date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2020/09/19
| 600
| 2,330
|
<issue_start>username_0: >
> thanks for submitting your paper to XXXXX Journal. **It is an explicit
> and interesting analysis of a natural problem**. However, in my
> opinion, it does not reach the level of XXXXX Journal. I therefore
> have decided not to pursue the evaluation process in order not to
> delay the publication of your paper elsewhere.
>
>
> Please don’t take it too bad, XXXXX Journal receive a lot of very very
> strong submissions in every aspect of mathematics and we publish only
> 700 pages per year, so we have to make some hard choices.
>
>
> Best regards, XXXXX (Editor-in-chief)
>
>
>
>
> Dear Professor XXXXX,
>
>
> The XXXXX Journal of XXXXX recently received a very large number of
> submissions. We are also attempting to reduce our publication
> backlog. Consequently, the editors are unable to consider every
> manuscript for further review. So we regret to inform you that we
> will not be able to publish your manuscript.
>
>
> We hope that you will submit your paper to a more specialized journal
> where your work may be more fully appreciated.
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
> The Editors XXXXX Journal of XXXXX
>
>
>
Are both of these are just boiler plate or anything to salvage from them. I must say both are really top journals in mathematics.<issue_comment>username_1: I think you should treat them as honest statements. They may be boilerplate, of course, since journals often get more submissions than are possible to publish on any reasonable time scale. They therefor have such "boilerplate" ready to ease the editor's work.
The first implies something lacking in the paper itself wrt the standards of that journal, though the paper may have merit otherwise. The second doesn't necessarily imply the same.
But, an exceptional paper, by their standards, would probably be put into the process.
As they suggest, move on with the paper and try for a different venue. Alternatively, improve it dramatically and try again.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: They are just varying species of boilerplate, absolutely. Either automated or not. Almost nothing can be gleaned from them, coming from "high status" journals. In particular, thinking in terms of rewriting and resubmitting to the same journal is probably misguided and a waste of your time and effort.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/09/20
| 1,067
| 4,562
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a postgraduate M.Sc. student at a university studying math. Currently I need to write some essay/assignment (about 10 pages) for a seminar where we revisit already published work and describe it in more detail.
By asking other students about their essay I noticed a great difference in the amount of cited literature. While I use over 30 different resources, most of my fellow students only cite a handful of resources besides their main resource.
Now, it is clear that the quality of literature might vary, and that 30 redundant resources and/or unreviewed resources can be considered as 'bad' resources and sloppy research. But that's not exactly what I mean.
In fact, half of my literature comes from an extensive research on the problem's history and related work (and almost all the literature had been published and reviewed in some way or the other). The other half mainly consists of my 'main' resource for the seminar and some books explaining some higher Matrix calculus and other basics (like the volume of a d-Sphere) which I used to explain the 'main' resource in detail.
---
My questions are:
1. Is the amount of literature even noticed by teachers? Do they care as much as I think or do they generally just peek into the literature section and see if it makes sense?
2. Some of the literature I use has been cited in my original 'main' resource. Is it common practice to just cite them again (which leads to drastically more literature)? Or do I only refer to my main resource even if the statement comes from some other paper?
3. Does it make a good impression to have a long literature section (with useful and non redundant literature)?
4. While I love knowledge about the history and related work to a problem it is also much easier than explaining the core of the problem. Do teachers find this stuff interesting at all? I believe teachers are normally very familiar with the problem. My concern is that they are only interested in theory and proofs and might find literature reviews boring. (I did explain the core of the problem as it is important, but I would have done it in more detail if I had spared about a page of history and review.)<issue_comment>username_1: You will, as you say, need to omit redundant sources and severely limit or omit unreviewed sources. With those caveats, more is generally better as more research suggests more learning. Yes, professors notice.
However, your paper must include your own thoughts and analysis. A cut-and-paste paper, where every sentence includes a citation, is not plagiarism, but it's not scholarly work, either. I'd assign such a paper an unsatisfactory grade. Use your sources to establish the background of the problem or topic. Then say what *you* have analyzed about the problem. So to address your question, *you* must address the core problem, whatever it is. You can't skip it with a lengthy lit. review.
In general, you must cite, *and read* the original sources. So, if B cites A, and you want to cite A, you must read A. Your professors are likely familiar with the literature and may ask you about the papers you have cited.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I love it when seminar talks give you a good sense of the line of reasoning in the literature that led to the question at hand, and when their research appears to be in conversation with other work. Though I've seen plenty that don't really do this much (and just give the standard broad intro that doesn't do more than say what all the things they are going to talk about are). Papers tend to have less variation.
Given that, I would say if you put the specific topic of your essay strategically into the conversation of the literature, your essay will be nicer to read.
Though remember that in writing, if you can say what you want to say using fewer words, you should. If the citations or the exploration of history is off-topic or otherwise doesn't serve your purpose, reconsider them.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The quick answer is yes. Pertinent literature is meant to support your position and build your story. The amount of literature cited usually reflects how deeply and how comprehensively a topic was examined. However, I should say that the literature cited must be highly relevant to be considered as a valid one. It will not be a good practice to pad the cited works to simply give an impression of in-depth research. Experienced readers of academic work will be able to tell if the amount of literature cited actually helps your cause.
Upvotes: 3
|
2020/09/20
| 3,066
| 12,551
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently defended my PhD in Neuroscience and am starting a postdoc soon. Like a lot of people who take this track, I hope to one day have my own research lab at a university. I would also like to teach, but here's the thing — I don't want to teach neuroscience or biology. I taught lower-division math at my undergrad university as an adjunct before leaving for my PhD (when I had just a BS in Bio, Math) and I loved it. I would ideally like to have a research career in neuroscience and teach lower-division math courses.
My question is: is it possible to span fields like this if you can demonstrate capability or have subject-specific teaching on your CV even without PhD-level training in both fields? I don't have math-specific training beyond my BS. Many adjunct/lower-division math professors have a Master's in Math and no PhD in any field. Do I also need a Master's if I have a PhD in a different field (neuroscience is more quantitative than other life sciences, but it's not math)?<issue_comment>username_1: Having only one doctorate isn't the problem. But you would find it difficult to find a university that had compatible needs. If you are tenure-track in Biology, that department will want you to do research in Biology (of course), but also to serve the students in that field. If you aren't doing that, you will have problems, and if you ask for such a position, they would most likely say no.
On the other hand, once you are tenured, you might be able to teach the *occasional* math course and still have everyone happy.
An exception to the above might occur in a small Liberal Arts College (in the US) in which both math and biology are under the same Dean and the teaching requirements were seen as more important than the research. But there will still be few such positions open. And having a neuroscience lab in such a place would be difficult to manage as the funding would be pretty much all on you to arrange. You'd be unlikely to have any time to spend on other things.
Nice to dream, though.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Can I become a tenure-track prof in one dept (biology) and teach in a different dept (math) with only one PhD?
