bit on how central the proof is for your work: Does it severely influence the main hypotheses of the work? If so, rescheduling the defense is necessary. If it is only of minor importance, there might be a possibility to correct this after your defense: At least at my university, this possibility exist for exactly the purpose of correcting minor mistakes, and the committee frequently asks the PhD candidate to make use of this option.
But yes, talk to your advisor about it.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/24
| 552
| 2,505
|
<issue_start>username_0: I notice that many top American engineering PhD programs ask for undergrad or master degrees in engineering or physics, but this discussion excludes math majors. How come? Are math majors not qualified because the training is vastly different from engineering?
I'm a math nerd interested in applications-oriented maths, but many of these research questions are worked on in engineering depts.<issue_comment>username_1: Because physics and engineering are closely related, both deal with how things work, why they work and how to make something.
It is often said thus: « a physicist designs it, but you need an engineer to make it work »
Not absolutely true, some physicists are happy in roles of engineers and vice versa...
So as their training is similar, they both have a suitable background for those phd’s...
However, if you put your application in and the advisor considers you then you may be picked - depends who applies often.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I'd expect many math majors to have the skills needed to succeed in an engineering program, but they are likely to lack the vocabulary needed. This is especially true if the engineering is theoretical or computational.
I would not be surprised if math majors are accepted from time to time.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes *generally* the training in a math degree is quite different from that of an engineering degree, in particular when it comes to *practical* stuff.
In many circumstances the language describing the background required of a candidate is a little less limiting than “engineering or physics” and will encourage applicants from *cognate fields*.
Of course mathematics is rather diverse in itself, and one can argue that training in more applied mathematics - theoretical signal analysis, control theory etc - should be considered as training in a cognate field. However, one can also appreciate that a student with a focus in number theory or algebraic topology might have to work harder to make a case. (For that matter, not every graduate in physics would be suitable for a graduate degree in engineering either...)
It seems to me the question is: do you really want to apply to a department that *prima facie* is implicitly suggesting you do not have the requirements of the program? Maybe the thing to do is to contact faculty members with research interests overlapping yours to ask if they would entertain supervising someone with your background?
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/24
| 310
| 1,330
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a list of about a dozen small errors I've personally discovered in my thesis. Is it advisable to have a slide during the presentation listing these? I understand that this is superfluous, insofar that the examiners will probably already have identified these, but I want to look as if I am aware of them coming into the defense. Is there any possibility it could be considered insulting?<issue_comment>username_1: If the typos affect the comprehension of your thesis by the reader or twist the results or facts that you have delivered in your thesis, then yes it is definitely a good idea to mention the typos and correct them when you come to the corresponding slide in your presentation.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I wouldn't suggest a slide for what is probably just a minor matter.
However, you could print out a list of them, deliver them to the committee prior to the event and say they will be corrected in the final version.
It may even happen that one or more of your committee members will have read your dissertation (shocking, I know) and will provide you with a few more.
But for the talk, focus on the insights in the work, not such minor details. Most people attending talks want that, in any case. The details can be found in the paper.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2019/11/24
| 1,110
| 4,700
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have the following situation in mind: consider two people A and B, who are roughly "equally good" in their field and do their bachelors in the same university - a small, not widely known insitution. Then student A stays there for his/her Master's, while student B chooses to do his Master's in a more prestigious place.
At the end, they both apply to a PhD at some competitive place. Coming from a "modest" university, where he easily stands high above the average, student A is highly regarded by his/her professors and so manages to get very good recommendation letters. On the other hand, student B studied in a place where students of his level are more common, and so he doesn't impress his professors as much, and they don't speak so highly about him in recommendation letters.
Do you think that scenarios like this could actually make student A seem a better candidate than student B in practice? In this sense, could studying at a good university hurt your career in the long run? Or would the prestige of the university where student B studied (as well as possibly the prestige of the professors who wrote recommendation letters about him) make up for the more modest recommendation letters?<issue_comment>username_1: There is far too little information here to make any prediction. However, letters of recommendation are probably very important *most of the time*. Grades mean something. Research experience means something. Courses taken mean something.
But all of the details are only there to paint a picture of the candidate that more or less enables an admissions committee to make a prediction about the likelihood of success. The institution you attend probably means less than you think it does. An old, frequently heard, saying is "There is nothing more dangerous than a C student from Yale".
If you are either A or B or trying to guess which you *should* be, think about your own education and where you think you would get the better experience. A smaller place will give you more contact and a more personal experience. A big place will give you somewhat less intimate contact, but perhaps with some superstars in your field. Either can be a benefit. But you have to make the most of whatever situation you are in. If you do *that* then you have a better chance of success in academia.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: As others have pointed out, anything can happen. Of course if you are at the weaker M.S. school, emphasize your class rank, etc. But my Bayesian estimate is that you (one) are better off at the STRONGER school. It will challenge you more, move you more etc.
Don't try to be a big fish in a small pond. Go out in the ocean and compete with the Great Whites. Consider <NAME>. He didn't stay in the cowtowns of the Steiermark. He went to Muscle Beach in California. "New York, New York...if you can make it there, you can make it anywhere." Be a playah.
Note: if there are other reasons, family, weather, economics, pedagogy, etc. that you (one) prefers the easier school, fine. Of course what matters most is the student, not the school. If you have the goods, you can prevail anywhere. But all else equal...go to the harder school.
Just a point of view, but hopefully explaining what is behind the pick.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: This completely depends on where you intend to go after your education and what kind of environment you enjoy.
On one hand, if you intend to go in to an academic position with lots of competition and a lot of ties between academics, institutions etc. then having one with a lot of status, important letters and people that you work with is very relevant.
On the other hand, if you intend to go in to a more commercial setting, and specifically one with perhaps less (prestige-based) competition and more of a focus on merit or experience, then the institute, letters, references etc. are less relevant and any research, work or other relevant experience you might have is more important.
In both cases, the way your 'status'is probably not weighed relative to the place you were before (university, research lab etc), but relative to other candidates that apply, or a in internal baseline.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: In my opinion B has better chances -
If you have to select one of 2 - do you take student A who came with grade A from a wood'n grass college behind the 7 hills that nobody has ever heart off in the big city - or do you prefer B who comes with grade B - but from one of the top 5 universities in the field ...
Think the decision is rather obvious who will get invited for an interview by the friendly HR manager.
Upvotes: -1
|
2019/11/24
| 695
| 2,818
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've just seen a job advertised by a London university for a job similar to mine but as senior lecturer. I'm confused because the bottom end of the salary listed is lower than what I am currently on as just a lecturer, and I'm not in London so this is without any kind of London weighting.
The only way it could possibly be worth me applying is if they started me at the top end of the scale they suggest. But that's unlikely to happen, isn't it?
I thought the salary scales of UK universities were quite similar, but this suggests there are huge differences.
I don't quite understand why anyone would apply for this job that pays less than jobs outside London, which is a much more expensive place to live.
Thoughts?<issue_comment>username_1: A scale is just a scale: A range within which the university will pay. If they decide that you are the best qualified candidate, they will have to figure out whether it's worth their money to also hire you. Since you're already making a salary at the upper end of the range, it's clear to everyone that they will have to go towards the upper end of their range to have a chance of getting you.
But you will never find out whether you're their top candidate if you don't apply. The worst that can happen is that they don't think that you're their best candidate; the second worst that they think that you're their top candidate, but they can't afford you. Neither of these outcomes are particularly bad for you given that you already have a job.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: In post-92 universities, Lecturer and Senior Lecturer together form the same salary range as a Lecturer in a traditional (pre-92) university. A Principal Lecturer in a post-92 university would have the same salary as a Senior Lecturer in a pre-92 university. Some universities in the UK also operate Assistant and Associate Professors, which further complicates matters.
A more meaningful description is the Grade: Grade 7 for entry-level Lecturer, Grade 8 for more experienced, Grade 9 for Senior(pre-92)/Principal(post-92) and Grade 10 for Reader.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The UK academic salary uniquely depends on the scale point which they use nationally. For example, if they offer you 45 then your salary is fixed, regardless of which U you work for. The salary range of your position (rank) is specified by the point system as well, but in most U, there are some overlapping in across ranks. For example, lecturers run from 39-46, and senior lecture from 44-50 (I made up the numbers). As a result, if you are at the top scale of a lecturer, you may make more than a senior lecturer at the bottom.
But when they make you an offer, they will take your current salary into account and usually make an offer higher than that.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/11/24
| 692
| 2,805
|
<issue_start>username_0: As a reviewer suppose you receive a paper (Paper 1) where one of main results is claimed to be concurrent work with another recently published paper (Paper 2). There is sufficient evidence to establish that this claim is true: (1) The proofs of the main result in Paper 1 and Paper 2 are completely different, (2) Paper 2 became available on arXiv only a few days before Paper 1 was submitted to the conference, and (3) Paper 2's authors are all fine with the claimed concurrency.
As a reviewer, should you judge Paper 1 based on its entire contributions, or should you judge it based on the novelty compared to Paper 2? If the former, it would be a clear accept. If the latter, it would be borderline reject.<issue_comment>username_1: A scale is just a scale: A range within which the university will pay. If they decide that you are the best qualified candidate, they will have to figure out whether it's worth their money to also hire you. Since you're already making a salary at the upper end of the range, it's clear to everyone that they will have to go towards the upper end of their range to have a chance of getting you.
But you will never find out whether you're their top candidate if you don't apply. The worst that can happen is that they don't think that you're their best candidate; the second worst that they think that you're their top candidate, but they can't afford you. Neither of these outcomes are particularly bad for you given that you already have a job.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: In post-92 universities, Lecturer and Senior Lecturer together form the same salary range as a Lecturer in a traditional (pre-92) university. A Principal Lecturer in a post-92 university would have the same salary as a Senior Lecturer in a pre-92 university. Some universities in the UK also operate Assistant and Associate Professors, which further complicates matters.
A more meaningful description is the Grade: Grade 7 for entry-level Lecturer, Grade 8 for more experienced, Grade 9 for Senior(pre-92)/Principal(post-92) and Grade 10 for Reader.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The UK academic salary uniquely depends on the scale point which they use nationally. For example, if they offer you 45 then your salary is fixed, regardless of which U you work for. The salary range of your position (rank) is specified by the point system as well, but in most U, there are some overlapping in across ranks. For example, lecturers run from 39-46, and senior lecture from 44-50 (I made up the numbers). As a result, if you are at the top scale of a lecturer, you may make more than a senior lecturer at the bottom.
But when they make you an offer, they will take your current salary into account and usually make an offer higher than that.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/11/24
| 2,566
| 10,858
|
<issue_start>username_0: There recently was some bad press regarding job security for tenured academics in Denmark. A [critical article in a newspaper edited by University of Copenhagen employees](https://uniavisen.dk/en/professors-the-university-of-copenhagen-has-a-job-security-problem/) mentions the firing of two professors, one of them (<NAME>) due to a "cost-cutting measure".
To get a balanced picture of the matter, I looked into official information as provided by universities, and found the following explanation by the [Copenhagen Business School](https://www.cbs.dk/files/cbs.dk/tenure-at-cbs_0.pdf):
>
> A position as associate professor or full professor at a Danish university is a permanent position. The employment and working conditions of academic staff employed at Danish Universities are primarily regulated by collective agreements between the Danish Government and the trade unions. According to the collective agreement [...] Danish Universities, however, can dismiss a member of the academic staff, employed in a permanent position, but only in special circumstances, due to either disciplinary offenses or **as a result of considerable budgetary restrictions or other unexpected institutions circumstances.**
>
>
>
This sounds to me like a university could easily get rid of any tenured employee they don't like anymore (for whatever reason) by declaring a new "strategic orientation", which results in an unavailability of funding for said employee.
Consequently, I wonder is if there is any job security at all for tenured academics in Denmark. Specifically, are there usually any "safeguards" that prohibit a university from firing a person they don't like by reallocating their funding?<issue_comment>username_1: I have recently been employed at University of Copenhagen in a temporary position. The current situation is definitely problematic.
Denmark has the general problem (shared with many other countries), that basic funding for universities has been cut over many years, and transferred to project specific funding for research centers or individual grants - more often than not provided by private companies and foundations, rather than the state.
This means that the extraordinary circumstances have become rather ordinary, and the case of prof. Thybo mentioned in the article, is not the only known case. Adding to this that many younger people are now being hired in assistant professor positions without tenure, although being at the age and reputation where they should really get tenure track positions or tenured positions, it certainly seems that University of Copenhagen is phasing out the concept of tenure.
To summarize: I think the conclusion that there is no job security at all in Denmark is rather harsh, but definitely not without reason. I would recommend anyone aiming for faculty positions in Denmark in general, and University of Copenhagen in particular, to do solid research into the financial situation of the department they are considering joining first.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: *No one* has job security in a bad economy or in an institution with poor leadership. Nor will tenure protect you from bad behavior.
Tenure isn't an *absolute* guarantee of a job.
Universities close. Wars happen. National politicians make bad decisions. Departments are closed fairly frequently in fact. And they are cut back for lack of students or research funding even more frequently.
Tenure protects you from being fired for what you *say and think and write*; not from everything. That is why it exists, not to make you comfortable.
Tenure exists so that you can properly follow your research even in to corners that offend other people, and especially important and influential people. It is a particularly strong form of *free speech*.
But tenure won't protect you in cases of misconduct and the actual treatment of others. This is the issue in the case cited. The professor has been charged with misconduct - with breaking rules and norms, not with what he has said or written. I won't and can't judge the case from afar, but tenure won't protect you from charges of, for example, pressuring junior colleagues in improper ways - coercion, extortion, and such.
The case of cutting someone for financial reasons is fairly common - especially if departments need to shrink for financial reasons. But if the university has competent management they are more likely to have a plan in place for such situations. In the US there have been cases of the university offering to "buy back" tenure for, say, a year's salary. This can be used to encourage older faculty to retire so that new faculty can be hired. But that takes planning. There is no job security in the face of incompetence of management unless there are laws that let, for example, governments step in. And that assumes government will be more competent.
However, in any decisions affecting your employment, you probably have rights at law. This depends on the country, of course, but most places such decisions can be contested within the university and/or outside it. In many places a decision on propriety might come down to *intent*. If the university moves funds around with the *intent* of getting rid of an individual it would be seen (and judged) as improper most places. So, tenure isn't the only right that an individual has in such situations though it often provides a *presumption* that you can remain employed.
There are abuses of the tenure system, but it is usually on the side of *not* firing someone who is being offensive - especially if they are being offensive outside their normal duties. There is currently a case in the news in the US (Indiana University) where a professor is being racist and otherwise offensive. The Chancellor of the university counters his comments in public very strongly, but refuses to attack his tenure. He stays. He can say what he likes. But others can also call his offenses out and they can do it without fear of loss of tenure.
If he is racist and spouts it he can probably keep his job, but if he acts it out, say by refusing to teach non-white students, then he would likely be gone in an instant.
I know of another odd case. A major university (R1) wanted to form a new department for an emerging field that overlapped some others. To form the initial faculty, administrators asked heads of those other departments to "contribute" faculty to the new department. What happened was that those departments sent over their tenured incompetents who they would have liked to fire, but could not. The individuals kept their tenure but the other departments were now free to hire better people. The new department struggled for quite a while but eventually overcame the original situation.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I agree that there is not complete job security anywhere, but the academic tenure-position in Denmark is special. First, management such as the Dean is not voted in by their colleagues. It is actually hired as a manager from a hiring committee that evaluates the candidates cv. So when a new dean comes to office, often they want to arrange faculties to their liking and move budgets around, which often result in firings because the new research agenda changes. So they fire people simply because they do not fall into their research agenda using the excuse of "money problems". No freedom of research. It has happened in my faculty. Like 6 years ago a new dean from the economics department was hired in the Faculty of Social Sciences at SDU and a round of firings happened, affecting heavily the management department. Last year, a new dean came in, one who had been fired in the previous firing spree. He now attacked the economics department from which more than 30 people were fired.
The problem lies in the way institutions are formed at Danish universities in addition to the Danish labour law. A senior academic who has worked for 9+ years will get a 6 months notice (the maximum) and no monetary compensation for being fired. This is the Danish law which applies equally to every profession. Independently of whether the market for an academic is not as fluid as the market for instance a programmer. So a few months of notice is not enough when it takes like one year to find a new position.
This is a greater problem for non-EU foreigners who only have a few months to pack their bags (meaning sell property, find a new school for kids, etc) and leave as they are not allowed to stay too much longer after their contract is over.
Summarising, a tenure position in Denmark does not correspond to a tenure position in the US, UK, Ireland or Australia and definitely not to a civil servant position like in many other countries like Germany, Italy, France and Spain.
Note that this is not a criticism, but a description of how it works and something foreigners should know before moving to an academic position in Denmark.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: A tangential "answer": in the U.S., for example, "tenure" creates a higher thresh-hold for getting fired. So, mostly, it's not worth the trouble for an administration to fire tenured faculty. Still, as can be observed, given sufficient motivation, administration can make a tenured faculty person's situation quite unpleasant... whether or not literally firing them. (Office in a broom closet, crazy teaching assignments...)
Unionized situations in some places in the U.S., and other countries, certainly shift the rules of the game, but, in the end, I'd think it'd come to the same.
Plus, there seems to be a perception among university administrators that systematic panicking of faculty and staff is useful to set a context in which there will not be good raises. "Financial contingencies..."
(Yes, in bad times, it is plausible that we won't have good raises at all, but, hey, wait, how come in good times we don't have good raises, either?)
And, yes, also, in many/most R1-style universities in the U.S., the dept head is not quite elected by the faculty, and certainly does not have decision-making power determined by the faculty... but, by the Dean. And, similarly, the Dean is not determined "from below", but "from above". Most days, this doesn't lead to anything ridiculous, but it *does* color the whole system here in the U.S.
The whole situation here, in the U.S., to my mind is comparable to the idea that "citizens have civil rights". Well, ok, sure, until, as we see now and then, a powerful person or group decides to do a thing despite one's "right" to not have it done. As an extreme case, we've seen that being declared an enemy combatant will really do a number on your life. My point is that "rights" exist at the whim of powerful people/entities. "Tenure" is similar, actually, I think.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/11/24
| 539
| 2,374
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a private tutor for (mostly) high school maths and physics students.
Recently a student came to me with an elegant little problem that he had been given on an exam. The problem was very short, and easy for him to remember, but he and others had found it difficult to solve. It required synthesizing the material he had studied in a way that required some creativity. (At least, at the high school level.)
I worked through the solution with him.
I create content (videos and papers) that I publish on the internet. I would like to share this intruiging application of high school precalculus.
Here's the concern: Does the teacher or whoever else who created the problem *own* the problem? Am I unethically making the problem useless for other exams or homework by publishing it? What if I alter it so that the process is the same, but the numeric solution is different? Do I need the permission of the problem's author to use it at all?
To be clear, it's not a "word" problem, but simply a "solve this interesting equation" problem.<issue_comment>username_1: As suggested in <NAME> comment: Ask the teacher, either directly or through the student and aim for a joint or collaborative web posting.
Copying the problem from the exam verbatim is at the very least questionable. I'm not sure whether they are legal copyright issues but you shouldn't do it anyway. Using the key idea of the problem, rephrased in your own words and with different numbers is fine. It is also highly unlikely that the teacher came up with this completely new problem. More likely the teacher also just found it somewhere and adapted it for their exam.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: There is an alternative that avoids the question asked here entirely and would even be more valuable to your readers.
Think about what it is about that equation (or other question) that makes it interesting. Abstract from that to a more general question that also covers the specific case.
Then present a way of thinking about that class of problems that will lead someone to a successful solution. Explain the thinking process. Explain any connections to similar things. Etc.
Then, you can publish that freely.
Note that words, but not ideas, can be bound by copyright. Take the idea and expand it. Anyone is free to do that.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2019/11/24
| 596
| 2,547
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a first semester PhD student. The standard time for finishing a PhD is 3 to 5 years in the part of the world I'm in. I have to defend a thesis proposal or project by the end of the second year. I have changed my area of research since my master's, so I only have conference papers in my current field.
I feel like my research proposal was a little open, a bit too general. I have an idea of where the current state of the art is in my field (let's say I read a few tens of articles in my field to write my proposal). However, i don't think I "am" at the state of the art. My coursework, experiment planning and helping the research group in other tasks are taking a lot of time, and I haven't evolved much on this for the first 3 months.
How far in the PhD should I be when (in parentheses when I think I can manage to accomplish these phases):
* I am able to understand to a very detailed degree state of the art work (15 months)?
* I am able to reproduce state of the art results with my models (18 months)?
* I publish in a journal something related to my work (21 months)?
* I know very well where I intend to "push" the boundary of knowledge in my field and the methods I will use for that (24 months)?<issue_comment>username_1: As suggested in <NAME> comment: Ask the teacher, either directly or through the student and aim for a joint or collaborative web posting.
Copying the problem from the exam verbatim is at the very least questionable. I'm not sure whether they are legal copyright issues but you shouldn't do it anyway. Using the key idea of the problem, rephrased in your own words and with different numbers is fine. It is also highly unlikely that the teacher came up with this completely new problem. More likely the teacher also just found it somewhere and adapted it for their exam.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: There is an alternative that avoids the question asked here entirely and would even be more valuable to your readers.
Think about what it is about that equation (or other question) that makes it interesting. Abstract from that to a more general question that also covers the specific case.
Then present a way of thinking about that class of problems that will lead someone to a successful solution. Explain the thinking process. Explain any connections to similar things. Etc.
Then, you can publish that freely.
Note that words, but not ideas, can be bound by copyright. Take the idea and expand it. Anyone is free to do that.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2019/11/25
| 483
| 2,213
|
<issue_start>username_0: Suppose an engineering PhD candidate in the USA is trying to pursue an academic profession (e.g. Assistant Professorship in a Research Institute), is it even worth-while to commit to extra-curricular activities like student leadership during PhD candidacy?
More specifically, are soft skills like leadership evaluated in isolation from your research portfolio during faculty recruitment? I understand that such skills will help with interacting with current faculties who are recruiting you, but could this kind of credentials ever elevate a research faculty candidate?<issue_comment>username_1: My university recruits faculties for two different tracks: (1) research-track and (2) teaching-track
For the former, the panel is least bothered about such activities of a candidate. However, for the second option, they indeed look for someone with such experience. It is not mandatory though.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Whether or not you get a tenure-track job is going to be driven by your research credentials, and not by extra-curricular activities. However...
* Interviews and job applications often ask about your service contributions; how you would go about managing people, budgets, and competing demands; etc. Extra-curricular activities such as student leadership may give you some concrete examples to draw on in addressing such questions. This is likely to result in a more compelling answer, which may help your overall application.
* Your circumstances or preferences may evolve over the next few years, and you may not be able to find the right academic position when you graduate from your PhD. Participation in extra-curricular activities may help your CV when applying for non-academic jobs.
* Networking is always helpful. You never know where you'll meet someone interesting or useful, even if it's just a fellow PhD student from a different department whose research connects to your own.
* Variety is important. In my experience, it's good to have a reason to step away from your research regularly and think about something completely different. Often inspiration for difficult problems strikes when you're not actively thinking about them.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/25
| 2,266
| 9,074
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a second-year Ph.D. student in Computer Science and I feel extremely burned-out because:
* I work fulltime as a software engineer
+ I work for financial reasons because TAship pay is negligible or basically equal to one-third of my rent.
+ I asked to be part-time and I have been continuously denied because my managers think me working part-time would not be enough to get things done
* I have to be a TA as part of my Ph.D. program so I teach one section algorithm & data-structure
* work on my thesis
* taking a graduate-level class which is extremely time-consuming
The semester is almost done and I'm exhausted I hate losing and dropping out is basically losing but I also enjoy school and learning.
What are effective ways to deal with burn-out while working full-time during a PhD program?<issue_comment>username_1: Doing PhD studies isn't a trivial activity - there's a reason why most PhD students are full-time students. Unfortunately, that means you cannot easily both do a PhD *and* hold a separate full-time job. That would be equivalent to doing two jobs at the same time. No wonder you're burned out.
Options:
1. Switch to a part-time PhD. You'll take longer to graduate, and you'll still be working 1.5 full-time jobs, but if you're willing to work hard this could still work out.
2. Put your PhD on official hold (or perhaps even quit it if you can't put it on hold), get on a more secure footing financially, and then go back to finish the PhD. You'll take even longer to graduate, but you'll only be working one job at a time.
Personally, I'd prefer #2, because I've found that working >1 job at a time is really hard and imposes a heavy cost. It's bearable if the period is only a few weeks, but if it'll take years (a part-time PhD could easily take 8+ years to finish), I'll likely burn out anyway.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: It is not easy to assess your situation. This is a time for self reflection.
You've captured your situation, but you haven't told us WHY you're seeking a PhD.
You've found out that getting the degree can involved real sacrifice and hard work -- taking on lots of responsibilities, trading off performance in one area in order to finish busywork, having situations arise that are somewhat out of your control....
The way to make the choice you're trying to make is to ask yourself "Is this worth it?", and the only one who can make the assessment is you.
I suggest writing down your long term and intermediate term goals. Forget about where you are now. Take an afternoon, and figure out where you want to be. After you've done that exercise, your can ask yourself how attaining a PhD is going to help you reach those goals, and how leaving the program will get in the way of those goals. For example, you state that you're working full time as a software engineer. Can you use that position, especially if you can put your full effort into it, to springboard you into what you really want to be doing? Will it tear down obstacles if you get your degree? Will the added financial benefits of working a real job counter any shortcoming in your career (those numbers are real!)
Ideally, such questions should be asked BEFORE you enter a PhD program. Asking them now, however, is not misplaced. If you can't understand how the degree would advance your goals, it is a success, not a failure, to change your situation as soon as you see the disparity, and not sink more time into a challenging endeavor that doesn't support your goals.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Yeah that's a tough situation all right.
Perhaps there is a way to address your employer's concern that the work won't get done if you are part time. His/her fear is understandable, since there are mouths to feed and in the corporate world the work absolutely must get done.
A possible option: ask for a probationary period, let's say two weeks. During this time you work part-time as you have proposed, and your employer can then judge whether or not sufficient work is getting done.
As part of the deal, he/she can switch you back to full time he/she judges the work isn't getting done. If that happens, you can decide then how you feel about staying.
Another option: perhaps you can find another graduate student to share the corporate workload with you; you both work part-time, but the employer sees effectively one full-time employee. But this will depend on the project you're working on, and the skill level of whomever you recruit.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: You should keep going if possible, perhaps part time. Either way your future is much better if you can get to the other side. Investing in your self will pay off in ways you probably cant imagine now. Best wishes
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I did a similar thing and worked to pay bills during the second year of my C.S. Ph.D. Your job sounds a lot like mine in that they want a lot out of you and aren't going to be accommodating.
Getting a Ph.D. involves several years of both hard work and *sacrifices*. Are you committed to that? If so, the job (and that income) come secondary. It can be hard to walk away from the money in C.S.
In my situation, I had to have a serious conversation with my advisor and do a little soul searching. My advisor committed to making sure I had a certain level of funding for my work after my second year. I had to do good work, help with grants, and move into some terrible housing to keep my budget intact. But it all came together for another five years.
If both you and your advisor are committed to your Ph.D., you should be able to find a way to make the finances work without the full time job.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Well, you are on your second year, let's assume you have 3 more years to finish your PHD.
I would suggest that you must be patient and never quit your studies. Quit your job, finish your PHD even if you have to borrow money, I am sure when you finish your PHD, better opportunities will come to you, even better than the job you have had to quit.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: Stay the course, take out loans if you need to complete your Ph.D; There's plenty of demand for IT professionals, and with a Ph.D you'll be able to pay off your loans reasonably quickly. Avoid dropping out at all costs. Other jobs can be had (and your current employer will kick themselves for losing you), loans can tide you over - hit on your family for loan money or a co-signatory on the loan if needed; Get a room-mate if needed to cut your accommodation costs. Your financial options will be so much better in IT with a completed Ph.D than without it, and you'll kick yourself if you just drop it... maybe not immediately, but someday. Above all, try to make some time for yourself, even if brief, to get out in the sun, breathe some fresh air, clear your mind, get enough rest (if time is just too short, try Buckminster Fuller's Dymaxion sleeping method - 1/2 hour every 3-4 hours - it's not a recipe for a lifetime, but might give you the hours in the day you need during this crunch period by not letting you get too tired). Best of luck!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: Drop that sucker like it's hot. I was in the same position as you - burgeoning software engineer in the defense industry. Dropped the Ph.D., devoted myself to full-time industry work and pulled myself up the corporate ranks. Life is so much more relaxed, I'm not impoverished and demotivated and I'm doing way more relevant and interesting work than my advisor had me working on. Better yet, I have a team of Ph.D's working FOR me and am considered an expert in my field within my corporation.
I'm going to get downvoted to oblivion - but QUIT. Quit so hard and so fast! If the system is making you miserable and stressed out - it's not worth it. I initially had feelings of regret for giving up on it, but when I was able to move out of my parent's house, purchase my own home, get married, adopt more cats and go on multiple vacations every year, it became worth it. Now I look at quitting the Ph.D as the best decision I have *ever* made.
Don't be miserable! Software engineers are very employable and you'll do well no matter what you choose. Just don't choose a moment of unhappiness. Life's way too short.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: Please don't make the same mistake many others have. Research is not more important than working or teaching or anything else. Your life has to be in balance and that will mainly be created by your mental attitude.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: This is an old question but one aspect is left unaddressed in the other answers: cost of living.
OP needs a real job to pay rent, OP's employer demands full time work and OP wants to do a PhD.
Start with bringing down monthly living costs, this really adds up. Find a cheaper place, flat share. Then you have more options for jobs that will be good enough to live on. Find a job for 16 hours a week. Then concentrate on your PhD.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/11/25
| 602
| 2,679
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am new in the field of research and am trying to publish my first paper.
I am working on improving a paper that involves Machine Learning. However, in order to make changes to it, wouldn't I need to implement it? Does this require that I implement the paper in my own way and not use their code at all? Do authors usually publish their code along with the paper?<issue_comment>username_1: Even though journals [encourage authors](https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/create-your-ieee-journal-article/authoring-tools-and-templates/about-sharing-your-data-and-code/) to publish their code and make their research easily reproducible, in some fields most authors do not publish their code.
In many cases, publishing code is plenty of extra work with little immediate benefit, as one would have to comment it/improve readability and check all licensing requirements of possibly reused snippets. There is often little motivation to do all this extra work on code that is anyway evolving in the middle of a project. In addition, publishing your code takes away your head start and enables the whole world to beat you to your own "future work" plans, so people might tend to only publish code when a project is finished.
This unfortunately means that you often have to implement state-of-the-art algorithms to be able to improve them or prove that you can beat them. Ideally, the algorithm is completely and unambiguously explained in the paper, so you should be able to implement it. Practically, this is not always the case, but you can always contact the corresponding author of the paper and ask for clarification. There is a reason why most articles include contact information of the corresponding author.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You can consider reaching out to the authors of the paper, and asking them if they can provide you personally with the code, since you want to use their work as a benchmark. Being used as a benchmark is a good thing, so the authors are quite likely to be happy about such a request.
When I did my MSc thesis, code quality was not an evaluation criterion. I developed a new algorithm and published a paper about it, but the implementation was basically 35 Matlab files loosely sellotaped together. This is not code that I would like to publish in any form. At some point, however, a group of researchers from another country reached out to me, asking if they could have my code for benchmarking purposes. I sent them the files, they wrote a nice paper, my paper got cited, everybody won!
Your mileage may vary, of course. But it can't hurt to just shoot them an email.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/25
| 2,034
| 9,154
|
<issue_start>username_0: A little background info: So I'm in my second year of studies at a state university in the town I live in. I'm specifically going to school for computer science. As I said, I'm in my second year, but I've been programming since I was 14 and was recently accepted into a research group (not trying to brag, this will be relevant...).
The school I attend uses the flipped class format for its computer science courses. Every computer science course I've taken has used this format and in all cases the classes have been terrible. In my first year, it really didn't stand out to me as much since these were intro classes, and as a result were really easy for me. But this past semester, I'm taking two classes, one that's almost entirely new for me (Logic and Algorithms), and one that's new in places, but I was really looking forward to (Operating Systems and Networks).
In the logic class, there is no material except a terrible interactive ebook; I understand very little, and one of my friends said the same until he went and found materials from another university that actually explained well. In the OS class, the only material are pre-recorded lectures (which are very high level, whereas the tests and exercises are much more in depth). The only way I've been able to understand the OS class is by buying a text book (which is labeled as optional). Even though I love computer science and do well at it, because of these flipped classes, I'm doing the worst gradewise in these two. For perspective, I'm also taking Linear Algebra, and I'm very close to an A in this course; math has always been one of my worst subjects, and this class is taught in a traditional format.
I have friends and know people in these and other comp sci courses, and we've all been saying the same things (some of which brought it up before I even mentioned it). I have one friend of similar skill level in basically the same situation, and another completely new to computer science whose taking the first introductory course (which states that it assumes you are entering it without prior knowledge), and she says nothing makes sense from this course because the material (and lack thereof) is so bad. On top of that, me and many of my friends commute an hour one way to school (and some of us work part time jobs, myself included), and its really frustrating to basically drive an hour to do homework on material that doesn't make sense during a period that could be spent explaining it. Flipped classes really do net out to more time spent than traditional classes.
I apologize if this comes across as a rant, but I really would like to know if this is worth addressing, and with whom. I feel like it will be like talking to a wall, but I would like to at least say something. I feel bad because I have such a terrible attitude toward my studies at this point because I'm so frustrated. Course evaluations came out last week, and I absolutely ripped these classes, but I would like to maybe send a letter to someone or something.<issue_comment>username_1: **TL;DR**: you could write a letter to your program director. However, success may be elusive, since the situation may be constrained by forces outside of the control of you and your lecturers.
---
It is worth addressing. The official course evaluations are the appropriate place for this, so you have taken the right approach. However, depending on the situation at your university, it may be the case that nothing you can do will make an impact on the situation. This is because the situation may be forced upon the lecturers through circumstances beyond their and your control.
Consider the following example. I am the responsible lecturer for a data mining course at my university. Teaching is 30% of my job, with 50% dedicated to research and 20% to project management. I am teaching this course in the traditional format, which I would prefer to keep doing. Last year, 134 students followed my course, and I survived (with positive student evaluations). This year, 312 students showed up, and I am barely hanging on (with student evaluations pending). Purely trying to keep up with the barrage of student questions in my inbox is eating up all my time. If I keep the course format the way it was, there will be absolute zero time for me to fulfill the non-teaching 70% of my responsibilities.
At my university, I am forced to write a formal reply to the outcome of the official student course evaluation, explaining how I will address the comments in next year's edition of the course. Hence, these evaluations matter at least a little. However, if I decide to refer to videolectures instead of ever teaching a plenary lecture again, the following will happen. My student evaluation grade will go down. The extra time I free up by eschewing lecture preparation, I will dedicate to writing another grant proposal. If the proposal gets the funding I request, I will get tenure. If I don't get that funding but my student evaluation grade remains high, I *might* get tenure. My situation simply does not provide me with any incentives to keep students satisfied; in fact, if I were to keep students satisfied, I actively *reduce* my tenure probability.
If your lecturers have mixed responsibilities like I have, it may be the case that their job parameters are set up such that student evaluations are not relevant enough to them. If not, then your success still depends on what value your university attaches to course evaluations. No success is guaranteed.
**So what can you do?**
* definitely **keep filling out those course evaluations**. This builds up to a paper trail of things being wrong in your programme at large, rather than being a problem of individual courses;
* ensure that you get the education you desire. If the course doesn't provide you with the education, you should use your time at university to get it yourself. Form a study group with your friends, acquire the books or other materials to teach yourself the subject. It is of course far from ideal to have to do this yourself, but if your university does not develop your skill set, **you can still develop your skill set**. Acquiring this optional text book you talk about, for instance, is a good move;
* if you have a set of coherent complaints, showing consistent shortcomings across multiple courses and lecturers, and these complaints are shared between a substantial number of students, **bring the complaints to your program director, as a group**. The program director should address problems with your program as a whole, that span beyond a single course.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It may well be that you are just at the wrong place. If your description is even close to accurate then your complaints will be impossible to act on effectively as the other students are likely not where you are. Large classes with a diversity of skills are very difficult to manage in the best case. But, it is possible to do that if the administration is willing to look at the issue. Scaling up in education is one of my least favorite things, since I see education as a relationship between a teacher and a learner (see Plato). You can't use the same techniques with 20 that you use with 120.
But, aside from leaving, there is something you might try. It is a fact that you will learn more about a subject by trying to teach it. If you are comfortable with it, tell the teacher that you already know and have experience with much/most/all of the material in the course and that you are bored. You could either suggest more and different material for learning from the prof, or, the more interesting case, offer to help those who struggle with the material to come up to speed. You will get a deeper understanding with either method if you can get buy-in from the prof. A flipped classroom makes this last solution fairly easy to do. You become a TA-lite, so to speak, wandering around and helping people get over blocks.
But, for a more systemic solution, you and the others in a similar situation might try to meet with the department head and maybe a few faculty and ask for a solution to your joint problem. One solution is to allow testing out of some of the early courses. Another is to have a single "honors" section that people could test in to and which might cover material from several of the early courses in a single course. This would put the students into advanced courses earlier than otherwise, but would take some faculty resources. But if the honors course was also "seminar-like" where the students prepare and present material it would be valuable for all and require less of a load on the faculty.