>
>
>
**TL;DR: no.**
Long answer:
I was for several years the chair of a mathematics department and during that time oversaw teaching assignments for the 200-odd courses offered yearly by my department. I can recall only one case in which my department allowed a faculty member from a biology-related department who did not have an advanced degree in math or a closely related area (eg physics) to teach a math class (I believe it was calculus for biology students). Even this arrangement raised some eyebrows — mine, and possibly other people’s — but the circumstances were a bit unusual so it was allowed to happen, for reasons I won’t go into.
With this background, I can say with reasonable confidence that **what you are proposing is impossible**. Perhaps you can reasonably expect to be allowed to teach a math class once or twice in your career if that’s something you have your mind set on doing, but as a regular part of your job, at a normal university? No way.
Even setting aside your lack of qualifications to teach math (an objection which one can imagine you overcoming under some hypothetical, if rare, circumstances), the fact remains that departments hire faculty among other important reasons to fulfill their own teaching needs. If you are in department X, you will be teaching the classes that department X offers - *that’s why they are hiring you*; so it simply doesn’t make sense for a neuroscience department to allow you to regularly teach classes of another department, except under some extremely rare and unusual circumstances.
Now, if you get a second PhD in math, or publish several years’ worth of postdoctoral research work in neuroscience that can be plausibly described as serious applied math so that you can credibly start calling yourself a mathematician, then your plan might start making a bit more sense. In that case you would probably want to look for positions that involve a joint appointment between a neuroscience department and a mathematics department — such things are not common, but they exist. Your teaching load will then be split between the two departments, likely in roughly the same proportion as the proportions of your position that are assigned to each of the departments. It’s still not likely that you will be allowed to teach *only* math classes, but it may be not too far from what you have in mind.
**Edit:** you also wrote:
>
> I would ideally like to have a research career in neuroscience and teach lower-division math courses.
>
>
>
Another thought that occurs to me is that your expectation that you will only teach lower-division classes is also unreasonable, independently of the discipline. Professors are expected to teach at *all* levels: lower division, upper division, and (where applicable) graduate; again, that’s sort of why you’re hired in the first place, and that’s what sets you apart from an adjunct or lecturer. You seem to want to do the high-level parts of a professor’s job - doing research, running a lab etc - when it comes to research, but only the most low-level parts of the job - teaching the sort of beginning math classes that your former university allowed you to teach with only a BS degree - when it comes to teaching. That’s simply not how it works: no university will waste a professor’s position on job duties that can be performed by someone with much lower qualifications than a professor. That would very obviously not be an efficient arrangement for the university, either economically or pedagogically.
If you don’t want to teach anything more challenging than the least challenging thing that there is to teach, you may want to ask yourself if you actually want to be a professor at all.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I think you should think a bit harder about what it was about the math class you taught that was such a good fit for you, and how you might incorporate that into teaching classes that are closer to your research field. As you discussed in the comments, if it was really the subject matter that you liked, then you might want to try to shift your research in a more mathematical direction and see if you can get a joint appointment of some kind, but I can't help but wonder if you can't find some kind of teaching in a biology department that draws a closer connection between your research and teaching.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: It is possible but unlikely. For one you don’t *technically* get to choose your teaching assignment (it’s from the Dean or something like this). For another, the university is likely to already have people in math to teach such courses, and will complete your teaching assignments with courses from your own unit rather than from another unit. Finally, if you have a position, you will be expected to teach in your home unit unless the position is explicitly identified as some sort of cross-appointment
Now, if you have specific and strong background in one area of mathematics, or develop a particular expertise - stay you have *demonstrated* expertise in applications of differential equations to competitive population dynamics, or an expert in Bayesian statistics - it may be possible to teach some courses in another unit, but that is NOT the usual situation.
Finally, if you have expertise in biostatistics, it’s more likely that a department of biology (rather than math) would ask you to develop such a course (and possibly attract math students in the process).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: No, almost surely not.
Lower-level math courses are imagined to be easily teachable by soooo many people that the market pressure is that there's a vast labor surplus...
And, as in other answers, your home department will have definite ideas about your allocation of energies there...
And, it would be unwise to promote yourself as a low-end product... who is, in effect, no better than a part-time instructor of low-end math... I'm absolutely not disparaging the teaching job, but am addressing the *status* thereof in most univ's in the U.S.
Summary: both infeasible and (very) unwise...
As in other answers: better (for many reasons) to try to steer your in-department courses in a more mathematical direction.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: What are your research interests within neuroscience?
<NAME>'s [answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/40589/dan-romik) presupposes that you want to keep the two fields completely separate: you'll run a neuroscience wet lab as your day job and moonlight as a calculus instructor at night. For the reasons he outlines, this would be very difficult indeed, verging on impossible.
However, neuroscience is a giant, sprawling field and the edge between theoretical/computational neuroscience, physics, and math is nebulous (if that). People study Ising models and manifolds and dynamical systems for many different reasons and from many different directions. If you were interested (and successful) in the more mathematical parts of biology, a joint--or even primary appointment--in a math department would not be out of the question. For example:
* [<NAME>](http://math.bu.edu/people/nk/) at BU
* <NAME> and the rest of the [Mathematical Biology group at Pitt](https://www.mathematics.pitt.edu/research-areas/mathematical-biology)
* [<NAME>](http://www.math.uwaterloo.ca/%7Esacampbe/) at Western's Center for Theoretical Neuroscience
* [<NAME>](https://labs.ni.gsu.edu/ashilnikov/) at Georgia State's Computational and Dynamical Systems Unit
* [<NAME>](http://koerding.com) at UPenn
* [<NAME>](https://neuroscience.columbia.edu/profile/larryabbott), [<NAME>](https://ctn.zuckermaninstitute.columbia.edu/people/liam-paninski), [<NAME>](https://ctn.zuckermaninstitute.columbia.edu/Ken), and other at NeuroNex Columbia.
* the late [David MacKay](http://www.inference.org.uk/mackay/AboutMe.html), whose book you should read if going down this road.
I don't know that you would necessarily need a formal mathematical credentials, especially for joint appointments (how would that even work?!). However, you would need to demonstrate your mathematical chops through suitable publications and reference letters. Depending on your current math skills, a postdoc, perhaps with someone like those listed above, might be one way to go about getting those.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: Your university's accrediting body may require that you have some minimal qualification (perhaps master's degree) to teach in an area.
Perhaps you could teach quantitative reasoning in an interdisciplinary general education program.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: I am a tenured prof at a research university (in biology) and can't see a university (and the relevant departments) letting you do this unless there are unusual circumstances like the ones some respondents mention above.
In addition, you won't get tenure unless you teach in your home department.
However, think creatively. Along with some suggestions above, here is another:
Many biology students don't like math for whatever reason. But they have to take some amount of math for requirements. But you are in a field (neuroscience) that has lots of math and lots of biology. Why not design math courses for biology majors using neuroscience examples so you are teaching them neuroscience and math at the same time. Of course you could use other branches of biology too - system biology, ecology, evolution, gene regulation, etc. all of which use a lot of math. But if you reframe your idea in this way, then a biology department might be interested. Many biology departments today want their students to have more quantitative background, but they are shunted off to math departments to learn it and there is a big disconnect in students' minds. How can we expect them to figure out for themselves how some calculus concept should be applied in biology if they have never seen an example of it? So think about making courses that bridge that gap and that show biology majors why they are learning this math and show them that it is actually important for learning biology.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: Just get a part-time job at a community college/junior college. That should let you scratch the teaching itch.