But, I think that *complaining* isn't going to get you far. Pointing out a problem and asking for a solution is much better, especially, but not necessarily, if you can provide suggestions for the outline of the solution. And collective action here is more likely to be successful than acting on your own.
I'll also suggest that you prof may be just as frustrated as you are. I know I would be and would be searching for solutions.
Upvotes: -1
|
2019/11/25
| 723
| 3,207
|
<issue_start>username_0: * Is it reasonable to request keeping my application to a tenure-track position secret in the cover letter?
* Would search committee likely to respect such a request?
* If at all possible, how long can such secret be kept?
The motivation for keeping an application secret is to not create any problem with the current department.<issue_comment>username_1: There are no guarantees, but most places will respect your wishes for a while. But they may want to contact your references, for example.
They might also have to make a public statement if you are offered a job, depending on various rules.
A complicating factor is whether every committee member gets the word. And if they explore your candidacy with other colleagues (not always allowed) your wishes might not get communicated or respected by everyone. So, you assume some risk, but it is likely small.
And your situation isn't unique in any way. Lots of people need to do this, so most committee members are probably aware of it and have seen it before.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Even if you don't write anything your application will stay mostly secret apart from reasons where it cannot be secret in order to be evaluated. Any place you apply to might contact your reference letter writers. If you get to the interview stage, this often includes an at least somewhat public lecture. If they want to evaluate your application these steps are mandatory.
Other than that your application is fairly secret by general procedure. The information you send in your application does not count as public so it will not be treated as such.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Let me re-order your questions so my answers can build upon each other:
>
> Would search committee likely to respect such a request?
>
>
>
I have worked at multiple universities where we have handled job applications that we were requested to keep private. These job applications have been at multiple levels (from professor to upper administration). So, in my experience it is possible that search committees will respect these requests.
>
> Is it reasonable to request keeping my application to a tenure-track position secret in the cover letter?
>
>
>
Given that it is possible, whether it is reasonable depends on your reasons for keeping your application private. The most common reason I have seen is because it would adversely impact a current position. But, there is extra work required for this, and sometimes it reduces the transparency of the application process. As many academics value transparency, there will be a need to balance the transparency of the interview process with your need for anonymity.
>
> If at all possible, how long can such secret be kept?
>
>
>
There is no guarantee that a secret can be kept -- for most faculty positions you give a public talk which has to be announced. Someone might infer from this that you are applying for a position. If a faculty is large, someone might accidentally say that you are applying. (Since your name has to be announced to faculty so they can sign up to meet with you.) So, it is hard to put a precise bound on this.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/11/25
| 1,120
| 4,826
|
<issue_start>username_0: Assuming you want a good chance of getting at least 1 offer from a research university, is applying for 20 jobs average? Is applying for 30 jobs overkill?
Would most letter writers feel hassled by having to send off letters to like 10-15 different websites, or would they expect that is normal?<issue_comment>username_1: 1) Unless you have something close to an Annals level paper, I would say you should be applying for close to 100. This probably isn't actually possible; to hit this number reasonably, you have to apply for temporary positions and for non-research oriented positions. Think of it this way. Positions taking applications on Mathjobs are getting something like 500 applicants. You're probably more qualified than most applicants, but if you're in the top 100, and a position hires uniformly at random from the top 100, then you need to apply to 100 to have expected value of one job.
2) Most recommenders are willing - they're blaming the university for not taking Mathjobs applications, not you. If you want to save your recommenders trouble at the expense of your money, you can use Interfolio, which is a company that sends out applications - including confidential letters - for you.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: My opinion, which I think is far from universal, is that the tenure track and postdoc markets are quite different in this way. Postdocs are hired to work with one or two particular faculty members, and so if there's no one close to your work at a school they're very unlikely to hire you as a postdoc. If I'd made a list of the 10 most likely places to consider me for a postdoc, the places that were at all interested were a subset of that list. Applying to only 10 would be unnecessarily risky, but I really don't think there's a huge difference in likelihood of success between applying to 20 postdocs and 100 postdocs. By contrast, tenure-track hires are not expected to be as close to existing faculty, and there were several places that interviewed me that weren't on my most likely list. Unless you're clearly in the top two or three people on the market that year (one Annals paper might not be quite enough), then you should literally apply to every single tenure-track position that you would consider taking. 20-30 places is way too few for the tenure-track market because there's just too much randomness in the process.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I'm currently chairing the search committee for a tenure track position in applied mathematics at a smaller (not R1) research-oriented university. We received 261 applications for the position and will phone interview about 5% of these applicants. Many of these applicants have 5 or more years of experience past the Ph.D.
The academic job market in mathematics in the US is extremely competitive at this point- more competitive than in previous searches that I've been involved in over the last 20 years. In this context, sending out far more than 20 or 30 applications would be entirely reasonable.
I agree with others that there is a big difference between the tenure track job market, the market for non-tenure-track but permanent instructor jobs, the market for term-limited non-tenure track teaching positions, and the market for research-oriented postdocs. However, you should probably not be too narrowly focused in your search.
If you're applying through mathjobs.org, then your recommendation writers can submit their letters online without having to write a separate letter for each application that you submit. That really isn't an issue for those positions. There aren't very many positions that aren't taking applications through mathjobs.org and would require separate letters.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: The existing answers all seem to focus on the US job market, so I will try to put a perspective for the European job market and the differences here. Most US maths jobs are posted on MathJobs and one can apply there. This is convenient but also means that it is very easy to apply for a lot of jobs and so this is what people do.
Math jobs in Europe are not all aggregated in a single place. You need to find the job adverts on different job sites (possibly country specific ones), in some newspapers and on department websites. This also means the application process is much less uniform and each individual application will require a lot more work than a few clicks on mathjobs.org.
Knowing that, applying to 20 or 30 positions is sufficient, provided you actually are a reasonably good fit for each of them. In fact, it can be quite hard to even find that many positions that you are qualified for. For tenure track positions the teaching language is also a factor, so you can't just blindly apply all over the EU as in the US.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/11/25
| 2,161
| 9,128
|
<issue_start>username_0: I just joined a faculty as assistant professor, at a university in South America. The admin team and students treat me as "professor". Moreover, because the official language is Spanish, people refer to me as "usted" instead of "tu" (see difference [here](https://www.dummies.com/languages/spanish/knowing-when-to-use-the-spanish-t-and-usted/)).
Just coming out of the PhD, and feeling still "young", I find this treatment very odd. I would like to be treated, particularly by students, by my first name.
Now, without trying to foster authority styles, or exercise power, or being pedantic, I wonder whether there is an actual "benefit" in keeping this formal relationship? For instance, perhaps it gives me more capacity to extract effort from students? Diluting the boundaries might give them confidence to go against my instructions or so. And yet, conversely, someone might argue that a more friendly approach can actually help me gain confidence with students, understanding more their interests and motivations.
In the end my question is what are the pros and cons of each approach, based on your experience. Any help is more than welcome.<issue_comment>username_1: A certain amount of separation from your students has value. You have some power over their future, for example. The use of *usted* implies respect as well. This is useful if any conflicts arise in the future where you need to take a role of authority.
But, having a friendly and open relationship with your students is also useful if it gives them the "permission" to seek you out for help when they need it. Mostly I'm thinking of academic help. Even if they have personal problems (health, family,...) it is useful to them to know that you understand difficulties that may affect their performance. You can encourage them in such situations.
Sometimes you need to be understanding. And sometimes you need to speak somewhat strictly. Both can advance their educational pursuit. Less frequently you need to speak with full authority. Don't make that impossible, should the need arise.
So, a small gap is useful, and too wide a gap is probably not optimal. There are some students who will try to take advantage of you (e.g., by trying have you change grades) if you seem too much like "one of the gang".
---
Note that I was always Dr. username_1 or Prof. username_1 to my undergraduate and even MS level students. But with doctoral students I (and my colleagues) more or less insisted on first names. But the expectation was that they had achieved the status of colleagues at that point and we wanted them to think that way.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Another element to consider is the point of view of students : in some cultures the students might be very uncomfortable calling you by your first name (and even if it isn't an issue in your country it could still be for international students).
I would recommend "allowing" your students to call you by a formal title even if you allow them to use your first name.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: It depends on many things.
What is the general culture at your university? You should at least be aware of how other faculty approach this situation. Being the one person who does things differently might be your style. But maybe you should consider that it gets you talked about, and not in a good way. At least until you have tenure.
For undergrads, you will probably be in a superior or supervisory position. Is it possible you will be in the position of giving a student a failing grade? If there is some misbehavior on the part of a student, might you be the person (or one of the people) who decides on punishment? If you are friends with your students, this sort of thing can be a problem, even a conflict of interest. One of my previous bosses once told me that being friends with the people you supervise is a potential issue should you ever need to discipline one of them. If you had to expel a student for cheating, but you were friends with him before the cheating, that could be a very sticky proposition.
Grad students, especially PhD candidates may be somewhat different. Under most circumstances, they have been filtered very strictly before they get to such a program. It is often as big a reflection on the prof and the faculty if a PhD candidate fails out of the program. A PhD candidate is in transition to the level of a prof. Introductory, bottom step on the ladder, not there yet, but transition.
As well, a prof supervising a PhD candidate is going to be interacting closely for at least 3 years. So there is more potential to be more nuanced, and more expectation of commitment and involvement.
So for grad students, generally it will be less of a problem to be friends. I visited my prof's home several times during my PhD. But I never saw the inside of any of the homes of my profs during my undergrad. I went drinking with my PhD supervisor on numerous occasions. We discussed various sensitive topics that I would never have thought to speak to a prof about during my undergrad. I mean, I held my prof's less-than-one-year-old son while he went back into the house to get something.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I believe your question really stems from wondering if being referred to differently will affect the respect and authority you are recognized with. I was a teacher for 2 years, and because I felt more comfortable being called by my first name, I had the students call me Mr [First name]. That was with 5th, 6th, and 7th graders. They still understood boundaries and authority. I still made the assignments, graded them, taught them. My role did not change and they understood that. You are teaching adults. They shouldn't have any issue with this. This is no different than a student asking me to refer to them by a nickname. It doesn't change who they are to me at all.
Basically, if you want to maintain a professional relationship between teacher and student, your name doesn't matter, how you treat them does, and how you handle disagreements or bad behavior, however that manifests itself, will.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: We had at least one professor (maybe more I can't remember) that asked if it is okay if he uses our first names and we will use his first name in the first lesson.
He was "my dads age" and quite infamous for having hard courses.
I am not aware there was any problem with his authority.
I think it boils down to your general demeanor and the name only plays a small part on how you are percieved and respected.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: From a german computer science student's perspective from 15 years ago:
Our most respected professors were those two who announced that they wanted to be addressed on a first-name basis, using the informal pronoun "du" instead of the formal pronoun "Sie" (which is the standard of addressing a professor in germany). They announced that in the first lecture of each semester, especially for fresh students.
But, and I think this matters, they both had other qualities:
* They were excellent teachers.
* They were excellent researchers.
* They always made time to answer a students question (sometimes even at 3am).
* It was hard to get a good grade from them, but everyone felt that they graded fair.
On the other hand, our least respected professors were those who explicitely insisted on being addressed formally *and* lacked some of the above listed qualities.
In the end, I do remember the books and some of the papers our two respected professors wrote (even though I didn't write my thesis in their field), while I don't remember anything from our other professors' academic output. So, I surmise that being in good memory of your students (at least those who enter the academic career path) will increase your citation count, which does look like a benefit for your academic career.
(I don't know whether this translates into your culture... I don't even know whether this would be the same in a different field than computer science, e.g. law.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I cannot really answer whether a kind of treatment or another is preferable, but the treatment you describe might be at least partially influenced by a language misunderstanding.
In Spain the word "*profesor*" means "*teacher*" or "*lecturer*". It is not a synonym for "professor" as an academic rank. In Spanish, a school teacher is a "*profesor*" as well. The word in Spanish for "professor" is, essentially, the word "*catedrático*".
Many Spanish speakers are in fact not aware that "professor" in English has a different meaning. And, if your class is actually in Spanish and you are being called "*profesor*", you should then know that they are in that case just referring to you with a standard "*lecturer*" equivalent.
The "usted" usage is indeed somewhat formal in Spain, though it is still used in certain contexts and universities (not always and not all of them). In many South American countries it is however much more common and has no formality implications.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/25
| 506
| 2,278
|
<issue_start>username_0: So, my situation is as follows: I submitted a paper to a journal and continued to work on that line of research, specifically on the open problems I mentioned in the submitted paper.
Now, in the received reviews the referees call for more content in the form of addressing one of the before mentioned open problems in particular. I am fine with adding more content, especially since I have already done the work.
However, the solution to the problem fills an additional 25+ pages, an amount which would pad the paper to a very long length. I am not sure of how to proceed as I am quite convinced that merging the two projects would be too long for the journal.
I don’t know if I should
1. merge the projects and hope for it not being too long,
2. disagree with the referees opinion in my revision and state the situation,
3. contact someone and get information before conducting the revisions?
Maybe as a more general question, how is it in general perceived to get a large lengthening in return to a call for more content?<issue_comment>username_1: First, many journals these days allow for "supplementary information", which does not go in the main paper, but is available for download at the journal's website for interested readers. You could add a brief summary of the new content to the main paper (say a page) and then refer the reader to the supplementary information section if they want all the details.
Another option is that you just submit a second paper with the new content (and then cite the second paper in the first one as "in preparation").
Either way, e-mail the editor with your recommendation first and ask if he agrees or has another suggestion for you.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: First, share your concerns with the editors. The reviewers may not have realized the extent of the work. If they agree that a long paper is fine, then write the long paper. If they don't want to do that then consider breaking the work into two papers with one referencing the other. You could even submit them simultaneously to the same journal.
But it would probably be worth checking that with the editors also. I'll guess they would consider that to be the better solution, but it is their call.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2019/11/25
| 629
| 2,718
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have submitted my paper in a journal a week ago. After one week the administrator returned my paper and requested all the authors to associate their ORCID with their accounts and asked us to resubmit the paper.
During the resubmission, a question asked "Was this paper previously submitted to this journal?" and I chose "No" as I thought this not a revision or a final version.
Now I see that it got an entirely new ID and is awaiting again for a new ADM to be assigned. I'm not sure if I had chosen "Yes", the previous ID with a .R1 (probably) would have been assigned with the same ADM so probably I haven't needed to wait again for a new ADM assignment; however, it's not a revision.
Overall, did I choose the correct option? If no, what should I do now? I'm not sure if it's the right action to contact the journal regarding that.<issue_comment>username_1: Often the journal submission system will have something like the following:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/zzpkL.png)
When the administrative staff send it back to you, your manuscript will usually show up in "submission sent back to author". Thus usually, you would edit this version of your submission. This generally avoids the issue of getting a new submission ID.
One minor procedural issue would be if you submitted a "new manuscript" when you were meant to update the "submission sent back to author".
That said, there are a range of journal submission systems.
Most likely, it wont matter and the administrative assistants will let you know what they need.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: If you had chosen "yes", then presumably the editorial management system would give you some options that eventually return your submission to the original editor who was handling it, who would see that they'd asked you to indicate ORCID IDs and you've done so. If you chose "no", this wouldn't happen and they would treat it as a fresh submission, which might mean your submission reaches a different editor. So the answer is no, you did not choose the right option.
That said, it's not a big problem. Your submission could very well reach the original editor anyway (because their specialty matches yours the best). Even if it doesn't, modern editorial management systems are capable of flagging duplicate submissions, which should catch your paper. The journal staff would then fix any problems for you.
Accordingly I suggest doing nothing. If you're concerned, you could also email the journal (use the desk editor's email, not the editor-in-chief's), and they should handle it for you if they didn't already notice it.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2019/11/26
| 890
| 3,853
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was interested in deep learning and devoted most of my undergraduate time to it. However, as I learn more about this field, I discover it does not fit me: I hate tuning parameters and doing experiments. Developing concrete and explainable applications seems more appealing to me.
I am about to apply for grad schools in CS and the personal statements become a headache. I what to apply for professional programs but all my experiences are in AI.
If I don't write about them, I have nothing to say except for mundane course projects. If I write about them, how can I explain why I choose a program for future SDE? Should I do intern works for the time being and postpone my application to next year?
I am also considering programs that do not have a clear orientation to work or research. Should I focus on one topic, post two topics in a parallel manner, or, discuss my changed mind in my PS? I am afraid that *changing mind* would be considered as a lack of resolution and reliability.<issue_comment>username_1: I think the best personal statements are the honest ones. Your question here might be the first draft of yours. Describe what you studied, why you want to move on to something more concrete and immediately useful/fun. (Be a little less forceful than "hate tuning parameters".) You can explain why simple (perhaps not "mundane") course projects turned you in this direction.
If you can connect your future plans to the work of particular people at the school you are applying to your odds will improve. Tailor your cover letter as appropriate.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> I am about to apply for grad schools in CS and the personal statements become a headache. I what to apply for professional programs but all my experiences are in AI.
>
>
>
You could advertise your experience and explain why you want to move, e.g.,
>
> I devoted a significant amount of my undergraduate study to deep learning,
>
> with results including [[summarise results]]. I want to shift my focus to
>
> [[grad school topic]], since I favour [[benefits of new topic]] over
> [[disadvantages of old topic]].
>
>
>
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: A personal statement is set up to describe the development of your interests as they pertain to your graduate program. People apply to graduate programs for many reasons. The backgrounds of applicants may differ widely. The personal statement is an opportunity to tie together your experiences in such a way that they show the school that your skills and interests will likely lead to success in their program.
In your case, you need to talk about your previous experiences, show the research skills you mastered, and describe *in positive terms* how that led you to an interest in professional work. A few general tips:
1. List out how your experience in AI would help you in that school's CS program. Then, in your draft, describe previous projects in ways that highlight the transfer of skills. These can be general abilities - like time management and project delegation - or specific skills with development tools.
2. Think about the transition in positive terms. Don't focus on what you don't like in AI, because the purpose of a personal statement is not to write about why you don't study something else. Focus on what you like about software development. Then, as your overall narrative, convey from point to point how AI led you to pursue software development. (If you really have no positive reasons for pursuing CS, then you shouldn't be applying.)
3. Specify an achievable goal that the graduate degree would help you attain. In other words, if you go to this school and work with professors in X and Y areas to earn (for example) an MS, what do you plan to do? Setting such a goal will help flesh out your motivation.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/26
| 916
| 3,955
|
<issue_start>username_0: Feeing kind of stuck here. I started out as a math PhD student then switched to engineering. I thought by doing so I would be able to learn new skills and expertise in that particular field. But I quickly realized my advisor had a side interest in a math-ish field that is tangentially related to his main area (maybe that’s THE reason I was hired in the first place) but obviously his knowledge is limited in this new field.