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/09/21
| 2,153
| 8,742
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am deciding if I should follow the academic path or work in industry. One of the perceived benefits of academia is the ownership of your own work, be it papers or patents. I want to know how much academia and industry differ in intellectual property (IP) rights.
If a postdoc or a principal investigator (PI) works on a project and their work leads to results that can be monetized, who owns the patent and profit derived from it?
There seem to be four players at work: the postdoc, PI, the university, and the funding agency. Will the lowest ranks of these, the postdoc, be part of the patent owners?
I want to compare this to what happens in industry, so I asked a similar question at [Workplace](https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/164160/do-industrial-research-scientists-get-rewards-for-their-innovation). In case the place is important, I am mainly concerned with Europe and North America.<issue_comment>username_1: This isn't a full answer, since it depends on the laws and regulations of the place of employment, including university contract rules. However, note the following.
There is a big difference between holding a patent and monetizing it. The latter is a business process, not a research process, and takes lots of inputs. Money doesn't automatically flow from the possession of a patent.
Obtaining a patent in the first place can be expensive since there are (varying) regulations governing it that normally require lawyers (plural perhaps, expensive usually).
Defending a patent against someone who wants to invalidate it can be very expensive. Even defending against someone who wants to exploit it without permission or license can be very expensive.
For university employees, as for employees elsewhere, there are often contract stipulations about patents. A typical contract provision gives the responsibility for obtaining, licensing, and defending a patent to the university itself. This is normally advantageous due to the costs entailed. Large research universities may have patent attorneys on staff or on retainer for this.
The patent may be applied for in the name of the researcher, or (perhaps), jointly in the name of the researcher and the university. Other contract arrangements are possible, and I don't know all of them. The researcher may be entitled to a portion of any profits that derive from the patent, but are normally protected against losses. The last is, potentially, a big deal.
I don't know of funding agencies who get involved in this, but that isn't outside the realm of possibility.
For your own case, if you are in a situation where it matters, start with your own employment contract. Or, consult a patent attorney.
While the patent may remain in your name only, you may be required by contract to assign some of the rights to the university (or company). Search for "Patent assignment" on google or other search engine. An example explanation is here: <https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/patent-assignment-how-to-guide>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: In the US, the Bayh-Dole Act gives the university first shot at and practically encourages it to patent anything discovered using federal funding. My university organizes this in a way that the scientists that made the discoveries leading to the patent get a cut of the royalties from the licensing. You sign something when you join handing over some, but not all, of your intellectual property rights so that they can manage this.
Software is a bit different. My university mostly allows open-sourcing (good thing since the government is requiring that in some situations now), but I’ve also seen it support keeping something closed and selling licenses to companies and sharing the revenue.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: In [germany](/questions/tagged/germany "show questions tagged 'germany'"), if the inventor is employed the employer has certain rights to inventions connected with their business. This holds for both industry and academia.
---
>
> One of the perceived benefits of academia is the ownership of your own work, be it papers or patents.
>
>
>
This is a misconception. For many papers, the economic/exploitation rights go to the publisher (exception are the growing numbers of open access papers, where the authors typically keep these rights, but the paper being available open access of course limits the economic benefits you can get there).
Similarly, the economic rights to exploit a patent are with the owner (who can license them, again very similar to copyrigted material).
In [germany](/questions/tagged/germany "show questions tagged 'germany'"), what will always stay with the author or inventor are the so-called moral rights. I.e. are and will always stay the author, you are and will always stay the inventor.
What is different is that an academic employer is far less likely to tell you to not publish your research as a paper (for inventions, they are legally forced to decide within short time whether they want to claim it or not).
---
Again in [germany](/questions/tagged/germany "show questions tagged 'germany'"), when you invent something, your employer (regardless of academia or industry) has the first choice for patenting it (unless it is completely unrelated to what your employer does - but you still have to give notice of this so they can decide that it is unrelated).
* If the employer chooses to patent, they will be the owner of the patent and they have to cover the costs of the patent. There is compensation to the inventor (fairly large set of rules, as a rule of thumb, the more you were expected to do this invention by your job, the more your salary is thought to be the compensation for your job as inventor. For academic research staff, there's often a percentage of the net gains the university has from the patent).
* If they choose to not patent, the invention is yours and you can decide whether to patent or not. You'll then have the full economic risks and chances.
* [Public service employers (such as universities) have additional rights](https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/arbnerfg/__40.html): instead of exploiting the invention themselves, they can claim an adequate share of the exploitation by the inventor.
* One point that needs to be kept in mind here: German universities by law do *basic* research - they are not supposed to do anything like industrial R&D. (That would have its place e.g. with Fraunhofer research institutes - [whose patent business looks completely different](https://www.fraunhofer.de/en/about-fraunhofer/profile-structure/facts-and-figures/patents-licenses.html))
This inherently limits the economic perspectives of most university patents since they happen very early in the "lifecycle" of the invention.
---
* A recent [newspaper article about patents at German universities](https://www.faz.net/aktuell/karriere-hochschule/hoersaal/patente-an-der-uni-nur-ein-draufzahlgeschaeft-16934899.html) gives some numbers:
84 % of the patents by universities cost more than they ever earn and the whole patent business is a net loss for universities. They say depending on how exactly the calculations are done [I assume, e.g. what staff costs and overhead are included] costs are up to 6x the income.
* I've been told by a university patent centre that their usual task is to convince academics that there is no point in patenting their invention - of which they have a hard time.
---
The following is my very personal take on the situation:
I've seen some inventions patented in academia where the incentive was clearly to have a patent (for CV, institute statistics, ...) rather than economic perspective.
(E.g. one invention I'm thinking of is handy for some researchers working experimentally. However, the monetary value is limited and enforcement basically impossible unless they'd have been planning to crawl the basement labs whenever they visit another institute in order to sue institue or individual students [students are often are not employed])
OTOH, going for a patent means a patent on the publication list in addition to the paper once the patent is filed.
External costs for a patent are typically quoted in the 5 - 15 k€ range (depending on how work the patent attorney does). This is roughly 3 - 10 weeks of postdoc salary (employer's gross) - and the funding for this may even come from external sources (university budget rather than institute budget, grants). All in all (with the postdoc working a lot on the documents), the institute gets a fully counting additional entry on the publication list for less than half a year's postdoc costs, in some cases maybe much less. There are few papers to be had that cheaply.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/09/21
| 1,397
| 6,045
|
<issue_start>username_0: This is a bit of a long story. I am a graduate student working on mathematics and the topic I have been working on is not directly within my advisor's expertise (pretty closely related to though). My thesis basically consists of two parts which deal with two related but independent problems. At the beginning when I chose these two problems to work on, I was kind of discouraged by my advisor as he thought these problems despite interesting did not seem reachable. But actually, when I decided to work on these problems, I already had some rough ideas on tackling the problems.
Anyway, the first part was basically done in last summer/fall which I also presented my proof orally to him. For the second part, he was once kind of skeptical of my proofs, however, his confusions and doubts seemed to be resolved through our conversations, email exchanges and my improvement of the exposition. I sent him my first draft in April (I was supposed to submit my thesis in June). In late June, when I had to submit my thesis, he said he had not really finished reading my thesis.
After my thesis was submitted, he told me that my thesis was very badly written which made him not even able to follow my work. But wait, he had two months to take a look at my thesis but he had not said a word about that every time we met. Anyway, my thesis defense was thus delayed for two months and in these two months I was constantly asked to make changes big or small on the thesis. At certain point, my advisor seemed to feel my thesis was in good shape and I should arrange for the defense.
Alright, I did the defense in August and it went well. But recently I received my thesis feedback report in which my advisor suggested that I should remove the whole second part from my thesis because he thinks that my proofs/arguments presented there are not solid enough. I always appreciated when he could point out specific mistakes/confusions I made in my thesis. But it seems that after all of these have been resolved, he is still not convinced that there is no gap in my proofs. I really do not know what to do now.
Should I argue with my advisor or should I simply follow his request to remove that chapter and get my degree safely?<issue_comment>username_1: Congratulations on your (presumably) successful defense, and sorry to hear about the timing issues.
Two important points are not mentioned here that may affect what you should probably do:
1. Is the advisor the only remaining gatekeeper to you getting the degree?
2. Do you wish to publish or pursue this topic otherwise, and are you interested in improving your mathematical writing?
Frankly, given all the delays (regardless of what caused them), if you just need your (seemingly) overworked advisor to say "yes", and they are prepared to do that if you remove a chapter, my first reaction is just to get that done and then figure out what to do with the rest!
If you need to still satisfy other committee members (may or may not be relevant in your geography/institution) and they don't agree, then welcome to the world of academia, where we end up in that boat all the time with reviewer feedback for submitted articles!
If you do want to work in this area and continue in academia, then don't stop there however. Regardless of what prompted the initial delays, advisors don't throw up their hands in frustration at whole chapters, after a successful oral defense and some back'n'forth, out of sheer laziness. You probably have something interesting there, that came across strongly in the oral defense, but continues to not be written clearly enough to hang together for a reader trying to make sense of it. You have doubtless had the experience of reading published papers where you sort of follow each paragraph but you're banging your head trying to make sense of it all. It sounds like your advisor might be in the same boat with your chapter, and has now moved to pragmatically trying to push you through.
If that is the case, and you do want to continue with an academic career in mathematics, you should probably work with someone to continue to polish this and therefore learn how to write more clearly. Perhaps not your advisor (since it seems hard for you and them to achieve this, based on experience), but perhaps someone else? And if you do so, there will be absolutely nothing wrong about having more results than in your official thesis, and/or a richer preprint or 2 preprints instead of one to show for it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It is very likely in your interest to follow your advisor's advice. The timeline you describe suggests your advisor has been highly irresponsible (or impacted by the current pandemic) about providing timely feedback, but this is not a reason not to do what they recommend.
In academia, you will be judged on your publications, not the content of your thesis. Removing content from your thesis to please your supervisor will not necessarily prevent you from publishing that work, so the downsides of a shortened thesis are limited.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Keep in mind that *you can always post an updated version of your thesis on the arXiv* (or, if this wasn't mathematics, at various other places on the internet). Thus, you shouldn't pay much attention to what thesis you submit at your defense; you can always "beat" it with an arXiv revision. If your advisor has doubts about a chapter while believing the rest of the thesis to be already sufficient, there is nothing easier than just submitting the rest to your university and then posting the full version on the arXiv. (Just make sure to document that the full version is an update.)
Independently, if you haven't already done so, I'd suggest you get some outside opinions (apart from yours and your advisor's) on whether that fateful chapter is actually rigorous or not. This is probably useful anyway, seeing that your advisor is a stranger to the topic; it would get you familiar with people working in the topic.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/09/22
| 1,155
| 4,854
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm an undergraduate now, and am faced with a genuine lack of ability when it comes to Physics. Seeing how my peers react to lectures and catch on faster, it's clear that the issue isn't my professors, but the way my mind takes (or doesn't take) to the material. I had similar trouble with high school Chemistry, and even in college, I completed all levels of Calculus and Differential Equations as well, and didn't struggle nearly as much in those. Doing the calculations in Physics or Chemistry is easy of course, but using definitions and formulas to relate real-world concepts to each other and work on them is extremely challenging to me.
Does anyone know why this might be? Advice is also appreciated on improving upon this weakness.<issue_comment>username_1: I have felt more or less the same about certain topics *within* mathematics and to an extent about physics, biology etc, so I thought I would share my experience and thoughts. My level is different from yours but the feelings are certainly similar.
In early years of high school, I did both math and physics competitions to the National Olympiad level but I picked math because I excelled at it much more than I did at physics. Continuing with the math, I competed at IMO's; however, the topics like combinatorics came much harder to me than the other areas. I have known a number of students who are *way* better than I was at combinatorics but overall did not remotely reach my level because of the other areas math. Nevertheless, I always felt that those students, if tried as hard and was interested in geometry, algebra, and number theory as much as I did, would have blown me out of the water.
Now I am about to finish my PhD and still feel the same way about topics like Algebra, Topology etc. They just don't come naturally to me as do Analysis or Probability. Venturing into non-math subjects, I failed art history and botany 101, the latter of which is often considered as a free-A class. On the other hand, I have heard similar stories from my peers who are doing excellent research in Algebra - they would struggle quite a bit in an introductory analysis course, for instance.
What I am trying to get at in my ramblings is that certain things are just easier for some people and not for others. This, compounded with the lack of interest you have in certain subjects, most likely lead to the feeling of "inadequacy" that you are perhaps describing.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: That you are good or very good at abstract mathematics such as calculus but have less innate talent for Physics, Chemistry or so on. People have talents whether through nature or nurture. It is a fact (or axiom) of life.
I am partly the opposite by the sounds of it. I was very good at GCSE and OK at A-Level mathematics (so this is college for the UK but I think up to roughly High-School in the USA system). When I got to university and started taking maths courses as part of my engineering degree, I struggled in the maths modules. All the way through my education I was good at Physics and Electronics, including at the undergraduate level, but I could not do the maths when not applied.
All this means is that I am more easily able to be an electronics engineer than a pure mathematician, and that you are possibly more easily able to be a mathematician than a scientist or engineer. You or I could try to be something else but it may be easier for us to stick with our talents and we may do better in the fields we are naturally comfortable in.
If you have generally excelled in all subjects until this point you have a new lesson to learn. All people have limits to their abilities. These may be physical or mental and things get hard when you reach the limit. Some people learn early on that math or literature or music are not easy for them, some people only learn what one of their limits is when they reach undergraduate or post-graduate study when the challenge is great enough. Almost anyone can learn almost anything but not everyone finds it so easy.
Experiencing an academic challenge that seems insurmountable for the first time can be a life altering event. You have to come to terms with your limitations or find new ways to work around them or overcome them. It is OK to find things hard. It is OK to find some things too hard. All it means is that you are not as naturally talented, or have not found the way to think about something that works for you yet, or both.