Somehow I managed to publish 3 papers in engineering/applied math journals (by fluke? I thinkso) but since everything I know about this field is self-taught I don’t feel confident in my knowledge. I don’t know enough math to become a mathematician nor can I claim expertise in this engineering field I am supposedly in and time is running out.
My biggest fear is actually that the committee members are going to think I have been doodling around doing some unrelated math stuff and reject my dissertation (does this happen? My advisor doesn’t seem worried about this possibility at all). What are my options here really? I suppose if I manage to graduate I will just get a regular job outside of academia, but I do want my degree as I have been here for too long.<issue_comment>username_1: You write that you do not feel confident in your knowledge. However, experts in your field have put your knowledge to the test, and deemed it worthy of publication in a journal. Not once, not twice, but three times. Trust those experts. If they think your knowledge is good enough for three journal publications, then the committee members are highly likely to think similarly positively about your dissertation.
A solid background in mathematics is fertile ground for an exceptional career in any engineering discipline. If you stop worrying about the limitations of your knowledge, and instead accept that everyone's knowledge is by definition limited, you have a bright future ahead of you.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Feeling nervous when you are approaching your thesis defense is the normal situation. If you were not nervous I would be surprised.
The chances of getting rejected outright are very small. By the time you get to your defense, it looks bad on everybody if you fail. Your school, your prof, your dean of admissions, all look bad for letting you go this far and not finish.
The very worst that happens is that you get told you must do some more work. That might delay your graduating by six months or something. And that is not usual, especially when you have three publications related to your thesis.
How many previous PhDs has your prof graduated? Your chance of getting rejected should be a lot less if your prof has several already graduated. It means that the "halls of academe" have been successfully navigated before. If you are not comfortable talking to your prof about such issues, you should be able to find out from your university. Many departments have collections of previous PhD theses available for you to look at. See if you can find some of the previous ones your prof supervised.
That might also tell you if you are in a line of research your prof has gone down before. Basically, that has two sides. If it's a familiar territory, you are less likely to get lost, but you are expected to put up something prettier. In brand new territory, you get a lot of credit for innovation even if it's ugly.
My prof gave me a "pep talk" just before my defense. Literally in the hallway outside the room, just before the oral. He said to remember that I had three publications. That I had done a lot of good work on the thesis and on the prep for the defense. That the committee had already seen the thesis and they had not reacted badly. Then he gave a strategy for answering questions. He said, listen to the entire question. Then give the simplest possible answer and look at the person expectantly. If they want more they will tell you.
Take heart.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/11/26
| 890
| 3,531
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm considering having six chapters in my PhD thesis:
1. General Introduction (including literature review)
2. General Methods
3. Study 1 (as a published paper)
4. Study 2 (as a published paper)
5. Study 3 (as a published paper)
6. General Discussion
Appendix
and each chapter should have its own references list at the end.<issue_comment>username_1: **tl;dr: Yes, but...**
In general, the dissertation can be organized as needed to convey the information in the best way possible for the reader. Your structure is common in many fields. **Proactive communication with your advisor and rest of committee should provide the definitive answer for you individually.**
As noted in the comments, if your dissertation includes 3 published papers, it is common to wrap this with a broad intro & conclusion. Inclusion of additional material beyond that may be discretionary.
An obvious caveat is that committee must be on board, though this usually amounts to the chair (or co-chairs) being on board with your organization. As typical for things like this, the answer individually depends on your specific research, your writing ability, your committee, and your departmental or institutional policies.
While you could look at previous dissertations (related & recent) from your department, note that this isn't an authoritative perspective for what yours *has to look like*.
As for **References**, I have seen dissertations with References at the end of each chapter, and others with one large Reference section for the entire document. I personally prefer the former, but this is largely up to you and your advisor.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Even less if you can. Legendary mathematician <NAME> and Nobel prize in 'Economic Sciences' (*Nash's equilibrium anyone?*) PHD thesis had 26 pages and whole 2 citations.
Contrary to what many teachers imply, a thesis is supposed to have only the info it needs. No hundreds of useless references added only to enlarge it or the unneeded history of theoretical frames and terms.
You should check the school's rules for thesis, they normally say what exactly they request. (*I also suggest Humberto echo's book 'how to write a thesis', its the shortest, most tot he real point book about writing a thesis I've find. Avoid any 'research methodology' book because in those the authors sin of being unable to get to the damn point, be precise, and be concrete.*) . Also check other thesis written at your school to see their index and learn what is expected of the contents.
In any case, what you normally need to write for a thesis is:
1. Presentation page, dedicatories, legal stuff, localization data
2. Index of contents
3. Introduction
4. CHAPTER 1- Literature review/theoretical frame divided by 1.1 variable 1, 1.2 variable 2, 1.3 historical junk of prior researches (I say junk because you cant just mention it happened, you need to explain it and why its important for your research and it will just add pages that have nothing to do with your actual results or research)
5. CHAPTER 2- VARIABLE 1 (Your dependent variable)
6. CHAPTER 3- VARIABLE 2 (your independent variable)
7. CHAPTER 4- METHODS
8. CHAPTER 5- Results and conclusions
9. Annex/extras
10. Bibliography/references
Depending on your thesis, CHAPTER 2 & 3 can be mixed and your variables be instead subheadings like 2.1 and 2.2
Personally, I would suggest to find a titulation/graduation method different than a thesis if its possible.
Upvotes: -1
|
2019/11/26
| 6,016
| 26,361
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a TA in a graduate level course. Students in the course have to hand in a weekly assignment which is done in pairs.
A few days ago, one of the students approached the professor and told her that they are not getting along with their partner and requested to join another pair of students, in practice creating a group of three students and leaving their current partner on their own. The professor asked me and the second TA for our opinion in this matter.
When we inquired further, the student stated (roughly) that they think the partner does not take the course seriously, does not put enough effort and expects them to do all the work. They also stated that success in this course is important for them and that they wish to work along with a similarly motivated student. (They named a specific student they would like to work with. That student already has partner so it would make a group of three students.)
While the request itself sounds legitimate, we are reluctant to comply with it, because we are not happy with the idea of students working on assignments in groups of more than two since we think this is unlikely to lead to situations where all students in the group put in a reasonable amount of effort. Also we are concerned of what will happen with the current partner of the student if we comply.
Thirdly, although we have no proof on this matter, both the professor and I independently had the gut feeling that the request might (mind you, I said might, again there's no proof and we may be totally wrong here) also be related to racial tensions.
A possible solution we were thinking about is to have a conversation with both students and see if we can make them work together in a more productive way.
I will be most grateful for any tips as to how to make this conversation productive and as pleasant as possible to the students involved.
Also if someone has any other thoughts on this matter such as creative solutions or convincing arguments for/against the obvious solutions such as refusing the request, complying with the request, doing some reshuffling in the pairs in order to be able to comply with the request and still guarantee all students are working in pairs, I will be most grateful.<issue_comment>username_1: Working with the same pair for a full semester is already an interesting proposal. When I was a teacher I made sure to randomize pairs. It taught them good communication skills and not to trust anyone directly at their word :P
Reshuffling rarely hurts, it exposes the students to working with various people, an important skill in almost ANY field. I do not know the difficulty of the subject nor how the average student performs, but if the class seems to generally understand the assignments, I believe reshuffling every few assignments or even every assignment would be a good idea, even if this student had not made this request. As long you do not suspect it will tank anyones grades because the roles are so established at this point that the class could not adapt.
I would be wary of making a group of 3 and a group of one. This seems blatantly unfair, not only to the one, but to all the normal pairs of two.
I would not have the talk with the two of them, its not your job to intervene in that way unless the motivated student asks. Otherwise it is their responsibility to talk with their partner about this.
And I would not switch partners specifically for the two groups so that each group is two, but the motivated student gets their request. You will then be obligated to fulfill similar requests to be fair.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: As this is a weekly assignment, then I would consider randomly shuffling all the students every two weeks or each week...
This forces more communication and reduces the effect of any single poor pairing.
It also prevents the "stars" coagulating together permanently and exposes them to the skills of needing to manage teams/partners who are at different levels. It is a useful skill, to get the best out of others.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: I would consider asking the student who is not getting along with their partner, whether they would consider leaving their current partner and work on their own from here on out. That way, the student still would have to do all the work on their own, but no longer has someone benefitting from their efforts without contributing.
If the student seriously considers this solution, you can be more confident that the complaint is genuine: if the student would be willing to go it alone, it is quite likely that the contribution of their current partner is near zero. But if the student is not willing to entertain this solution as a serious option, then you can derive the information that their current partner does contribute at least something to the team, and the request looks much less reasonable.
Based on the information you retrieve from this process, you can still decide to allow the student to join a team of three, or reshuffle some other way; asking the question does not commit you to actually make the student work on their own. But it might give you relevant insights.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: Allow both students to present their work alone or in pair rather than to change teams or make trios. That way, if one of them really is doing all the work then that person will be happier to not feed of a leech while the other will have to start working or fail the course.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I'm surprised that you hadn't foreseen this. Many students have complaints about their randomly-assigned partners - and frankly, many of these complaints are legitimate. I recommend switching partners weekly. This gives three advantages:
* No one has an unfair advantage (in grades or workload) from having been assigned an awesome partner, or an unfair disadvantage from getting a bad partner; such things tend to average out.
* Students can learn to work with many different types of people
* Students can "grade" their partners and provide feedback -- by the end of the course, the students (and you) will have a statistically-significant measure of each student's ability to work in groups (I stole this idea from [<NAME>usch's book](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/1401323251)).
At any rate -- you have come this far, it may be too late to switch your paradigm this time (though maybe not). If this is the case: I don't think either of the options you presented are fair -- first, because groups of three and one are unequal, and second, because there are likely more lopsided groups in which one member is suffering in silence.
What I would suggest instead is to ask all students whether they'd prefer to keep their current partner or to be randomly assigned a new partner. You can do this confidentially, and maybe give some wiggle room, saying that you may break up pairs even if neither member requests a switch. You can then shuffle those pairs in which at least one member requests a new partner.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_6: Talk about it with the lecturer/professor in charge of the class as a whole.
============================================================================
As a TA, you're in a relatively subordinate position, so naturally when dealing with these sorts of policy-related issues, asking your boss for advice would be a natural first step. It's possible that there's already a policy or procedure in place, in which case you should follow their advice. If there isn't, however, I'm going to give you a policy that many of the classes at my university use:
Allow students in malfunctioning teams to use a variant cover sheet that includes statements of contribution.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, for instance, where a normal assignment cover sheet might simply include the names and student IDs for the students in the group, the variant cover sheet would also provide an additional column where they can list each student's contribution to the work - for instance, in a three person group, one student might be listed as a 0% contribution while the other two are listed as each contributing 50% towards the assignment.
Then, when it comes time for assigning marks for that piece of assessment, you take those statements of contribution into account - someone who contributed 0% of the assignment gets 0% of the marks for said assignment. Normally, knowing that they might be penalized this way encourages students to contribute a fair share towards their group assignments.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: I am also a student and we often have to work together in groups. My comment is therefore based on personal experience. In group work we have often divided the work so that one does the whole assignment alone and then the other does the next one. If then all of a sudden there is a new mix, this system can no longer function. Maybe a team member has already put in a lot of work and relies on his partner to do it soon.
I think reshuffling is a good idea, but I think you should implement it with the next course.
The easiest thing for now will be to offer to do the work alone, but encourage to get help from other groups.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: Talk to your Professor more and ask her to get advice from someone with more experience, because this is a big an potentially challenging issue and you hint that it may rightly or wrongly be about race. If it were me, I think I would have a meeting with the other student (since you have already talked to the first one) and then have a meeting with them together. Basically you need to help them to come a place where they can work together effectively and maybe help them analyze in a calm why why the pairing is not working.
* Is the other student even aware of an issue?
* Has the first student discussed it with them?
* Is there miscommunication or cultural incompetency?
You have no idea. I think you can always point out to them if they really seem to be having a conflict that it is essential in life that they be able to work with people that they don't like or whose personal styles they find irritating. But I think that you/the professor should contact whoever runs the teaching and learning center to get some advice about how to talk about this.
Also, I think this is a lesson learned about overreliance on group work for the purposes of grading. Group work is very important for building team work skills and also can increase learning if done properly. But you should always have an individual piece that is the majority of the grade.
I think that too many of the other answers are immediately jumping to the let them separate solution especially when you have not even spoken to the other student involved.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: I'm missing a crucial bit of information here: **as TA(s), do your observervations of the students indicate that the non-performing student in question does indeed underperform to an extraordinary extent?**
* If not, i.e. the performance difference is inside what is to be expected => I'd say that's the normal range within which students have to learn to collaborate.
* On the other hand, there may be situations where the disparity between student performance is so large that you decide the group should be separated for didactic reasons.
---
I'd say that different levels of disparity between/within groups may be expected in different courses.
Two extreme examples I encountered as student:
* As student I once had excercises where the rules explicitly favored teams that would have strong and weak students rather than the strong students ending up in strong groups and the weak students forming weak groups. This was very much on purpose: strong students were expected to explain solutions to weak students.
In such a situation, the complaint doesn't make any sense and should be ignored.
* But I've also had the experience of our group being seaparated - however, I didn't ask for a reassignment, the head assisitant told me they had observed that my colleague a) caused me a lot of additional work by frequently messing up the experiment, and/or b) didn't do anything themselves and obviously did not understand what they were doing. So *they* had decided that our group should be split into two one-person "groups".
This came along with assigning us also different experiments which were suitable for single experimenters (and involved a bit more work for each of us than what we were supposed to do each as part of a two-student group). AFAIK, they had decided that the would be better for both of us: I was relieved of what they considered an unfair amount of work, and my colleague being forced to do their own experiment (and getting a TA closeby pretty much all the time) would learn far more than in the group. I may add that this was a chemical wet lab practicum with lots of time critical steps which left no time for additional explanations if one didn't understand what they were supposed to do in the middle of an experiment: in that case, the other had to work twice as fast in order to keep the sampling plan (and there usually was no time for redoing the whole experiment).
* As TA, my experience with student groups was mostly also (wet) lab practica where groups did different experiments TAs belonging to experiments. One would occasionally get and hand on the information to "look with group x that y does their proper share of work", just like the information that "y in group x needs disability accomodation z".
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_10: The student made a request for a reason, whatever that reason is, and ignoring her reason is possibly hurting her education. What I mean is this:
I've been teaching at the university level for decades and what I've learned through the years is that students don't come to me with requests to break the status quo, to be different from everyone else, to do things in a way that will mess up my original plans for the class, unless there's a pretty good reason. At least not most of the time. And I've learned through the years that it's more important to give them the benefit of the doubt and be responsible for the needs of the respectful students, even if I might accidentally allow a very small number of slackers to slip through in the process.
Afterall, I'm an authority figure in their eyes. *You* are, too. You're an authority figure. It was probably difficult for that student to approach you and request a partner change. Therefore, something is probably messing up her education. She probably needs that partner change.
For all you know, one of the partners in the pair, possibly the partner the student wants to drop, may be, for example, an alcoholic. He may be disruptive, causing the two to argue almost violently everytime they talk. Or maybe one of them is sexually or racially biased, so that someone on that team is repeatedly getting hurt very badly. Maybe there's even sexual harassment. Or maybe they're too mismatched academically. Maybe when they try to work together, one makes the other feel stupid and there are serious arguments. Maybe a much less academically skilled student in the partnership is becoming seriously depressed.
The point is, the possibilities are endless and you don't know all the facts. You never will, even if you ask the students.
Years ago, one of my students killed himself. He was a high performer on a team of three who complained a lot about the other members of his group working on their project. He was taking several other courses in addition to mine, but after his death, which was about 2/3 of the way through a statistics course I was teaching and which he had been in, I began rethinking group projects.
Since then, I allow students to select 1- or 2- or 3- person projects and then to pick their own groups. My classes run the gamut: a few 1-person projects are done but most projects that are turned in are 2-person projects. A couple are 3-person projects. The difficulty levels are matched to the number of people working on them. Occasionally, a student requests a group change. I always allow it, no questions asked, without delay.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: I would let the person go off and do the project by themself, but I wouldn't let them join another team and unfairly have 3 people to a team while others only have 2.
If the 1 person really is doing all the work, and the other team member isn't doing anything.. then the 1 person will be more then happy to go solo on the project. (Many group projects can be done solo anyways, it's just professors are pushed to have more group projects, so they shove out a project that can be done solo, but as a group project, just to tell their administrative oversight committee that they're meeting "group project requirements").
I had a group project in grad school where me and 2 other folks were in a team, but I was doing all the work. I told the prof mid-semester that since I was already doing all the work, I'd rather just do the group project all by myself and leave those other two folks hanging then keep doing all the work and letting them partake in the grade I was doing all the work for.
Prof was ok with that idea.
Because it wouldn't have me go join another team and throw off the balance.
Colleges these days seem to be inundated with group projects, because businesses have told colleges they're getting a bunch of grads that don't seem to do well in project teams. So, colleges have ramped up group projects to give students "experience" in group work.
But, college group projects are not like real work projects.
In work, there is incentive to do your job. If you don't, you get fired.
In college, there is often no incentive to work, because if you have at least 1 person in the team willing to do whatever it takes to make a good grade, and there's no punishment system in place to punish slackers, then slackers will just let the hard worker do all the work while slacking off.
So, if you haven't already got a peer review system in place, you need to put one in place. This lets each member of the group project grade the others. So, if one slacker is in the group, everyone else will give them an F. And, you have to decide how that works into the final project grade. EG: usually a professor will count the peer review as 50% of the project grade, and will then give their own grade to cover the other 50%. But, if a professor sees everyone giving a slacker an F, they'll probably skew their own grade to an F as well and average it out. But, the professor uses their 50% part of the grade to "Curve" the grade if needed. (Because colleges seem to yell at professors for flunking classes, even if the student is a slacking POS.)
The problem with peer review is when you end up with a group of slackers and 1 hard worker. The slackers can gang up on the hard worker and threaten them with a bad peer review score if they don't bust their hump. If that's the case, you'd hope the hard worker would tell the professor. But, it might not happen. So, you can still have 1 person doing all the hard work, but a bunch of slackers forcing them into the predicament.
I had one class where the professor let us fire a team member mid-semester AND do a peer review at end of semester... all to proactively take care of slackers. If the slacker was fired, they had to complete the project on their own and automatically got an F on the peer review. This lit a fire under a lot of students' rears, because nobody wanted to get fired.
Problem then was that the project could easily be done solo.. there wasn't enough work to go around. So, everyone in the group was worried about being fired and trying to jump on any work they could do.
(To handle the "demand" for group projects, a lot of professors are simply taking their class project, which they used to have students do individually, and just have them do it as a group now. So, you have projects that are pretty simple to do, and thus a hard worker can do it all, which just means slackers look at it and go "meh, I know one person can do that, so I'll just hang back until that person gets on it.")