What you choose to do is up to you. What you find easier to do is not up to you. What you are interested in doing is only partially up to you. It is your life, pick what you want to try and do and go try to do it :-)
P.S. Literature was not a talent for me so I hope those with more ability can correct my poor use of language and spelling in the edits.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/09/22
| 1,111
| 4,276
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'd like to join a class at a university, as a non-matriculated student, that I can participate in online, due to COVID-19. I already have a PhD (in a technical field), and am looking to take a class *outside* of a technical field, with the goal purely being personal intellectual enrichment. Many universities are moving classes online due to COVID-19, which makes this practical.
I'm not sure how to go about doing this. It's easy for me to find classes in the field of interest (Middle Eastern history) in various university catalogs, and it's easy for me to see if the university is holding it online or in person. But I haven't been able to find out which universities will allow me to participate without being a degree seeking student. I'm not tied down to any one university or any one particular class, but rather any class in my general area of interest that I can fully participate in. I know that the application deadline for the upcoming semester is very soon (for cases where it hasn't passed). Can you give me guidance on:
* What types of schools will allow such participation?
* What is the application process like?
* How do I find these?
* How do I go about doing this?
Note that I know there are a lot of open classes, MOOCs, Coursera, etc., but that's not what I'm looking for. I'm looking for the full structure and engagement of a full university class, with papers that will be graded, and the like.
---
To clarify:
* *non-matriculated* means here "not seeking a degree", only (full) participation in a class
* I am happy to pay tuition for this class
* I'm located in the US<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I'm looking for the full structure and engagement of a full university class, with papers that will be graded, and the like.
>
>
>
That is a big part of the work that goes into teaching. So the time you take up cannot be spent on "real" students. That would not be fair without some way in which you compenste for the effort. Setting up, administering, and enforcing such payment system is work, i.e. costs money. You can see that what you want is not that easy. MOOCs are an attempt to give something like what you want, but is still viable from the university perspective.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: For *(full) participation in **a** class*, rather than several classes, you may struggle. You could try institutes that specialise in remote learning / part-time study (and did so pre-covid), since they are more likely to offer single courses, especially those that target professionals. (My search provides [results](https://www.google.com/search?q=remote%20courses%20us).)
If you want to study a number of classes, but just not graduate, then you can simply enrol as a regular student. There's no requirement to graduate.
Also (as per my original answer to your now edited question): Beyond MOOCs, schools won't allow this. As [explained](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/155648/22768), it isn't in the financial interests of schools. Nonetheless, for a particular class that you're interested in, you could try emailing the instructor. If you present a good case, they may be willing to allow you to participate (just like they might allow you to participate physically). Whether you'll be successful is unclear: Participating physically would go largely unnoticed (in a large class), participating digitally may leave a digital trail (and isn't possible when students must login).
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> What types of schools will allow non-matriculated participation?
>
>
>
I'll skip this part, because honestly it was news to me that there are universities that don't do this. Usually the emphasis is on job-related courses.
>
> What is the application process like?
>
>
>
Very simple, if you can pay. They want your money.
>
> How do I find these?
>
>
>
Look for a "school of continuing education," "university extension" or similar. If you do not want something job-related, you might look at programs marketed to retirees. In some places, such as those with a shortage of classrooms during teaching periods, this may be easier if you look for summer courses. Availability of classrooms is not, of course, relevant for online courses.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/09/22
| 545
| 2,329
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an American undergraduate studying Engineering Physics. I am planning to stay at my current school for a sequential Master's program (in Electrical and Computer Engineering). I wonder if Physics PhD Admission boards would hold me to a higher standard or would hold me to the same standard as other undergraduate applications?
More specific to me, I have excessive amount of Transfer Credit (from classes taken during HS) so that my undergraduate degree only last 2 years, but I don't really want to stay another year or two as an undergraduate. Additionally, I am quite interested in Quantum Computing so I want to get some EE experience.
I am specifically asking about Physics PhD admission in the United States.<issue_comment>username_1: (I think the question asks:) Will my PhD admission be hindered by an undergraduate and postgraduate degree from the same institute?
Probably not. Although two institutes would demonstrate broader experience, that's a minor detail. Other factors are more important, e.g., grades, your institute's ranking, your rationale for staying.
I wouldn't try to pre-empt any negative perception (in an application), unless it forms part of the backstory. For instance, during my undergraduate studies I became fascinated by X, from [prestigious] Prof. X's classes. We discussed the possibility of exploring the topic further, which led to their supervising my postgraduate dissertation on Y.
(Discrimination laws probably forbid discriminating on such grounds, but the law isn't always followed.)
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: You'll be held to the same standard as everyone else - they are looking for people who are going to be successful graduate students.
You mention in a comment:
>
> I want to stay in school longer to get more research experience
>
>
>
I think that's a great way to improve an application in that more research experience gives you more space to demonstrate you'll be a successful graduate student. The number or type of degree earned along the way will mean little compared to the total research and academic experience and proficiency you can demonstrate.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: The standards are usually different, you will probably have less time to take quals, 1.5 years vs 3.
Upvotes: -1
|
2020/09/22
| 417
| 1,601
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am on the 1st year of a TVöD E13 contract (offered for 2 years), and I would like to ask: what is the notice period for resigning from my current job?<issue_comment>username_1: I am also a postdoc in Germany on the same type of contract.
My contract states that within the probationary period, which is the first six months, the notice period is two weeks. Beyond that it says that the rules about notice period are defined in Section 30 paragraph 5 of the TVöD regulations. Googling for this leads me to this website (in German): <https://www.der-oeffentliche-sektor.de/infoundrat/infothek/1483>
Which, with the help of google translate, leads me to the conclusion that the notice period depends on how long you've been with your employer, counting not only your current contract but the whole continuous employment relationship if you were there before that. If you've been with them for 6 months - 1 year it would be four weeks. If 1-2 years then 6 weeks. 2-3 years -> 3 months. More than 3 years -> 4 months.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: If you are aiming for a fixed date and are still on good terms with your boss, it is quite common to create an "Aufhebungsvertrag", that is a contract in which you both agree to terminate your contract at a certain date, irrespective a of notice period. After all, you want to leave and your boss likely wants to hire someone new on your position.
You will likely get a call from the "Personalrat" though, as they want to check that you weren't somehow forced by your boss to contravene regulations this way.
Upvotes: 4
|
2020/09/22
| 795
| 3,372
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently received an invitation to review two papers from a journal(!) through [EDAS](https://www.edas.info/), which I have an account with, only because many years ago and while I was studying my Bachelor degree, I submitted two papers through their portal. I had some free time and reviewed the papers right away.
After submitting my reviews, I received other review invitations from the journal's editor. I wrote back to him and explained why I cannot review any more papers, also posted a short response on EDAS portal. However, he kept sending papers! Not only that, he is sending multiple emails reminding me that the review deadlines are approaching fast!
This does not bother me! What bothers me is that one of the papers I reviewed was a very poor paper and its authors withdrew it. After their withdrawal, EDAS sent me and other reviewers an automated message. The surprising thing was that the paper had 9 reviewers!! In other words, the editor had spammed all of us in a way, and EDAS had no mechanism of stopping him from doing this!