Basically, college group projects are designed to promote slacking and reward it. Professors that think a student will magically rise up and show management skills by "whipping everyone into shape" are delusional unless they give the students a punishment mechanism by which to give their threats to the slackers some teeth.
The fact that your professor doesn't have anything like this in place yet is a bit alarming.
As a TA, I'd say let this person do the project by themselves (but not join the other group).. so they can cut the slacker loose... and also get with your professor to get a peer review system in place STAT.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_12: Others have answered quite well in usual terms, but let me put a different perspective here:
**Forget about being a teacher, imagine you are their manager**
In classes, relationships are usually disposable. In the workplace they're not.
At university, bad teachers usually get away with being abusive of students. Slacker or poorly behaved partners also get away with the full grade awarded for the group.
Maybe not radically or instantly, but both those perspectives change at workplace. Suddenly a colleague has the perspective of being with you for many years rather than a single semester. Also, if you are a manager, the main goal is to ensure that the mission is delivered a the end of the day, week, month or period, and while it ideally shouldn't matter who is delivering, it is also your responsibility to individually evaluate and provide feedback for team members. You'd be responsible for giving raises to good performers, and possibly assigning someone for a promotion. But, if the CEO wishes to cut costs, it would be your job to pick who's getting fired, even if against your will. And keep in mind, firing someone is much more drastic than failing a student in a lecture.
Also, it is a manager task to manage teams: Ensuring each team has the necessary resources (people and tools) to complete the job assigned to them. If there are conflicts in the team, i.e. two people don't get along, you may chose to avoid assigning some people together for a while, but the current task needs to be completed in the time frame. Also, if someone actively refuses to work with a given person, this refusal attitude needs to be curbed as much as it damages the company.
In management, you should be able to identify and act over excessive misbehavior without being requested to do so. That because at one hand, you need to show you can actually punish someone who fails to deliver or act properly, at the other, you don't want to create a "snitching" mentality. You would also want to avoid taking a person's word against another at face value.
This is hard in academic settings where people may be working in pairs, but all you see is an end result over a pdf file. It is also unhelpful that managers should rarely have to manage more than 10 people, while classes rarely have less students than this.
But notice that failing to do so creates much bigger problems in the workplace: Good employees may quit the company. Abused employees who cannot quit might develop mental health issues, and former employees might sue the company. Failing to curb racist actions or abusing your employees may result in a lawsuit against you. And unlike the university where usually the advice I give students is just "pass the class and leave it alone", in the workplace, people do quit their jobs and seek lawyers to settle past quarrels.
So case in point: Avoid running away from manager responsibilities.
Approaches that would be usual in workplace scenarios:
1. Talk to the other person. Start with "how are things going?", then maybe move to questions that are more specific. Maybe he has complaints of his own. If you are good enough, you should be able to motivate this person to work better, without creating a grudge against the colleague.
2. If conflicting reports arise, consider testing for authorship, a few technical questions may be simple to answer if you've done the work, but difficult if someone else did it.
3. Do not accept when one person asks for another to be punished. It's not their call and you should curb this initiative. If one student asks to form a trio, he's already asking to be rewarded with no merit to earn it. If he asks for another student to be left alone, he's asking you to punish this other student. In your case I'd propose for the student "I'll let you work alone, and your colleague can form a trio, would that solve your problem?".
4. Despite the previous advice, people do need to feel confident to report actual problems. So if one student has a complaint about the other, you should be a good listener.
5. Check if the allegedly problematic student causes problems elsewhere. It's one thing if two good performers have a localized quarrel, but you'll often find people that make trouble everywhere they go. Don't be blind to this, it helps judging the case in hands.
6. If, and only if, you can conclude independently from a single person report that there is a rotten apple in the basket take corrective action. That is, if you can see by yourself or there are enough non-involved people that support the claims about one person misbehaving, or slaking his/her work, then you should warn or possibly punish this person.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_13: As a student, I significantly prefer getting to choose my partner(s), especially if assignments take more than an hour a week.
The best solution I have seen to deal with requests to change partners was a form where two people would fill it out to become partners and leave their old partners. The old partners who were being left had no say in the matter, however they were highly encouraged to pair up with each other (they could continue alone if desired).
You also couldn't change partners more than twice (most students never changed partners). This was for a course where we spent ~10 hours a week on the assignment.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/11/26
| 1,123
| 4,900
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am undergraduate in Computer Science and my problem is that i don't quite understand what's wrong with me
1. When I am taking a course I am able to understand it but at much slower rate then other students which results in me taking 2 or 3 courses instead of 5 or 6 that i should be taking, also I have to go in deep details for every subject to be able to understand it and this is very time consuming because it requires alot of research.
2. I have also noticed that my fellow students are able to read much quicker and to understand what the Author is telling them, while I often need much longer just to read the page plus I have to read it couple of times to actually understand the Author and i often get it wrong (I often get wrong what the Author actually means i.e I often interpret it the wrong way) and I am like slower at everything writing, walking, thinking, solving
3. And the most devastating part is that after the exams I forget everything literally everything as if I never learned it, this is very demotivating especially knowing that in order to get my degree i have to demonstrate my knowledge from the past too.
Am I mentally retarded or just stupid (like IQ bellow 80 or something) has anyone had similar experience ?
Even if I make it will I have any chance in the workforce?<issue_comment>username_1: Dont feel like you cant make it in the workforce, as long as you improve, even slowly, you should be able to build your skill set and prove your worth in any field.
I often overwhelmed myself with 7 or 8 courses per semester but had to drop many (due to gaming.) That being said, slow reading and re reading, along with forgetting things after tests are something Ive experienced since I was extremely young.
That being said, I have been tested by the international High IQ society and scored a 143 when I was 12. I managed to finish my physics degree and I managed to teach myself programming after college (I majored in physics and was a teacher for 2 years but unhappy when I wasnt learning) in under 6 months and get a job in industry. I tend to learn faster and retain only things I find interesting, and not things Im simply TOLD I will need or to remember.
Everyone is different, but you may have ADHD like I do. It makes focusing and remembering difficult. This is why I often have to re read over and over and over. It also contributes to how often I forget things. It is a daily issue that I spend up to 20 minutes looking for my keys and wallet before work, and I often get hungry, make food and forget it in the microwave when I begin some other random task. If these sound familiar maybe consider a doctors appointment and a discussion. I am unmedicated (had medicine from age 5 to 18 but now cant remember to go to the doctor or schedule things so I've fallen off that habit year ago)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: No. You are definitely not retarded.
You mention that you spend a considerable amount of time going into deep research on every subject. Indeed one of the skills you develop (or should strive to develop) during the course of your studies is to adopt a more pragmatic approach and understand when do you need to understand every detail and when do you need to only understand things at a high level. I had a similar experience to yours so I know that this might sound to you like cheating/impostering, but the reality is that with the sometimes overwhelming load that you are faced with during your studies (and will keep facing in your future academic or professional life) you routinely need to evaluate if the gain in your overall performance from this additional rigorousness will indeed justify the amount of time you will invest in it, often at the expanse of other tasks.
Two things that helped me personally to control this tendency are:
1. Studying with other students. This can help give you some feedback on whether it is indeed vital to go into that level of detail on that particular task.
2. Deciding in advance how much time I'm going to dedicate to a specific task. This is indeed challenging and might also be stressful at times, but knowing you have this time constraint can help you to prioritize what are the most vital elements of each task.
Another **equally important** point: from your description it sounds possible that you might have ADHD or some other learning disability. I recommend that you will approach the unit in your university in charge of supporting students with learning disabilities. They will be able to advise you how to optimize your learning process and help you get additional assistance that you may be entitled for.
Last but not least, have faith in yourself! the fact that you are taking such a challenging program and are studying diligently and the very fact that you asked this question shows that you are capable!
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2019/11/26
| 559
| 2,512
|
<issue_start>username_0: A former colleague has created a figure. The figure is not published and serves only as a mean for information sharing. I used to be a part of that research group and thus had access to it.
I published an article featuring a modified version of this figure, to explain my current experimental set-up. I did not cite the author of the figure as the figure was not found in any published material. I didn't know what to do - perhaps add them in Acknowledgments?
Have I done the wrong thing?<issue_comment>username_1: The correct thing to do is to cite them for the figure by name, if they will permit it. List the citation as "private communication". You should also probably indicate the it is "adapted from a private communication..."
You have committed plagiarism if you give the impression that you are the source. But it is easy to avoid with a citation.
You can probably handle it in acknowledgements if you are clear about what you are acknowledging. Use language similar to the above.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Citing such "private communications" is often frowned upon, because others can only take your word for it, and have no chance to check the context.
Like with any illustration that you copied or very closely adapted from somewhere else, you put a copyright notice (after asking for the consent of the copyright holder, that is) in a footnote.
The *facts* represented in such a figure deserve an additional citation, if they were previously published. If not, no problem, but you are automatically taking over the scientific responsibility for their correctness.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I didn't find an information in your text - do your ex-colleagues give you any options they will be satisfied with? Actually, are there some really specific details of the experimental setup, which they patented or invented that are drawn in figure? The question behind that I have - do they claim that this is the case of plagiarism because you published their "intellectual property" or just because you took away the figure that they designed/drawed, although it contains a rather common for your field of research information?
In both cases, I would find the way to solve the problem ASAP during the private meeting to avoid any misunderstanding. In the first case, you need to be careful and, basically, follow their wishes not to escalate the situation you are into.
Good luck with it! Maybe you could update us about the solution.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/11/27
| 786
| 3,382
|
<issue_start>username_0: I started in a combinded MS/PhD program and was on the PhD track, but for mental and physical health reasons I had to switch to the MS track. I had not yet made it to the research part of the program, so I don't have an adviser.
I really want to get my PhD, and the (then) graduate director in my department told me when I made the switch that I'd be able to apply to rejoin the PhD program after getting my Master's. I'm getting my Master's in the spring, so I'm working on the application now. I just don't quite know what to do with the essay.
The essay is supposed to be about my research interests, career goals, and reasons for choosing the program. I think my health issues will be sort of an elephant in the room if I don't say something about them, but I'm worried that saying too much will make me look like a weaker candidate than I am. I've had these health issues for most of my life and will continue to have them for the foreseeable future, but they're more under control now than they were a year and a half ago when I made the switch.
How much is too much to reveal about this whole situation? How much is too much of my essay to spend on it? Is there any way to spin this situation in a positive (or at least neutral) way?
(I wasn't sure how much detail to include in this question, but I'm happy to go into more detail if it would help.)<issue_comment>username_1: The correct thing to do is to cite them for the figure by name, if they will permit it. List the citation as "private communication". You should also probably indicate the it is "adapted from a private communication..."
You have committed plagiarism if you give the impression that you are the source. But it is easy to avoid with a citation.
You can probably handle it in acknowledgements if you are clear about what you are acknowledging. Use language similar to the above.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Citing such "private communications" is often frowned upon, because others can only take your word for it, and have no chance to check the context.
Like with any illustration that you copied or very closely adapted from somewhere else, you put a copyright notice (after asking for the consent of the copyright holder, that is) in a footnote.
The *facts* represented in such a figure deserve an additional citation, if they were previously published. If not, no problem, but you are automatically taking over the scientific responsibility for their correctness.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I didn't find an information in your text - do your ex-colleagues give you any options they will be satisfied with? Actually, are there some really specific details of the experimental setup, which they patented or invented that are drawn in figure? The question behind that I have - do they claim that this is the case of plagiarism because you published their "intellectual property" or just because you took away the figure that they designed/drawed, although it contains a rather common for your field of research information?
In both cases, I would find the way to solve the problem ASAP during the private meeting to avoid any misunderstanding. In the first case, you need to be careful and, basically, follow their wishes not to escalate the situation you are into.
Good luck with it! Maybe you could update us about the solution.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/11/27
| 2,615
| 10,249
|
<issue_start>username_0: Not referring to degree mills here, but genuine PhDs.
This claim comes from [this blog post](http://neurochambers.blogspot.com/2012/05/tough-love-insensitive-guide-to.html?fbclid=IwAR2U1cB8NTAIEbXZzyatcZWwus4VM9aGvi28KD8zWU0cgZerzmKmvOB59Sk) by Cardiff University psychologist and neuroscientist <NAME>:
>
> A PhD is essentially a test. Don't fool yourself into thinking that you pass this test by passing your PhD. Wrong. The fact is that passing a PhD is like getting a certificate of participation. Why? *Because almost everyone who starts a PhD and sticks around long enough ends up getting one.* No, the real test is what happens after your PhD. That's when you’ll know whether you’ve really passed. Do well and it will open the door to a career of unparalleled intellectual freedom.
>
>
>
(emphasis mine)
The claim sounds fantastic to me. Is it true? Are there any statistics that indicate it to be so? <NAME>'s post links to a source, but unfortunately it appears to no longer be available.<issue_comment>username_1: But, be careful not to read what he writes out of context. The two points before this statement are:
>
> The first is that, like a career in science, a PhD is not for everyone. It requires a peculiar mix of intelligence, discipline, creativity, rationalism, stubbornness – and sheer nerdiness. Different people have these in different measure, but a successful PhD student has a healthy dose of all.
>
>
> The second is that a PhD is hard. It’s meant to be hard, not because inflicting pain is necessarily fun, nor because some scientists are ‘dementors’ (see this interesting post by Zuska on that subject), and not because your PhD is expected to solve the mysteries of the universe. It’s hard because it is an apprenticeship in science: a frustrating, triumphant, exhausting, and ultimately Darwinian career that will require everything you can muster.
>
>
>
In the context of "a PhD is hard" and having the right mix of "intelligence, discipline, creativity, rationalism, stubbornness" it is probably true that "almost everyone who starts a PhD and sticks around long enough ends up getting one". But, sticking around means passing classes, passing qualifiers, and passing numerous other barriers that are put there to ensure that you have the ability to finish your PhD while maintaining the quality standards of the university.
Anecdotally I know of very few people who stuck and around didn't get their PhD in the end. But, I do know of exceptions - people who stuck around and tried to get their PhD but failed.
This article from the [Chronicle of Higher Education](https://www.chronicle.com/article/PhD-Attrition-How-Much-Is/140045) from 2013 claims that only 50% of students finish their PhD, and gives an anecdote that only 10% of one class finished.
So, in the context of what <NAME> writes it's more or less true, but in the broader context of people doing PhD's it's probably not.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: This may vary a lot depending on the field, university, and advisor you end up with, but I'll answer according to what I've seen (in Applied Math, in the U.S.).
No, this is not at all true. Even once you get accepted to a PhD program, you usually have qualifying/preliminary exams you need to pass within your first few years (with a limited number of attempts). If you don't pass these, you are gone from the program (though you are often allowed to leave with a Master's; I would say that is often a consolation prize).
Once you pass the qualifying exams, you have to find an advisor willing to work with you, a research topic, and pass some sort of comprehensive exam that is related to your topic. Some advisors are picky about who they work with, so it is possible to not find an advisor. It is also possible to fail the comprehensive exam (you usually do not get a second attempt).
Once you have completed those hurdles, you have to actually write a thesis, and have your advisor basically approve it as being ready to defend. And then you have to defend it. I have seen people who, despite years of work, never get their thesis to a point where their advisor approves them to defend. I think there is typically some sort of time limit on your thesis from when you start the program, but this is according to university regulations. I have also seen unsuccessful thesis defenses; these are rare (since usually you just will not be allowed to defend if the thesis is bad), but if it happens you are gone without a PhD.
I suppose that being persistent could include applying to a different PhD program after being kicked out of a first (or a second). Maybe if it is a low enough ranked program they will give out a PhD to anyone who sticks it out, but I don't really know about this.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: From what I have seen, this is pretty much the case for PhD programs in Europe. PhD programs in Europe tend to work a bit differently than in the US. It is typically expected that you have already completed a Master's degree before starting a PhD. The PhD program itself tends to have little or no coursework requirements, and no examinations other than the thesis defense at the end.
A lot of filtering that is done in US programs through exams during the program, is instead done at the selection stage. Consequently, landing a PhD position in Europe can be more difficult than in the US. But once you got the position, it is very rare for people not to get their PhD in the end. People on occasion may drop out of the program. Much more rarely, a program may decide to drop a candidate if things are really not working out. If that happens, it typical happens in the first year. But overall in the various locations I have been, at least 80% of people who start PhDs in Europe end up with a PhD.
Some actual data:
* According to [this article in the Times Higher Education](https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/phd-completion-rates-2013/2006040.article), PhD completions rates in the UK are about 73% after 7 years, grow up to just over 80% eventually.
* [This post by the Dutch association of Universities](https://www.vsnu.nl/en_GB/f_c_promovendi.html) shows similar numbers.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Just being there is not enough. I usually tell my students when they are worried about their progress: "If and because you work hard, you will definitely obtain enough high quality results to write an excellent thesis afterwards." And my experience has confirmed this most of the time.
The trouble with research is that you do not necessarily have to reach a specific goal formulated in the beginning of a PhD work to end up with a good thesis. Sometimes little to no progress is made with the specific hypotheses from the beginning, but new hypotheses are found and answered during the work. PhD students themselves sometimes fail to understand this transition and then also come to the (false) conclusion that they only stuck around and finally got their degree. This might help to explain why this impression is out there. But I would call it a myth.
Statistics would be interesting. However, reliable data might be difficult to get. At my university for instance each faculty has their own ways to handle a PhD student and in many cases where students drop out they never were PhD students *officially*, just an ordinary university employee.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: *NO.*
It definitely depends on the location, at least in the U.S. And it hasn't been true anywhere I've gone.
I was in a PhD program at a Medical College in Milwaukee, Wisconsin where the majority of students did *not* make it beyond their second year, much less get a PhD. I knew it starting the program, as did all of us. That was ten years ago.
Before that, getting my Masters Degree in Columbus, Ohio, at Ohio State University, we also all knew that not everyone would make it. And many did not even finish their Master's degrees. Many who stuck around for years never got PhDs.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: From my experience in Poland it looks like that:
1. Get Masters degree done
2. Apply for PHD, this includes exam
3. Now we arrive to a fork, you can quit, you can be kicked out by not passing an exam/lecture, you can have helpful professor that will get you through no matter what, you can have a terrible professor but be smart enough to pull PHD off basically on your own or you can have a terrible professor and fail, and be forced to leave.
4. After you published enough, wrote your work, there is PHD exam you have to pass.
So, if you are lucky, have a good professor/advisor it might seem like a breeze, for average person it is honest tough work and always some percent will quit/fail for various reasons.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: This is a case of inverse causation. They don't eventually get PhDs *because* they hang around, but rather that they hang around because they are likely to eventually get their PhDs.
Those who really have no chance to graduate (which may turn out to be the case - admissions processes have imperfect prediction) will eventually be cut off funding and (need to) go elsewhere without PhDs. Those will continue to receive funding to hang around do so because they do sufficiently good work to make eventual graduation look likely.
Then again, it really depends on the country, the university's rules and even on on the research groups themselves.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: That's probably true, but it might not be "worth it."
When I was in my mid-20s, I started a PhD program at Carnegie Mellon University. Now in my early 60s, I finally "get" the real analysis and other math that I needed for the program. So perhaps I could perhaps get my PhD after four decades. No reasonable person would suggest working that long to get a PhD. I once knew of someone who took 16 years to get a PhD.
The issue is not whether or not someone can get a PhD, but whether or not they can do so within a reasonable period of time. Four years is standard, as for undergraduates, five or six is ok, allowing for time "overruns," but very few people would accept 16 years or 40.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/11/27
| 1,373
| 5,912
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am in a Ph.D. program. In my program, I declared my preliminary advisor who is supposed to guide me when writing my first field paper.
Firstly, after I passed my qualifying examination in the last summer, I asked my paper advisor to visit his office to discuss and determine my research topic. He just ignored my email and did not reply at all.
Secondly, one month later I sent an email again and visited his office. I got a research question from him. I read some papers and then visited his office to discuss the next steps. I told him about my rough ideas, then he told me that they will not work. He told me to change my research topic if I would not have a skill set to deal with the problem. I majored in a field of study which specializes in the required skill, so I kept going on doing my research. Then he refused to see me when I asked him to visit his office later and get some feedback on my research work.
Thirdly, he had not given me any guidelines on my research as a paper advisor other than giving me some papers.
Fourthly, he ignored my email later when I asked him to write a letter. I can understand that he would not write a letter for me, but he just ignores my reasonable emails several times.
Fifthly, he would not advise me anymore as the main advisor since I did not know some stylized facts when I started my research and since I did not produce an immediate result within a few weeks.
Lastly, all the Chinese Ph.D. students in my research group only insisted to work with my paper advisor because he is also Chinese, though there are at least three other professors. So he said to me that he has too many students, which is an excuse to support his decision that he does not advise me.
I am wondering whether or not these are reasonable. What should I do if there is no one other than him whose research interests lie in mine? Looks like I just have to endure several year's loss in my life due to a bad decision of mine. The intended field of study is very narrow, so it is difficult to find another professor at another University since my Ph.D. program is evaluated around the margin of ranked universities that have professors in my field of study. Do I have to transfer to another different program with a different major?<issue_comment>username_1: I would not call this abuse, but I would say that this professor is clearly not interested in working with you. Not answering emails, not meeting with people in a timely fashion etc. are all indicators that the professor just thinks that you're not worth their time. This may or may not be true, but that really doesn't matter - it takes two to tango in an advisor/advisee relationship, and you don't have a partner in this professor.
I don't quite know how your university works. It sounds like you were assigned to this professor semi-randomly to (I'm guessing here) start some project while you look for a permanent advisor. Whether the professor violated some of the rules of this mentorship process (say, they have to meet you a certain number of times or help you actively, however that's defined) is really not for me to judge - you should consult with your student counseling center/ombudsperson/graduate handbook about this.
Overall, my advice is to look for someone else to advise you, ASAP. This professor is not going to offer you a happy PhD experience in my opinion. If that means changing your field slightly to accommodate some other professor's interests, I would do it. If that professor is the only person in the department qualified to advise you on that field, and you are unwilling to change fields, you have a problem. No one can force a professor to advise someone (I would *never* want to work under someone who was forced to take me anyway, that would be hell for us both!), so you need to figure out what matters to you more - staying within that narrow field, or actually getting an advisor in that university.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I wouldn't say it's abuse, but I would say the professor is not delivering on the most basic requirements of being an academic adviser. In effect, they have unilaterally backed out of their commitment to be your adviser, without even deigning to tell you. Unfortunately, universities do not have a good track record at holding their academic staff to account in this regard. As a result, it is likely unproductive to speak to university management about this issue. At best, it will result in you being assigned a different adviser, and at worst, you make yourself a formidable enemy in your current one.
Instead, ensure the best possible outcome by looking for a better adviser yourself. More generally, if you want to succeed, you cannot wait around for either people to come to you with solutions to your problems. You'll need to adopt a more assertive set of behaviors than those you have described in the question. Get yourself the help you need, and indeed deserve in your position as a graduate student. Perhaps a professor you are friendly with, a fellow student, or a student councilor can provide some on-the-ground mental support.
Be aware that, despite the fact that your current adviser has wasted your time and treated you like trash, it is in your personal interest to refrain from pointing this out in public. Professors are in a position of considerable formal and informal power, and can make your life difficult. So you'll need to be diplomatic and treat your adviser with the utmost courtesy. They have provided themselves with a justification to gracefully exit the relationship: there are just too many students to support. Quelle surprise to the person who signed on to support them, but it is probably not a complete lie, so you can give this as the reason when you are asked why you want to change advisers.
I wish you all the best in resolving this issue.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/11/27
| 180
| 781
|
<issue_start>username_0: When including a list of own publications in thesis, which order would you follow?
* Descending chronological order
* Ascending author position
* Relevance to thesis chapters
* (Any other ways)<issue_comment>username_1: This might be field-dependent, but in electrical engineering it is common to sort references according to the order in which they are cited in the thesis. You might want to look at published theses in your field and see how they do it.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Look for published papers in your field and do it like they do. Different fields have different conventions, try to follow what is common in your area. Your advisor should also be able to tell you what is usually done in your field.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2019/11/27
| 1,075
| 4,641
|
<issue_start>username_0: My PhD is in computational Materials science. I successfully defended my thesis yesterday. However, I felt that one of the committee members was starting to get angry with my answers. I was trying to answer his questions, but his questions were very vague indicating that he clearly did not go through my thesis. Thus I had to answer his questions a bit elaborately, so that he could understand the reasoning behind my answers. I could sense that he was dissatisfied with my answers.
For example: He asked me, how confident are you about your theoretical model when comparing with the real world experimental results?
My answer: Since my model has A, B, C assumptions. It can never accurately predict the experimental/real world results.
His question: What would be your confidence level? What percentage?
My answer: It would be hard to put an exact percentage. But I would go with 90%.
He followed with an "okay".
Can I ask him directly about his feedback on my answers during the session?<issue_comment>username_1: This would depend somewhat on your general relationship with him. If he is relatively anonymous to you then it probably isn't worth the effort and you won't get the feedback you want.
But if you know one another well, through coursework or other research (etc.) then it might well be worth a sit-down. You may have some misunderstandings and he may be able to help you clear them up. He may be able to point to directions for study or research. There are a lot of things.
But if you approach it right, you also show respect for him and his ideas and that can lead to a better long-term relationship that might be profitable.
And, it isn't especially uncommon that a committee member (even several) haven't read your thesis. A common question from committee members to advisors just before or after the defense is "You're sure this is ok, Jack/Jill?". The advisor nods affirmatively and all is well.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The answer may depend somewhat on local culture.
For the universities/departments I know here in Germany, the candidate usually has the right to see the documentation of their exam and grading after the process is finished, (for the PhD thesis some parts often also earlier: e.g. the written reviews about the thesis can often be seen already before the defense). This would also include the protocols of the committee decisions.
There is a general idea that an examinee needs to have the chance to review the exam, their answers and the grading for didactic purposes (I've seen some universities explicitly stating this, and also stating that some examiner should be available during this in order to answer questions that may arise for the candidate) as well as for ensuring procedural fairness.
---
Thus, I'd say:
* Yes, you may ask that professor, possibly first making sure that the process is indeed finished also from the university burocratic side.
* Otherwise, if the burocratic process is not yet finished, they may say that they can answer only after the whole procedure is formally finished,
* or they may refer you to the protocol of the defense.
* And of course, you cannot really do anything if they are not willing to discuss further.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Congratulations! Tbh if you have already succesfully defended your thesis it might not be of great benefit to question the comitee.
As highlighted by cbeleites it would depend on the institution, country, culture etc of where you are so I would ask your supervisor for advice first. I think what would be a good question to ask is "if there were any questions you felt that I did not answer well, how do you think I could have answered them better?"
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: Congrats! First of all, I am not sure whether your committee member has an expertise in your area of research. Many professors are specialized in specific topics. If s/he is specialized in your topic, you may ask him. If that is the case, he might have found some missing parts/elements and gave you some clues. If your defense is approved, which is a partial requirement for your doctoral degree, I guess he shouldn't be offended for such questions even if some of your answers during the defense may not be ideal answers. If he is not specialized in your research, the question might have come out of curiosity. For example, one of my committee asked about how my model could be applied in her area.
Many times, these questions are asked to see how you can think outside the picture and consider alternatives.
#Just saw that this is a very old topic.
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/11/27
| 1,138
| 4,455
|
<issue_start>username_0: The EU has a research fellowship [program](https://ec.europa.eu/research/mariecurieactions/actions/individual-fellowships_en) named after Physicist <NAME>-Curie. The website lacks a bunch of information, but I'm specifically interested in understanding what kind of funding it actually provides in the Individual Fellowship (IF) track. The linked-to-page says:
>
> The grant provides an **allowance to cover living, travel and family costs.** In addition, the EU contributes to the training, networking and research costs of the fellow, as well as to the management and indirect costs of the project.
>
>
>
If you've received such a grant, participated in fund allocation, or saw the "books" at a hosting institution, I'd like to know more about what amounts of money they're talking about.
Specific points you could elaborate on:
* Is the funding a lump sum? Per-year? Per-month?
* Is the host institute's part figured as a percentage of the overall funding? Independently of it?
* Do the applicants (individual + institution) ask for certain amounts, or does the program set them?
* If it's the latter, what are the fixed amounts? Or the criteria for setting them?
* Can you give a specific/typical example (no personal identifying information please) of the amount of funds some researcher, and their hosting institute, have gotten?
Obviously - no need to address *all* of the points.<issue_comment>username_1: The website has a bunch of information if you look in the right place, in the [applicant guide](https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/other/guides_for_applicants/h2020-guide-appl-msca-if-2018-20_en.pdf). All your questions are essentially answered by this paragraph:
>
> The living allowance is the EU contribution to the gross salary costs of the researcher and amounts to EUR 4,880 per month. It can only be used to this end.
>
>
> This amount is adjusted through the application of a country correction coefficient (CCC) for the cost of living according to the country in which the beneficiary is located. For the outgoing phase of the Global Fellowship, the country correction coefficient of the TC partner organisation will be applied. However, the adjusted amount will not change in case of secondments to a partner organisation in another MS or AC. The country correction coefficients that will be applied are indicated in Table 1 in Part 3 of the Work Programme (Marie Skłodowska-Curie actions).
>
>
>
I'll let you read the rest. There is also a mobility allowance of 600€/month and a family allowance of 500€/month. There are also a few annex costs. Bear in mind that this is a gross amount.
I didn't search for the Work Programme (it's somewhere online, I imagine), but in France, the resulting net salary is around 3000€/month, which is extremely good for a postdoc; to give an idea, the median net salary for employees is 1789€ nationwide. I have a few friends who got or supervised postdocs like this in several European countries, none of them had to complain about the salary, quite the contrary.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This question was asked years ago, but I still want to share my experience as it was very frustrating to find out after the fact.
Per country the implementation of the grant differs. I had my MCIF in the Netherlands. I receive the legally obliged salary (CAO scale 11), and no penny extra. No family allowance, no travel allowance. Not even my full travel costs are reimbursed.
Obviously this upset me, and I informed the ERC people. They contacted the university and sided with the university that this is fair. The idea is that the minimum legal salary in NL is much higher than the MCIF minimum salary, so this CAO salary is plenty to cover minimum MCIF + travel + family allowance.
So for NL it doesn't matter if you receive the family allowance or not you salary will always be minimum CAO salary. The university just uses the allowance to decrease the cost for themselves.
I wish I would've had the option to tell ERC that I won't be using the mobility and family allowance so they could fund someone else with it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Same experience as username_2 in the NL. The salary is not nearly as high as advertised, in the end even the courses are charged from the personal allowance and not from the institutional allowance. It feels like a racket. Extremely misleading.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/27
| 563
| 2,456
|
<issue_start>username_0: What would happen if a student was admitted to graduate school (only consider US institutions here), but failed a course later and would have to wait till the next time to take the course to make up for it and get the bachelor degree?
Do they have a chance in this situation to apply for a deferment of admission for a fraction of a year?<issue_comment>username_1: I suppose it's okay to ask. But since graduate admission is generally contingent on successful completion of your undergraduate degree, I think it's much more likely that the graduate institution will rescind your admission. You would need to make a fresh application in the next admission cycle, with no guarantee of acceptance, and the failed course would tend to weaken your application.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: As I mentioned in the comments, there are a few cases here.
The best case is if you can make up the necessary course before grad school starts. In the US, you might fail a course in the spring but be able to make it up over the summer. Note, you can usually take courses at a different institution -- so if you fail a course in the fall and your institution will not offer it again until next fall, I would try pretty hard to find another institution where you could take the course over the spring, and then transfer the credits. If you can find some way to pass the course before graduate school beginning, then there is unlikely to be an issue.
The second-best case is that the course is completely unrelated to your degree -- e.g., you are a physicist and you failed music and therefore won't get your degree on time. This is bad, because the university could refuse to accept you over this, or could make you defer an entire year. But it is likely that a work-around can be found. For example, you may be able to make up the music course at your new institution and then transfer the credits to your old institution to get the degree.
The worst case is that you failed a major course -- e.g., you are a physicist and failed E&M. As before, they could revoke your admission over this, or force you to wait an entire year. But in this case, they are far more likely to rescind your admission, for obvious reasons.
As Buffy pointed out, deferring your admission for a fraction of a year is difficult, unless the program routinely does winter admissions (and most do not, at least in the fields I'm familiar with).
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/27
| 722
| 3,156
|
<issue_start>username_0: You can prepare a talk from a to z, know exactly what you are going to say and how (and this is even more important when English is not your first language and your skills are not top-notch) - but what can you do when you are asked a question with a thick accent that you just don't understand?
You can ask the asker to repeat the question, but this is only possible once, and if you still don't understand, you're in a jam.
This can lead to some seriously awkward moments...
What would be the best way to deal with such a situation?<issue_comment>username_1: What I usually do is to try to piece together as much of the question as I can and then rephrase/guess/fill in the blank in my own words ("So you are asking whether..."). If my guess is close enough the person asking usually relents. If not, repeat this process until the question is clarified.
In the long term the only solution is to try to expose yourself more often to different accents so that you learn to understand how they differ from the "standard" ones.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Just be frank and say ' Sorry, but It's hard for me to understand your accent as X language is not my native language and I learned it for certain region.', then repeat the question to them and ask if you got it right, and if you didn't for X word, politely ask them to repeat that word or to change it.
In a more normal conversation this will help you learn more on the language and the other person will learn their accent might be hard and that it is not personal. In a standing talk or presentation start the same but right off but you can ask for rephrasing right off, or someone will repeat the question for you.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I have two suggestions that you might consider. Neither is a panacea but one or the other might help.
If this happens frequently, or is likely to, have a colleague who has "native" speaking skills and with whom you are in frequent successful communication listen for questions and relay them to you as needed. They can understand the speaker and you can understand them. I'm very deaf and have trouble understanding almost every conversation. But I can communicate well with my spouse, as I hear her everyday and know how her mouth moves when she is speaking. She often has to interpret for me in any social situation, even among friends where accent and language are not an issue. Some deaf speakers have colleagues or others use sign language to relay questions.
The second way, that works in some, but not all, situations, is to ask the questioner to meet with you after the talk in a quieter environment where conversation is easier and you can have some back-and-forth that is hard in a public space. Questions asked in auditoriums can be hard to hear even in the best case. A disadvantage, of course, is that others don't get to hear your answer. But even here, giving "I'm not a native speaker" as the reason for the request to meet is probably a good idea.
But I would avoid any suggestion that the other has an accent or other possible communication issue. Own the problem yourself.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/11/27
| 872
| 3,479
|
<issue_start>username_0: Here is a peculiar situation I face but I don't think it is uncommon in academia.
My adviser asked me in an email **to commit to continuing the work to publish a paper from my PhD work before signing my PhD dissertation form**
Let's assume the worst case scenario in which I will not be able to work on this paper in the future.
Does my adviser have the power to revoke my PhD if I will commit in an email, but I will not be able to continue the work to publish this paper?
What do you suggest me to do?<issue_comment>username_1: I suggest that you make the commitment and try to stick to it. It would be good if you get it done. But nothing bad can happen if you don't. It would be unethical for the advisor to even suggest revocation.
This sounds more to me like a strong endorsement of the quality of your work and that it should be seen by more than just your committee. I doubt that it would enter their mind to try to harm you. If your work was poor they would have no reason whatever to suggest you publish it.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I am not a lawyer, but this type of promise strikes me as a good example of a contract that is very likely to be ruled [unconscionable](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscionability), and hence legally [unenforceable](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unenforceable), if a court of law were ever to consider the matter.
In a more academic context (since academia sometimes obeys unwritten rules that don’t always coincide with the written law), your adviser’s requirement strikes me as unethical and highly problematic. Your adviser’s job is to approve your dissertation if, and only if, they judge that *the work that you have done to date* meets the requirements for a PhD. A PhD is not indentured servitude and your adviser cannot exert control over your life into the indefinite future, or indeed into any future that extends beyond the moment they sign that piece of paper. I see it as highly improper for your adviser to attempt to impose such a requirement. If I were a colleague of your adviser who heard about their behavior, I would lose a lot of the respect I hold for them, assuming I had such respect to begin with. And if I were a university official hearing a demand from your advisor to revoke your PhD over a breached promise of this type, I would laugh them out of the room. Of course, I cannot guarantee that other academics would have the same reaction.
I can’t advise you how to proceed, but some options that I can think of are:
1. Make the promise and be true to your word.
2. Make the promise without planning to satisfy the requirement. The rationale here is that a promise obtained under coercion is ethically void and you are not bound to satisfy it. (Again, that is the notion of unconscionability I was referring to earlier, but in an ethics rather than legal context.)
3. Do not make the promise. Explain to your adviser that the demand is inappropriate and hope that they will be convinced, or possibly negotiate to get the adviser to relax the unreasonable condition so as to allow for uncertainties about future events.
4. Complain to relevant authorities at your department and/or university.
Some people might think less of you for choosing option 2. Personally I think each of the choices I outlined above is reasonable and moral, although option 2 is certainly distasteful and I would try to avoid it if I could.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2019/11/27
| 738
| 3,112
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am polishing my CV for PhD applications (Statistical Physics related). I was wondering about whether it is appropriate to list some personal interests and non-academic skills. This is my list (last line is the more uncertain, since during the lessons sessions I am not able to read much):
Additional Skills & Interests
* Time planning skills --- Ability to take on new responsibilities --- Teamwork
* Curious nature --- Problem solving skills --- Critical thinking
* Keen hiker, runner and soccer player (informal level).