Is there anyone else with similar experiences? Should I do something about it or just let it pass?<issue_comment>username_1: I'm not familiar with this portal, but if they're standard emails they would start with "do you accept or decline", and only let you submit a review if you accept. If this is the case just decline everything. You will usually be asked for a reason for declining, in which case you can say you can't review any more papers. You shouldn't receive emails about upcoming deadlines then, because you never agreed to review the paper.
If the emails automatically assign you, that would be pretty unethical and I would have no qualms about ignoring them (after letting the editor know you never agreed to review the paper). If you don't want to receive any more invitations, this is also the way to start: tell the editor you don't want to receive any more invitations and you will mark the invites as spam if you keep receiving them.
About there being 9 reviewers: did all of them submit a review? If so that would be overboard. On the other hand if you can't actually see their reviews, it's possible the system is also messaging reviewers who declined to review and/or never responded to the invitation.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If you are in the EU or the service provider operates from the EU, send them another email in which you remind them very kindly of their legal obligations. Sending you spam after you opted out of their mailing lists is illegal under the username_2. Even not providing easy ways to opt out is an offense.
You can get in touch with the journals Data Protection Officer (DPO), if the editor fails to respond, or directly file a complaint at your national Data Protection Authority (DPA).
You can take also take legal steps, they are outlined here: [What should I do if I think that my personal data protection rights haven’t been respected?](https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-topic/data-protection/reform/rights-citizens/redress/what-should-i-do-if-i-think-my-personal-data-protection-rights-havent-been-respected_en) (European Commission)
An email to the DPO with "username_2 violation" in the title will most likely prompt immediate response and apologies though. Fines are substantial if the company doesn't comply.
Upvotes: 3
|
2020/09/22
| 1,341
| 4,962
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have read lots of posts here about abusive advisors, and I have heard about and even experienced some similar experiences in my own academic life.
Is there any data available for how prevalent this problem is? I am interested in quantitative, objective data to the extent that it is possible to quantify these kinds of things.
To clarify slightly, the kinds of things I would consider abusive could be:
1. Verbal abuse where the advisor puts their students down in unnecessary and unproductive ways, like name-calling.
2. Not giving the student due credit for their work or somehow preventing them from making progress.
3. Discrimination based on race or sexuality. Similarly, discussing or trying to get involved in the student's personal life in an unhealthy way.
4. Any behavior that normally qualifies as abuse in other relationships and generally shows that the advisor is not interested in *advising* their students and helping them become a successful academic.
I am not really talking about absentee advisors or advisors who are just kind of blunt that don't display these qualities.<issue_comment>username_1: From [PhDs: the tortuous truth](https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-03459-7):
>
> Overall, 21% of respondents said they had personally experienced
> harassment or discrimination, and the same proportion reported
> experiencing bullying. One-quarter of respondents who identified as
> female reported personally experiencing harassment or discrimination
> compared with 16% of those identifying as men. The highest rates of
> harassment or discrimination (24%) were reported in North America, and
> the lowest (18%) came from Australasia.
>
>
> ...
>
>
> In the survey, 57% of students who said they had experienced bullying reported feeling unable to discuss their situation without fear of personal repercussions.
>
>
>
From [A message for mentors from dissatisfied graduate students](https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-03535-y):
>
> In the survey, 21% of respondents reported experiencing discrimination or harassment. The same percentage also reported bullying. Of those, nearly half said that their supervisor was the perpetrator
>
>
>
It looks like, by the numbers, 1 in 10 PhD students will be harassed or abused in some way by their supervisor. Anecdotally I think that abusive advisors burn through students at a higher rate that normal advisors, so I'd actually guess about 5% of PhD advisors are a serious problem.
I will note that your experience will vary wildly based on gender and race. You are much more likely to find that inappropriate or abusive behavior from faculty as a woman, for example. It's hard to generalize because an advisor who is perfect for male students may be abusive to female or non-binary students.
That said, the abusive part of academia is smaller than the part that isn't abusive, but will apologize for it and gaslight victims into silence. That's the fraction I'd be more interested in quantifying.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It's an interesting research question and difficult to answer since many cases are unreported or without details. I agree with the comment by @benxyzzy.
As far as I know, bullying in academia is on the rise. The short answer is: basically there are no specific data records of this kind of abuse and qualitatively speaking this is as prevalent in academia to a level that any PhD student should be self-aware and warned beforehand about the issue. Because this affects human health and academia's reputation.
There are prescribed mechanisms in place to avoid this abuse but they are not practical. Most times the practical solution is to split up the supervision, which goes unreported and does not help the institution.
The Nature survey gives good insights.
Other data sources:
* I found this [dissertation](https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/303903849.pdf) commenting that there is a vast body of
empirical research on incivility in higher education.
* Some student ombudsmen make annual reports like [this one from the University of
Oslo.](https://www.uio.no/english/about/organisation/student-ombudsperson/reports/annualreport2015ombudforstudentsuio.pdf)
* <NAME> talks about [bullying](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_2foQgULYM&t=1s), [gaslighting](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TI_FSDceViw) and [toxic
workplaces](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7oEIbj-bsw&t=1404s), commenting that there is plenty of research about that.
* Some journals on higher education may have empirical data-based
articles like these ones: [PhD student-supervisor relationship-Is there
a problem?](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277307342),
[Hierarchical microaggressions in higher education](https://psycnet.apa.org/journals/dhe/8/1/61).
* Regarding your second point, there are plenty of articles on authorship issues like "coercive authorship" "honorary authorship".
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/09/22
| 1,256
| 5,412
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am trying to apply for a Lecturer job in another country; I noticed that they're asking for an academic resume and they provided a template as well. Here is what they said:
>
> You should provide attachments, including your academic CV and details of research, publications and grants if not already covered (an Academic CV template is available here).
>
>
>
Here is the issue: the template has sections of stuff I didn't do or don't have. Since I completed my PhD in another country, we have different "evaluation metrics". For instance, in my country (3rd world country), it's pretty hard to find funding for your research, and most students do a PhD with no funding (my case). I do however have experience in preparing project proposals to get funding, but I never got funding. So, I don't know what to write in the "Research grants and contracts" section.
So my question is: is it a good idea to use my own template? The template they're providing is pretty detailed and they're asking for specific sections, such as contribution to the department, contribution to the faculty, contribution to the university and to enterprise. A resume is not an official document, meaning that the candidate makes his own resume and not some institution, am I right?
**Update:**
I want to thank all those who took the time to comment and answer my question.
I emailed the university and they said I can use my own template.
I want to clarify that the resume I have now (and I am using to apply for other opportunities) is not a representation of my lack of interest! I did re-format my resume a lot of times, in fact I used to prepare tailored resumes each time I apply (my field is cyber security and IA, so I did target vacancies that want a profile that unites the two fields, but I also applied for jobs that seeks individual skills). Before I apply, I always ask for external input from a professor in our lab about the resume I used. But I truly believe that it won't change a lot if another candidate has +5 years experience more than me and uses a generic format.
Even my supervisor noticed that and asked me to only use one, because according to her is "what's more important is the content of the resume and not how it looks". So, I prepared one standard resume that took me +3 hours!<issue_comment>username_1: I suspect that most of the applicants will use the template. I also suspect that the search committee will expect all applicants' CVs to be in the same order.