* Passionate reader of classics and manga.<issue_comment>username_1: Focus on your academic skills. Stress the suitability of your background and your likelihood of success in any program. That is how you will be judged. For undergraduate admissions it can be a bit different (in the US, anyway), but not for doctoral study. Stick to business.
The other things may save you when you are in the process, but that is a personal thing you can draw on. Your SoP should be strongly oriented toward your expectations for the future and your willingness to work hard to get there.
But in some fields teamwork may be very essential. But don't just say you are a valuable team member. List team projects you were on that were successful.
Many of the other things are assumed. If you weren't curious, for example, you wouldn't be applying in the first place.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I'd only add interests if they're a bit different and demonstrate skills that are looked for in an ideal PhD candidate - determination, perseverance, creativity, intelligence, self-reliance etc. (e.g. triathlon runner, multi-lingual, high grade piano player etc.).
...And stick to only presenting one. You don't want to appear so involved with personal activities that you won't have time for your research project.
Hobbies and interests that are common place - enjoys reading, running, going to the cinema etc. are best to leave out.
Also avoid anything that might look like a huge time drain that could take you out of the lab regularly/for prolonged periods of time (i.e. a second job or travel blogger etc). These are not good to mention. As a general rule, supervisors want people in their lab who aren't hugely distracted by non-research activities.
Good luck with your application!
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I do not like it when people write unqualified statements.
You say you have good time planning skills and good teamwork. How can you prove it? Did you successfully complete a complex project? Did you manage a team before? Did you collaborate with many people?
You say you have a curious nature and good problem solving skills. How can you prove it? Did you write a research paper? Did you win some physics/math competition?
Anyone can write anything on their CV. Without anything to back it up these statements are at best meaningless, and at worst seen as thinly veiled attempts to bolster a weak CV.
Personally I wouldn't write reading as a hobby. Hiking is fine, but I find that most people don't read these bits.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/11/28
| 789
| 2,977
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an undergraduate student who is co-authoring a publication for a scientific journal for the first time. My advisor has asked what I want my name and affiliation to be but I need some guidance.
My full name is <NAME>, but I go by Lizzi. I go to Virginia Tech which has the full name Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University although Virginia Tech is also an official name. I am majoring in statistics and minoring in math.
I'm thinking I should say my name is <NAME> and affiliation is Virginia Tech Statistics Undergraduate. Is this appropriate detail? Any help is appreciated!<issue_comment>username_1: I would say: your name, your choice. Consider creating an ORCID which is unique. In case you feel like adapting your publication name, this ID remains the same.
As to the affiliation: usually there are guidelines by the instition. Ask your advisor and consider the affiliation they are using in publications.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: In terms of “standard” conventions, I would suggest:
>
> <NAME>, Department of Statistics, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
>
>
>
If the research you’ll be publishing was conducted as part of a research group, however, you might list that affiliation instead, e.g., “Applied Statistics Lab, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University“
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: My suggestion for your name would be: whatever you come up with, do a couple of **google searches** first to find out if it is sort of **unique**.
If there are, for example, already a couple of Elizabeth Duncans active in some other area of science, it might be worth thinking about an alternative spelling of your name (or even Lizzy Duncan) just so that it is easier to figure out which research was done by you and which by similarly named people all over the world.
The go-to "default" (at least as far as I have seen) would be something like:
>
> <NAME>
>
> Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
>
>
>
You don't have to mention that you are currently in an undergraduate programm.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: If you use the full name Elizabeth, I would definitely suggest to keep the middle initial: it is useful to disambiguate you from [other authors](https://scholar.google.it/citations?user=Tk2KYRcAAAAJ&hl=it&oi=ao) [with the same name](https://scholar.google.it/citations?user=eOvG6LwAAAAJ&hl=it&oi=sra), and makes automatic citation tracking more effective.
You can also opt for Lizzi, which could make a warmer, more personal impression, but it could cause some minor trouble in future (example: you sign up for a conference in a far away country as "Lizzi", because that's the name you want to appear on your name tag; the organizers get you a visa to enter the country, and customs complain that the visa says "Lizzi" while your passport says "Elizabeth").
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/11/28
| 577
| 2,472
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am applying for a job and they ask my h-index. The problem is that Scopus and Web of Science list different citation number for my papers and this results in a different h-index. Who should I trust?<issue_comment>username_1: The best thing to do would be checking directly why the two numbers differ. Both sites offer detailed information on how many citations got each of of your publications.
It is very likely that a few publications (or citations to them) are simply missing from one of the sites, so this means that the higher result is the correct one. But it could also be an error in the other direction coming from a citation mistakenly considered, or something that should not be a publication. (Note that sometimes Scopus and WOS have different ideas of what counts as "publications", especially when it comes to conference proceedings).
When you apply for the job, specify the source of your H-index as well, so that your information is easy to verify.
If you conclude that one of the two websites is missing some of your publications or citations, you can contact them and ask for a correction. This correction may take weeks to be published, if it is accepted. Since your username looks like an Italian name, I should add that if you are looking for academic jobs in Italy this is an important step to do, because citations on Scopus and WOS are widely used there for bibliometric evaluations (and the *abilitazione scientifica nazionale* in particular).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Both (and neither).
Like other citation metrics, the h-index compiled by these databases only depend on what's already in those databases. Both of them have quality barriers, which means you could well have been cited somewhere else but neither of these indexed it. That's why your Web of Science h-index is almost certainly going to be lower than your Google Scholar h-index. In the same way I'd guess that your Web of Science h-index is lower than your Scopus one.
In other words, your h-index depends on what database is used to generate it. You could say your h-index is 15 and it wouldn't carry meaning; you need to say your h-index is 15 *as measured by Web of Science*.
I'm not sure how seriously the job you describe treats the h-index. If given the option, I'd report both of them (and the one by Google Scholar). Otherwise just give the higher number, and expect to defend it in the interview.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/11/28
| 1,339
| 5,289
|
<issue_start>username_0: [comments from my supervisor]
>
> You still have a tendency to use phrases such as "All in all", and "To
> this end". Not a serious problem of course, but be aware that the
> editors/reviewers for some scientific journals will not accept such
> wording - they will see it as a waste of words (the phrases have
> little real meaning, after all) and will encourage a more concise form
> of writing. You also continue to split infinitives (e.g. "To
> effectively curtail"), again not a serious problem, but not "good"
> formal English if that is what you are aiming for.
>
>
>
Above are some comments from my supervisor on my writing styles. So how should I improve from here, for instance, if not saying 'all in all', 'to this end', what connecting words should I use. And, if not starting a sentence with infinitives, how should I restructure my sentences.
[the referred sentence that has a bad style]
>
> To effectively curtail pollution from all sources requires attention
> paid to the long-overlooked industrial pollution. To this end, this
> PhD research emphasises the need to ...
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: "Bad style" is probably being too harsh on yourself. It sounds to me as if your supervisor is trying to finetune the final details of your writing, to get it from an A level to an A+ level. This is not unimportant, but the base level is fine, so don't worry too much.
Without longer writing samples, it's hard to give concrete advice. In the referred sentence above, I don't see why you would need connecting words. There is little wrong with saying:
"Effectively curtailing pollution from all sources requires attention paid to the long-overlooked industrial pollution. This PhD research emphasises the need to ..."
If you feel that you must use connecting words, Maybe replace "To this end" with "Hence".
I haven't yet found a single instance of "All in all" where those words fulfilled an actual function in the sentence (and I would be much obliged if anyone could provide me with such an example). Ask yourself: if I leave out these connecting words, does this impair understanding of the paragraph? Getting this right is more of an art than a science, though: the answer to the question is subjective.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Your supervisor's first objection is against empty "connecting words", as you call them. Since they are empty, you may as well drop them:
>
> To effectively curtail pollution from all sources requires attention paid to the long-overlooked industrial pollution. [To this end T]his PhD research emphasises the need to...
>
>
>
Your argument, rather than some connecting words, should build the connection:
>
> To effectively curtail pollution from all sources requires attention paid to the long-overlooked industrial pollution. This PhD research emphasises the important role of industrial pollution in most immissions today [or whatever your argument is].
>
>
>
The second objection is not against starting sentences with an infinitive, but against splitting infinitives. I don't know whether split infinitives are really bad style or just a matter of taste. Since some of your readers believe the former, I would err on the side of caution. [From Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split_infinitive):
>
> The opening sequence of the Star Trek television series contains a well-known example, where <NAME> says "to boldly go where no man has gone before"; the adverb boldly is said to split the infinitive to go.
> [...]
> The construction is to some extent still the subject of disagreement, but modern English usage guides have dropped the objection to it.
>
>
>
Here are my additional two cents: Avoid the passive voice. Who does the "requiring" in your first sentence? Who must pay attention?
>
> To curtail pollution from all sources, researchers and policy makers must pay more attention to the long-overlooked industrial pollution. This PhD research emphasises the important role of industrial pollution in most immissions today.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: >
> To effectively curtail pollution from all sources requires attention paid to the long-overlooked industrial pollution. To this end, this PhD research emphasises the need to ...
>
>
>
Try to eliminate words that aren't necessary, e.g.,
*To curtail pollution requires attention to industrial pollution. This PhD research...*
Now rewrite, e.g.,
*Curtailing pollution necessitates addressing the industrial sector. This PhD research...*
or
*This PhD research ..., which reduces pollution in the industrial sector.*
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: All in all, your writing is fine.
Your writing is fine.
I've read your post, and to this end it makes sense.
I've read your post, and it makes sense.
There are lots of words in English that mean very little. Your advisor suggests dropping them - I think they are right.
It may seem strange in your head, but often following one direct sentence with another is the best policy - these types of connectors don't really connect anything. Write the simpler version and then read it to yourself: it probably conveys the same info and is best in shorter form.
Upvotes: 4
|
2019/11/28
| 1,007
| 3,882
|
<issue_start>username_0: I finished my Ph.D. research in computer science a few months ago and started writing my dissertation. Meanwhile, I applied for a postdoc position before my Ph.D. fund could run out. So, I found and started a postdoc position around a month ago in another University in Germany, and I'm going to have my disputation in 3-4 months from now (that's the usual waiting period in CS in Germany).
However, I'm not sure what title I should use regarding my position in the new institute until I do my Ph.D. disputation, especially in email correspondences and when I introduce myself or other similar situations?
Of course, I do not use the "Dr." title until I do the disputation, but should I declare myself still as a "Ph.D. researcher" or a "Post-doctoral researcher" or something else regarding my position here?
BTW, my contract just says a research employee.<issue_comment>username_1: Mr. (presumably) Bob, computer scientist, researcher.
You may throw in your MSc (computer science) or Dipl.-Inf. - whichever it is in your case.
---
For many (most?) such positions (my experience is Italy/Germany) the PhD isn't a hard prerequisite. The actual prerequisite is that you have the required research abilities, and having a PhD is one way to show that this requirement is fulfilled.
(I've *colloquially* referred to such postdoc-type positions I had before handing in my PhD thesis as "pre-postdoc".)
---
IIRC the formal speech at the end of the disputation procedure, you cannot use the Dr. until you get the PhD certificate (Urkunde) but after passing the disputation you don't need to correct others any more who refer to you as Dr. Bob.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I would use research fellow as your title in English and in German use whatever your contract says or research fellow as well. That leaves out the slightly awkward postdoctoral part.
In general, unlike a doctorate, using the title 'postdoc' is not something that people in academia worry a lot about (and outside academia many people will have no idea what it means). So using postdoc to describe your role wouldn't be outrageous even though linguistically it seems wrong because of the implied doctorate.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I think it's fine to call yourself a postdoctoral researcher. After all, that is the job you are doing. As cbeleites' answer points out, a PhD isn't a hard prerequisite for the job, so calling yourself a postdoctoral researcher does not imply that you are a doctor.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I saw people referenced as "cand. inf.", but DE-Wikipedia (<https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Studiosus>) tells me that is for students prior to the masters degree. Possibly you could refer to yourself as "cand. Phd.". Its not standardized, but should do the trick.
**Note: legal problems, see comments**
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: ABT seems to be a new acronym being branded about - 'all but thesis'
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: If I were you, I would just humbly say that I am a young researcher in X field, and spend more time explaining my ideas. In my signature, I would just put something like PhD (ABD) or nothing at all.
By the way, in my humble opinion, I don't think titles matter in academia. Researchers care more about mutual interests and your ability than positions. Putting the obligation of advising students aside, a professor would never refuse collaboration with a college student, if s/he is equally good as a PhD holder.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: You are a post-doc, as per your job.
"But I am not a doctor yet" I hear you protest. Irrelevant. You have entered the post-doctoral employment stage, and that makes you a post-doc. You did get the job on the basis of the expectation that you will resolve this paradox within a year or so.
Upvotes: -1
|
2019/11/28
| 585
| 2,668
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have decided to apply for PhD in cybersecurity even though my research during my graduate time period is totally of a different topic, which is neuroscience. My CV is majorly focused on research in neuroscience and data science and it doesn't contain any previous experience even though I have been learning a lot in cybersecurity and getting trained in the area.
What are my chances of getting into the program(in US, Sweden, UK) even thought I don't have a research experience in Cyber security nor have worked on a project?<issue_comment>username_1: In the US this might be possible. Probably more so than the other countries you name because the educational systems differ. In the US, one can enter a doctoral program with only a bachelors degree and little, if any, research experience. So, in the US, your research background would be neither much of an advantage or any disadvantage.
However, you would need quite a lot of things in your background to make it possible. These would be things drawn primarily from maths and CS. You need some programming skills, but also the deeper ideas of CS such as data structures and algorithms (and more). If you have that, along with appropriate grades and good letters of recommendation you would likely be considered.
Your doctoral education would almost certainly begin with a lot of coursework, where the advanced courses prepare you for comprehensive exams (qualifiers).
In many other countries, however, a starting doctoral student is expected to begin with much more in the specific background.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Completely possible!
You only need to argument your research as multi-field with an holistic approach, base your methods or the relation on technology and how it impacts the new field, or propose some innovative way to apply or relate computational sciences to biological systems (neural networks or Ai to learn how X works are always a good hit.)
As as example, my first career was in 'environmental improvement and diagnostics', then I went into 'informatique sciences' , specialization MBA into 'economy', then MBA into ' Computational Systems' but PHD in 'Organizations direction/Management'. It all comes down on how you relate everything.
As for how easy it would be to enter, well, you need to see which universities you want, go into their website's and see their requirements for candidates. You can then tailor your proposal to them and contact the admissions department to say what they want. Even within the same country there are variants among the universities, more so between public and private ones.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2019/11/28
| 1,518
| 6,613
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am giving a lecture in IT (for the first time) to more than 100 students. I refused to use the slides of the previous lecturer and I wanted to make my owns. They take me a lot of effort and I believe that are better than most lecture slides on the same topic.
The lecture includes so many mathematical equations (almost every slide). Because I am making them from scratch, I made already 3 mistakes in the equation (e.g. multiplication instead of addition). I discovered two of them during the lecture I said that it is a mistake. I corrected the mistakes before I uploaded the slides.
the third mistake I did not notice but when I gave an example I used the correct one. In the exercise, the students were claiming that the equation does not give the same result as expected in the exercise (which is graded). I decided to give all the students the full note for that exercise.
My question is how bad to have these mistakes? Should I use the slides of the previous lecturer?<issue_comment>username_1: Everyone makes mistakes. Teachers, students, everyone. It isn't terrible that you make them, but it is good, and can be extremely instructive when you correct them.
Your description suggests that you do the right thing here. Proof your slides and make corrections. But also, when mistakes are pointed out in class, not only admit them readily, but work through the correction as needed. If it is just a typing error then it is easy, but logic errors might require more effort.
However, seeing a professor work in real time to solve a problem, rather than just showing prepared stuff is extremely enlightening. Students can get the idea when presentations are perfect that this stuff is supposed to be easy. In fact, it may not be easy and so seeing a solution develop, even seeing false starts and corrections, will give them more confidence in their own work. Especially if they struggle with some of the ideas.
Your students will be evaluating you overall, not just your slides. If you act in a human and humane manner, especially by responding to their needs, you should do fine. But occasionally a student will be unreasonable. Don't worry too much about this.
But perfection in a lecture isn't necessarily the most effect way to teach. That doesn't excuse sloppiness, of course, but consider the overall picture, not just the minute details.
I've had students complement me more often on "lectures" that forced me to work "live" than on those that were very polished. In fact, I once tried to develop a "perfect" description of a hard problem and it left the student baffled. "Where did *that* come from?"
Be good. Very good. But recognize that you are human, which means being adaptable.
---
As to using the previous slides, I have no opinion. They might be good, but they might be too perfect. They might also force you into stilted delivery, which you should avoid.
But as a newcomer to this stuff, you might have conversations with colleagues about your teaching materials and get their feedback. People learn a lot by interacting with students, but it isn't obvious to a new teacher how that all fits together effectively. Some places have more senior instructors visit the classes of new faculty and then give feedback, either formally or informally. There is no real reason why you can't ask a trusted colleague to do that, even if not required. While it might feel risky, it also shows you are trying to improve your craft.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Well, first up be frank with the students and then give them some freeby decimals on their grade as apology because if they study from the mistakes they will get it wrong in the exams (besides the full note you already gave), and to avoid it, start a mistake hunt.
Give your students ALL the slides and tell them to analyze them and submit the mistakes they find or improvements they can think off, you can do this as part of the grading as some homework project or you can add it as an optional with an extra point or 2 over the final grade, that will be a nice incentive. In the end you can find even more mistakes you didn't noticed, improve the layout or design, have the students study and work, and all resulting into material you can use later on in the future. And your evaluation will be saved.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: If you are averaging 3 errors/lecture\*, that's too much, especially with typed materials. Makes the course hard to follow and creates a real confusion factor of people using the uncorrected materials in error.
Not sure if the solution is to use the previous materials or just tighten up on what you are doing yourself. I suspect there is some way to be better prepared without just using old slides (which may have issues themselves). Wonder if you are somehow trying to be too ambitious. All that said, if you are not so strong on the materials yourself, perhaps using old lecture materials, at least for first run through a class, might be a better course of action. After doing that, you are more knowledgeable about what you want to change and why.
P.s. I hate slides--find blackboard and chalk much more engaging. (But that's off topic.)
\*If instead, this was 3 mistakes over an entire course's typed notes, than no biggie.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Making a good slide deck is really, really hard. It is entirely normal that a lecturer needs several years teaching a course to develop the perfect deck.
Consider the purpose of the slides: to give the students the best possible education. If your current deck isn't good enough yet, you should really consider using some of the old deck. There's nothing wrong with using a blend, as long as you give credit to your predecessor. If you really don't like the old deck, you can also look for slide decks for the same topic produced at other universities.