If it were I, I'd use the template, omit entirely the things that aren't applicable in your case, and very briefly address those in a cover letter.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> specific sections, such as contribution to the department,
> contribution to the faculty, contribution to the university and to
> enterprise
>
>
>
They're all standard for **academic CVs** and if the institution has included them on its template they reflect the criteria against which your application *will* be assessed.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I've always found that typesetting a CV well (getting page beaks in sensible places, preventing different bits of text from being printed one on top of the other, preventing lines from sticking off the edge of the page...) is difficult and stressful. You could take it that, by providing a template file (as long as that template file is a good one), the university is offering to do a lot of that hard work for you, and protect you from that stress. I wouldn't be inclined to turn that offer down.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: Re-formatting the application pack for each vacancy is a huge waste of time. Some parts of it, such as the cover letter, may need to be adjusted to match the requirements of the vacancy. Other parts, such as CV, Publication List, Research statement, Teaching statement, etc, reflect your current profile. A University which asks these documents to be re-formatted for them is putting a huge additional burden on applicants. This is largely a test in compliance with bureaucratic requirements, than a test of your academic skills and abilities. It's up to you to decide whether the job is worth participating in such a test.
Outside academia, e.g. in IT sector, companies are searching for the candidates based on their online profiles, e.g. LinkedIn. All necessary details are clarified via interviews over the phone, skype/zoom or in person. Companies which expect developers to re-format CVs for them will likely go bust very quickly.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: There is nothing in the statement ``(an Academic CV template is available here)'' indicating this is a required format. I would assume that most applicants would not use the template.
I suspect the template is there to help applicants. Does it have a place for hobbies? If not, probably you want to not list hobbies. It does have a place for ``contributions to the university'' so be sure it is clear on your CV if you ever sat on a campus-wide committee or some such thing. Different cultures put in different things in a CV, but in this case you have a guide.
The fact that the template has separate sections for different types of service makes me suspect this is a generic format used for scholars at many ranks and many departments. There may be many sections any specific person would have blank.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2020/09/22
| 594
| 2,581
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am applying to faculty jobs in computer science. Let's say I am in field A.
I found a job ad for an assistant professor position. The ad says something along the lines of "the department is seeking applicants whose expertise is in the area of Field B" and "A focus in (subfield of B) is preferred." The ad also reads "the applicant should have interests that complement existing departmental strengths," which I interpreted to mean that you could apply if you do similar research to existing faculty.
Field B is essentially disparate from Field A, but there are fewer people in general studying in Field A than in Field B. (Speaking statistically of data sets like the Taulbee report.)
Would it be appropriate for me to submit an application for this job, even though I don't work in Field B? Or would the department hiring committee get mad that I submitted an application, effectively wasting their time?<issue_comment>username_1: There is nothing wrong with applying, as long as you are honest about your field and your interests. Of course, they are more likely to choose someone in their preferred field, provided they get some good candidates there. But sometimes they will change their minds for an outstanding candidate who they judge might also fit in to fill a need.
No, they won't be "mad", as long as you are honest. Make your best case that you will be an outstanding faculty member, regardless of field. But, they *do* have a current preference elsewhere. Be aware.
And, I don't think you should "apologize" for applying though you are in a different field. Just state your qualifications.
Had they said that qualifications in a particular field are *required* then it would be different, of course.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: **You want a job? So apply. That’s all there is to it.**
The academic job market is not some kind of neighborhood bonding event or support group where people try to be as nice as possible to each other and avoid hurting each other’s feelings. No one will be mad at you — in fact, the very notion that someone getting mad at you is a consideration you should take into account when deciding whether to apply for a job is, from my point of view as someone who in a typical year looks at anywhere between a couple of dozen and a couple of hundred job applications, completely absurd.
You might not get the job, but there’s nothing inappropriate about applying, unless there are formal *requirements* listed in the job application that you don’t satisfy.
Good luck with the job search!
Upvotes: 3
|
2020/09/22
| 3,292
| 13,718
|
<issue_start>username_0: I graduated from my PhD in the middle of last year and have since landed a full time job in industry. Currently I'm pretty ran off my feet with work, but I'm also enjoying having free time at weekends to spend with my Husband.
My supervisor has been in touch pretty relentlessly about publishing some of my last results from the thesis (also saying that I "owe her" and it would destroy my future if I don't see it through). Now I'm happy with never going back to academia, and career promotion isn't my focus if I'm honest.
I've tried to cobble together a draft but it keeps getting ripped apart (she was pretty notorious when I was doing my PhD for brutal feedback) and I'm looking at it and realising I don't care about seeing this through... I don't appreciate the pressure from her, it's not truly beneficial to me, it's taking up my personal time and I have a lot of things going on with family difficulties lately.
I've always been a bit of a wimp with confrontation. So given all I've said about this how would you advise for me to tell my old boss I don't want to publish (preferably without triggering an intense vendetta)?<issue_comment>username_1: Keep it short and sweet:
>
> Dear [*her name*],
>
>
> Thanks for the reminder about our project. I thought about it some more, and for personal reasons I won’t be able to continue with the work. Since you have all the data I suggest that you pursue publication by yourself or with other collaborators. And, if it matters, I do not care very much about the issue of coauthorship, so whatever you end up deciding about who should be a named coauthor of the paper once it’s finished is fine with me.
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Gerilk
>
>
>
An important point is that, since you’re worried she will try to pressure or guilt-trip you, **you should not apologize for or explain your decision**. Manipulative people are expert at using every sign of guilt or embarrassment to pressure people relentlessly until they get what they want from you. I can almost guarantee it from experience: if you give her a reason — any reason — she will find some counter-argument to make that reason look invalid or insufficient, and will repeat this as many times as necessary with any additional details you add to your explanation, until you give in. *Do not give her an opening to do this*. A firm “no” with no explanation is the only approach that works with this type of person.
Good luck!
**Edit:** there’s been an extensive discussion in the comments about whether the email should mention the subject of authorship. To clarify, I don’t think it matters very much if you mention it or not. I included that part since, first, it seems factually true based on what you said that you don’t care about authorship; and second, letting the former supervisor know this eliminates one possible pressure point she will surely try to use to keep pressuring and annoying you in the hope of getting you to change your mind.
But if you prefer not to mention this, that’s pretty much just as good and won’t particularly affect the outcome.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: "I am afraid that, despite trying, with my new job and duties it has become increasingly difficult to allocate time for writing the paper. I have tried to give the paper my best shot, but it has taken more time than expected, and unfortunately my resources have now run out. I am afraid it is not realistic for me to complete the paper and I am forced to close the file on this.
I am, of course, happy to let you have all necessary data and materials if that is of use to you. Here is the link <...>."
Note that I make no mention of authorship - she should keep you co-author, but if she doesn't, you probably don't care either.