Making good slides is *so hard* actually, that it's quite normal for a really good slide deck to get used by many grateful lecturers at multiple institutions. For the original creator, this can lead to a lot of name recognition, as someone making a valuable contribution to the community. (Remember to put your name and institution in the footer of your slides.)
Finally, be honest with your students. Encourage them to ask questions, if they think there may be a mistake in a slide. Either in class of privately. Either you find and fix a mistake in your slide (and discover a smart student), or you get to explain to your student why your slide is correct after all (and the student learns something).
Upvotes: 0
|
2019/11/28
| 625
| 2,709
|
<issue_start>username_0: Posted here as OP is not on SE:
Ok I have a dilemma. I am a university student. I was re-diagnosed late with ADHD due to a misdiagnosis of severe depression and anxiety, I have struggled at university often having submited assignments late with careless mistakes.
Now I know that the standard concessions given to someone with my condition are extensions plus additional support someone to help break down the assignments and help with structuring my arguments through providing strategies to organise my work.
My problem is the majority of my low marks and fails were caused by penalties for late submission 5% per work day. I failed multiple assignments being hit for the maximum penalty of 50% (10 working days).
Now that I have my late diagnosis, should I contest those results and ask the penalties be withdrawn or tempered? Or should I just go dig a hole and bury myself because without that degree that is about all I have left to do. ♂️<issue_comment>username_1: Go talk to someone at the university who has some responsibility in such matters. There is often a specialized office for it. Discuss the situation there and ask for advice. They have knowledge that few of us here have and can make suggestions few of us might think of.
But it isn't necessarily a question of *contesting* results. Find out your broader options before you choose any particular one. There may be some combination of things that can be made to work for you.
You aren't alone in such things, and universities short be adept at handling them.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: (Possibly US-specific) This is a regrettably common situation, but universities generally still do not have a standard way to handle it that will give you the outcome you want. It is also unlikely that your instructors are under any legal obligation to retroactively provide accommodations. I personally agree with you that this is not fair to the student. Unfortunately, that is not how many universities and instructors see it, so don't get your hopes up.
Consult with your disabilities office first to see whether they can intercede on your behalf, but it is likely that they will tell you that your only option is to try to negotiate with your instructors yourself. If you do this, remember that you have essentially no grounds to contest anything and are appealing to their sympathy.
As a matter of long-term strategy, it might be preferable to withdraw from school before the end of the term and take a leave of absence until you get a handle on managing your disability. Taking a time-out and starting fresh might be a better option than trying to fix the situation you're currently in.
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/11/29
| 549
| 2,228
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently filling out an application for a lecturer position in the UK, which includes a section on employment history.
Previously I was employed at a Russian university where my official job title was an engineer. However, the work that I did correspond more to a research assistant. The problem is that in Russia you need to be a PhD and go through an official selection procedure (that means for an organisation to open position, to select a pool of candidates, etc.) to get a research assistant position. So usually if your professor gets a grant, he/she usually tries to hire you on a less "complex" position from a bureaucratic point of view (especially if you are not a PhD).
Obviously, I don't want to describe all this country-specific stuff in my application. How do you think, is it OK to put a job title "research assistant" in the application? Are the universities likely to verify this information?<issue_comment>username_1: *Do not lie*.
You never know who is going to read your application. What if the committee includes a Russian person who is familiar with the Russian system and spots the inconsistency right away?
I would write the actual job title and then describe the tasks you had there, emphasizing that they were research tasks.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: On my resume, I put the official job title in the language of the country where the job was located, and a loose translation into English to summarize how I perceive the mapping. This ensures that all information is in your CV in a truthful way, while also providing the context to enable correct interpretation. So my resume says something like:
* 20xx-20xx: Postdoctoraal Bursaal (~postdoctoral researcher) in Belgium
* 20xx-20xx: Research Associate (~postdoctoral researcher) in the UK
* 20xx-20xx: Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter (~postdoctoral researcher) in Germany
* 20xx-20xx: Assistent in Opleiding (~PhD student) in the Netherlands
Wimi's suggestion to describe your responsibilities in the job is a good one, if the application form allocates enough space for you to do so. My personal opinion on that is that it can't hurt, but it's your resume so it should match your style.
Upvotes: 2
|
2019/11/29
| 915
| 3,724
|
<issue_start>username_0: Over the past few months I’ve contacted around 10 potential advisors at various schools of interest, and the only professor who has gotten back to me told me to wait until I was accepted if I wanted to work with him. My email strategy has been reading over papers from a professor and crafting personalized emails explaining who I was, why I was interested in their research, and asking if they had time to discuss what they are working on. Since many professors instruct to not even contact them until after a student is accepted, and many others don’t respond to prospective students, is it even worth trying to reach out? Is it still too late to keep trying to get in touch? It’s difficult to justify spending the time to look into a professor who doesn’t respond, but I keep hearing that it’s important to contact professors of interest before applying.<issue_comment>username_1: It obviously is a strategy. It is viable to a certain extend. There are issues of course. You have read similar entries about cold-mailing from this webpage. People send cold-mails, usually generic to hundreds of people. As a reaction, these recipients started to ignore e-mails of similar nature. Now, I know your e-mails, as you describe, is hardly generic. But the recipent will not know that, if they don't read them. Odds are they won't. Your strategy pours a lot of time into a single e-mail that won't likely get read.
I would instead suggest transfering such e-mails through a more reliable source. Maybe your proffesors have collabrators that you may be interested in and you can prove to your proffesors that your interest is geniune and they may communicate your request.
Or I better option would be to devote your time to search for more people / universities. There are a lot of good researchers in relatively easy to get in places. Or certain side of an easy to get in university might be much stronger than their overall department or university. I personally think, those are the most efficent time investments.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: What I would do, and that is what I actually did, is to send email to those professors that are actively looking to fill an open position. As I have experienced, there are a lot of open positions out there and there are many resources ([here](https://jobs.sciencecareers.org/), [here](https://www.nature.com/naturecareers/jobs/science-jobs), [here](https://jobs.newscientist.com/en-gb/jobs/), and [here](https://euraxess.ec.europa.eu/jobs/search)) to find out a specific position (PhD, postDoc, fellowship...), the country/city where you will work and what is the project about.
Ususally for PhDs these notices comes in two flavours: there may be many open positions which will be filled through a complex process involving a commission examining the applicant's CVs and then contacting those who passed the first selection, or a professor which posted an open position. In this second case, as I experienced, you have many more possibilities and, more importantly, you can directly contact the PI by email and you will have a closer contact with whom might be your future supervisor.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: What might be very impressive is if you would be willing to apply as a special student.
This might be a good “backdoor” way to get into a top 10 university.
I worked in the office of graduate admissions at Harvard university:
Most do not realize that applying as a special student is just as competitive as applying as a degree seeking student, but in many cases you do not have to take the GRE
Here is the answer I gave to another person on this forum:
<https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/61120/123306>
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/11/29
| 928
| 3,996
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been working as a postdoc for nearly a year. In recent months, the university is working to upgrade office and common spaces within my particular building. Some professors wanted a "Faculty Club" which is something like a common space for interaction between scientists to share ideas and discuss problems. However, in the last faculty meeting some professors stated that this should be a space "only" for them and postdocs would not be allowed there, not even to use the coffee maker.
Now I live in a country (Chile) where there is a social rising with people demanding for equality and to stop discrimination between different social classess. In this context, the universities have a role to be an example and to educate people according to the social demands.
However, I see the same discrimination within the university, when you have professors that does not want to share spaces with postdocs like we were second class citizens. I understand that professors and postdocs have different needs in term of office spaces, but I don't think that in the middle of the 21st century you should start to ban people to use certain spaces just because they are "less" than you.
Is this common in academia?<issue_comment>username_1: You ask if this is common in academia. In all universities I've been in (only Europe), I've never seen something like this. Common rooms where usually for every employee of the respective department (administrative staff included).
Solar Mike mentions in the comments "Professors have a need to discuss "privileged" information such as grades which postdocs may not have the right to, so separate spaces are a reasonable necessity - and not a social slur...". That professors need to discuss privileged information is true -- but I usually saw a simple solution for that: People were allowed to book rooms for meetings and then only invited people were allowed to enter. This also takes care of the fact that sometimes privileged information needs to be discussed only by some professors (not every professor who drops in), sometimes between professors and postdocs (or between postdocs or phd students). If your professors' argument is also that they need to discuss privileged information, you might want to suggest this possibility.
However, I suggest you to choose your battles wisely. Academia is a very hierarchical world -- it can be dangerous to start a battle about minor issues (as long as you are not a tenured professors). Especially if your faculty wants to have a faculty only room (i.e. they themselves are no advocates of "flat hierarchies"), it may be dangerous to suggest too many revolutionary battles. If equality is really so important for you, try to find a professor who advocates for you.
(Depending on how your institution is, you might also want to fight for a "non-professor only" room.)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't see the issue. You claim it's elitism, but it may simply be practical: A place for the permanent employees of the department. It's not a secret that the permanent employees have a bigger stake in the long-term working of such a space than temporary postdocs, graduate students, or undergraduates. I would gladly leave my professional books in a lounge for professors without worrying that they disappear; I wouldn't in a room that's shared with everyone else around who's going to be gone again in a year and may not feel the same level of responsibility than the ones who will be my colleagues for the next ten years. I would also gladly have a $1,000 coffee machine and pay my fraction of the purchase price and monthly coffee bill for it, divided by all faculty of the department; I suspect such an arrangement would not work if done in a shared space.
I suspect that postdocs would gladly be accepted if a guest of a faculty member, but maybe not by themselves. In the end, I just don't see why anyone should get all bent out of shape over the issue.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/11/29
| 472
| 2,061
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've noticed that several MathJobs applications asks "Faculty contacts in our dept?", always with this exact, confusing wording.
I'm not clear what this means. Can someone explain?
Is it, "do you personally know anyone in our faculty?" or is it "who is the person in our faculty that's closest to your research area so that they can evaluate your application?"<issue_comment>username_1: It is more like the first of your options. If your name is mentioned to a member of their faculty, will they recognize the name and have a rough idea who you are. This doesn't necessarily mean they know you personally, maybe they have just read some of your papers and have seen you speak at a conference. But the point is that the faculty member should already be aware of you not just that they work in an area that fits with what you do.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This is a really really important question, and it's really important that the correct answer is option 2. Most graduate students interpret it to mean 1, and this puts them at a disadvantage. You should list any people in the department who might be interested in serving a postdoc mentor for you. You should always list someone.
There are two main reasons for this:
1. On mathjobs you can run a search for all applicants who listed a given faculty member as a contact. I always look at the applicants who list me as a reference. Along with sending an email, this is the best way to assure that at least one person looks at your file.
2. When I served on the postdoc hiring committee I was responsible for looking through 20% of the applicants. We're only going to hire a postdoc if there's a good research match for them in the department who is interested in mentoring them. If I see a good file, one of the most important things is to make it easy for me to know which faculty member to mention the file to. Sometimes I can work that out myself, but it's not always obvious. Listing someone as faculty contact immediately indicates who I should email.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/11/29
| 1,093
| 3,611
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have quite some articles with more than 7 authors. I read [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/71453/when-citing-a-paper-with-a-lot-of-authors-is-it-ok-to-shorten-the-author-list-i) that when an article has more than 7 authors you shorten it in the reference list. So for example:
>
> <NAME>., <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>,
> <NAME>, and<NAME>. 2010. Biological markers of amyloid
> β-related mechanisms in alzheimer’s disease. Experimental Neurology,
> 223(2):334 – 346. Beta-amyloid and tau protein abnormalities in
> Alzheimer’s disease
>
>
>
becomes:
>
> <NAME>., <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>,
> ... <NAME>. 2010. Biological markers of amyloid
> β-related mechanisms in alzheimer’s disease. Experimental Neurology,
> 223(2):334 – 346. Beta-amyloid and tau protein abnormalities in
> Alzheimer’s disease
>
>
>
if I'm correct.
Do I have to shorten every reference with 7+ authors this way? Or is this just a suggestion for if the article has an excessive amount of authors (as [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/71453/when-citing-a-paper-with-a-lot-of-authors-is-it-ok-to-shorten-the-author-list-i) where the citation took up half the page)?
Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: Presumably you are going to submit a paper to some journal. It may be that they have their own rules for this, so you should check. And, it may also depend on the field.
There are publications in some sciences in which the list of authors is longer than the article itself. Things done at CERN, for example might have this characteristic.
And whether you use ellipsis as you show in the example, or the first (couple of) authors with "et al." also depends on the field depending on how important the last named author is.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This depends entirely on the style sheet you are using. For example, [MLA](http://research.wou.edu/mla/mla-multipleauthors) demands "et al." for three or more authors; [APA](http://research.wou.edu/mla/mla-multipleauthors) for six or more. The right thing would be to familiarize yourself with the house style of the publication you are targeting.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: A small addition to @username_2 's answer which I agree 100% with:
sometimes, depending on a particular journal and style guide, it also depends whether the citation is in-text or in the list of references, and even the referenced publication origin. In some cases, the style guide phrasing can be suggestive, and for some – compulsory.
Moreover, different journals have different standards on applying their recommended or compulsory guides in practice.
Take IEEE Transactions as an example.
For **in-text references**, according to [Section IA of IEEE Reference Guide (2018)](https://ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/wp-content/uploads/IEEE-Reference-Guide.pdf):
>
> NOTE: Use *et al.* when three or more names are given for a reference cited in the text
>
>
>
For **the reference section**, according to Section II of the aforementioned guide:
>
> If there are more than six names listed, use the primary author’s
> name followed by *et al.* For non-IEEE publications, *et al.* may be used if names are not provided.
>
>
>
With this example, I wanted to demonstrate that the rules can be very different and unexpected; therefore, one must get familiarized by a style guide used by a particular journal, and maybe some recommendations that are specific to only this journal.
Upvotes: 3
|
2019/11/29
| 576
| 2,342
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently writing my thesis. At times, I find it may be helpful to add additional context to a quotation or I may want to include an additional, interesting fact that complements the main body of the text whilst not being directly pertinent to the point at hand.
For example, I'm quoting "God does not play dice" and want to add a footnote regarding the discrepancy between the popular interpretation of what Einstein meant by god and his "cosmic religion". It's not relevant to the academic point I'm making with regards to quantum physics but it is interesting and pertinent to how the reader may interpret the connotations of the quotation.
Is it acceptable to include things like this in the footnotes or should I leave them out entirely?<issue_comment>username_1: While I’m a big believer in “ask your adviser” about many questions, it’s useful to remember (and to remind yourself occasionally) that this is *your* thesis. *You are the author*. With that status comes the freedom (in a technical sense, at least) to write literally *whatever you want* in the thesis. That’s what it means to be the author of something.
So yes, you don’t want to annoy your adviser and other readers of your thesis too much, but remember: it is your thesis. If it makes you happy to discuss Einstein’s metaphysical beliefs (or lack thereof), there’s no need to overthink the issue. You worked very hard for several years to come up with interesting things to say, the least that people can do to respect that monumental effort is to humor you by putting up with a few not-very-relevant side remarks.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Within reason, it's fine. And probably should be done more than it is. Think of these as paprika though. Don't overspice the goulash!
Use endnote style citations for references and actual footnotes (on that page) for explanations, asides, etc.\* If you have a particularly long digression, put it in an appendix (for example a mathematical exercise or "complicated homework problem" suggested by the work, but not really core to the thesis).
\*But watch your margins (thesis bane). Also, if the amount of endnotes causes an issue with your word processing program, consider to group them by chapter. [Edited answer digression into a footnote, couldn't help myself. ;-)]
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/11/29
| 570
| 2,231
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm new on this website and am not sure how much of higher academia works.
Suppose I wanted to work with a professor in a particular field of mathematics at a research university (not necessarily a PhD-granting university) to possibly write a dissertation in that field. Must that university be a PhD-granting university? If not, how would I go about working in a particular field?
I'm currently working on a master's degree in mathematics. I have found that most of the researchers in the field I would like to pursue are employed at non-PhD-granting universities. Does that mean I won't get the chance to pursue research in the field?<issue_comment>username_1: While I’m a big believer in “ask your adviser” about many questions, it’s useful to remember (and to remind yourself occasionally) that this is *your* thesis. *You are the author*. With that status comes the freedom (in a technical sense, at least) to write literally *whatever you want* in the thesis. That’s what it means to be the author of something.
So yes, you don’t want to annoy your adviser and other readers of your thesis too much, but remember: it is your thesis. If it makes you happy to discuss Einstein’s metaphysical beliefs (or lack thereof), there’s no need to overthink the issue. You worked very hard for several years to come up with interesting things to say, the least that people can do to respect that monumental effort is to humor you by putting up with a few not-very-relevant side remarks.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Within reason, it's fine. And probably should be done more than it is. Think of these as paprika though. Don't overspice the goulash!
Use endnote style citations for references and actual footnotes (on that page) for explanations, asides, etc.\* If you have a particularly long digression, put it in an appendix (for example a mathematical exercise or "complicated homework problem" suggested by the work, but not really core to the thesis).
\*But watch your margins (thesis bane). Also, if the amount of endnotes causes an issue with your word processing program, consider to group them by chapter. [Edited answer digression into a footnote, couldn't help myself. ;-)]
Upvotes: 1
|
2019/11/29
| 517
| 2,099
|
<issue_start>username_0: A job opening for a tenure track position specifies that the application must include "scientific highlights".
Now I am puzzled by this. I've applied before for tenure-track positions, and I've never heard of such a thing.
I don't get the difference with other more standard ingredients of an application, such as research statement, list of publications, cv, cover letter; this is even more puzzling because these latter standard ingredients are also specifically required in this job advert.
Any clue?<issue_comment>username_1: While I’m a big believer in “ask your adviser” about many questions, it’s useful to remember (and to remind yourself occasionally) that this is *your* thesis. *You are the author*. With that status comes the freedom (in a technical sense, at least) to write literally *whatever you want* in the thesis. That’s what it means to be the author of something.
So yes, you don’t want to annoy your adviser and other readers of your thesis too much, but remember: it is your thesis. If it makes you happy to discuss Einstein’s metaphysical beliefs (or lack thereof), there’s no need to overthink the issue. You worked very hard for several years to come up with interesting things to say, the least that people can do to respect that monumental effort is to humor you by putting up with a few not-very-relevant side remarks.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Within reason, it's fine. And probably should be done more than it is. Think of these as paprika though. Don't overspice the goulash!
Use endnote style citations for references and actual footnotes (on that page) for explanations, asides, etc.\* If you have a particularly long digression, put it in an appendix (for example a mathematical exercise or "complicated homework problem" suggested by the work, but not really core to the thesis).
\*But watch your margins (thesis bane). Also, if the amount of endnotes causes an issue with your word processing program, consider to group them by chapter. [Edited answer digression into a footnote, couldn't help myself. ;-)]
Upvotes: 1
|