The other point is that you have made clear that your resources are used up. You have given her your resource she was not entitled to in the first place, she wasted your time by "ripping the drafts apart", so in a way, you very indirectly indicate that she herself waylaid the paper with wasting time in complete disregard to your resources. So, this response gives you the satisfaction to have let her - very indirectly - known that she has not used her "grace time with you" well. Of course, you could just cut off without any feedback as per @DanRomik's suggestion, but maybe this one is more cathartic for you without being outright confrontational; and it does not open further doors either. You are "forced" to close the file - it's not anymore in your hands, most certainly not in hers.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: How about just...never talking to her again? Just stop e-mailing her back. You don't owe her a thing.
You sent a reasonable e-mail to her explaining your situation. Then she replied and said that you owe her.
What wonderful nonsense! She needs a reality check. That is not the way things work. She is your *former* supervisor.
I think that you should block her e-mails. Put them in the spam folder. Maybe in a few months, once you have established some distance (both physical and temporal) you will see just how unreasonable she is being.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: It might be important to know what such a "vendetta" might look like. Will you depend on your advisor in the future as a character reference for your next job? Or do you fear an actual, physical vendetta (hopefully not)?
If all you fear is burning bridges and getting one last angry "I'm very disappointed in you, after all I've done for you" email, the other answers provide good starting points if you really definitely wish to end any discussion with your advisor (which, given what you said about their communication style, is understandable). However, in case you are not fully resolved, there might be additional points to be considered:
1. **Closure:** indepedently of whether or not this has any impact on your future career, I've found that having unfinished projects (i.e. half-written papers) kept me from moving forward in the past. Only you can decide if this is relevant for you, but if you suspect it might be, then finishing the paper becomes much harder with time up to a point where you could not realistically restart writing the paper in a year, so you might want to just do it now for your own peace of mind.
2. **Confrontation practice:** You said yourself that you've 'always been a bit of a whimp with confrontation", so this might be an ideal opportunity to practice holding your ground while still moving a project forward. This is possible because your advisor (i) has absolutely no power over you any more and (ii) actually *wants something from you* (your time and work to publish another paper that might advance only their career with no benefit to you). For example, you could respond to her tearing apart your first draft along the lines of "Dear Advisor, I've received your feedback on my first draft but found that your comments were not sufficiently detailed to enable me to improve the manuscript. In order to efficiently move forward, I would appreciate it if you could explain your comments in more detail and outline what needs to happen before we can submit this manuscript". Situations like this (unclear/unconstructive communication from someone that you need to work with on a project) are likely to happen to you again, but usually, there is much more at stake.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Such manipulative people are only interested in their own personal goals and aspirations and do not care about the needs of others. All their life they have been perfecting the 'art' of exploiting the goodness in the personality of others (which they honestly see as 'weakness'), to their own advantage. I totally agree with username_1. You do not need to do it if you don't want to and more importantly, you **DO NOT NEED TO EXPLAIN OR JUSTIFY** your decision. You said
>
> I've always been a bit of a wimp with confrontation.
>
>
>
No need to be "confrontational", at least not in the conventional sense. But a polite but firm **NO** is necessary. And for heaven's sake, don't give up authorship for the work you have done. That too is a part of your life which you will never get back! Good luck.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: Beside the other good suggestions, you might want to be a co-author if she, or someone else on her behalf, takes the burden of writing the paper by developing the research a bit further. As that happens, you probably **ought to be a co-author**. So you could make it clear that you don't have time to write the paper (as much as she hasn't got that) but could help with the 'supervision' of a master student set to fine tune your results (if she understood what they boil down to, seen her ruthless rounds of revisions).
Or maybe the university could pay your current employer the work time for writing the paper against mentioning the new affiliation? Let your manager discuss this with her. I doubt that a company would give away even a small part of what is needed to write an article in normal conditions (let alone with a compulsively dismissive counterpart, clearly a bad collaborator for any company). You know the field situation.
Anyhow. It is clear that the supervisor cannot write the paper herself, for lack of time or skills or virtues or for sheer circumstances. **You are in the strong position here**. In the worst case scenario, you can ignore her mails as you would do with anyone sending unsolicited mail -- this requires, mentally, a further measure of emotional distancing from your past. I guess this is the difficulty that peaks up at the point of decision.
Your family matter more than all this, I presume.
My two cents.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: It's common if not normal for people to publish at least one paper from their doctoral studies. In fact in UK it's a requirement of being awarded (at least in an engineering faculties) a PhD that it be "worthy of publication" in a peer-reviewed
journal. As far as I know, "worthiness of publication" was in the opinion of the external examiner, the supervisor and the department research head. That said, most PhD publications I encountered were done after the PhD thesis was "accepted". I don't know if *actual publication* had to take place before formal award of the doctorate, or if publication had to be done at all.
But most candidates I met - natives of UK or foreigners, even those not planning to work in universities - were happy to publish as it was something more to put on their resumés. Use of university facilities, e.g. photographic, computer software, typesetting, etc., was available to those pursuing publication if their new employers did not possess them.
Worst case scenario: Let's say the supervisor really was supportive through the bad times and let's say that you really do owe her morally as well as academically for this. Even so, you have to balance your new situation against the obligation to knock out a paper. You mention your finally having some time to relax, enjoy a less stressful day outside working hours and giving more time to your husband. This is quite in order after the commitment of recent years. A good share of women PhD candidates can drop out after getting a job and/or getting married. Maybe the supervisor fears you will just put off publication indefinitely and her "investment" will show no corresponding publication in her supervisee tally, make her look less productive than her colleagues, etc. But YOU are the one who has to set the work-balance here. I can't see any problem telling the supervisor as much. You shouldn't need anyone else to attend the meeting with the supervisor with you. If she can't accept your need for time and space for a while, then just make the same point to the postgraduate studies dean or the HoD. Leave in a formal letter to the same effect too. Job done.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_8: **You owe nothing** If it were the case that former students “owed” me continuing to work on their papers I would be, in a sense, rich. In my field
people often take industry jobs post graduation in which publication isn’t important. All my students *want* to publish with me after they finish, but the reality is that publication is hard and they don’t have much to gain. You have personal reasons, but everyone does. Having your weekends back is reason enough. So they invariably don’t. I think once you are outside of the academy research and publication just seems much less important. This perhaps explains why she believes it so important for you,as well as for her, that you do it. She hasn’t left and those of us still inside struggle
to comprehend the radically different perspective.
I don’t try and make former students publish our work because a) making people do things they don’t want to is mean & b) I can’t. Your supervisor shouldn’t and can’t.
The exception is, of course, those who go on to faculty positions. (Who do it enthusiastically). I now price this in when weighing up taking up a project with a student (at least now ). To be honest the problematic cases in my experience are those that strung me along post graduation - For this reason I think a firm email saying: I wish you all the best with it but I’m afraid I can’t give it any more time.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: Tell her to write it and put your name 2nd , or take all the credit with your blessing; and also tell her that you have a life now and do not have time for her endless rewrite demands.
Curious about what field this was in. Sounds like some touchy feely subject as science and math should not be that hard to finish after tweaking one draft.
Upvotes: -1
|
2020/09/23
| 1,582
| 6,646
|
<issue_start>username_0: Graduate schools in North America usually have a required number of courses that you need to pass. Afterwards, the school is usually pretty flexible at the student taking more courses (and it is often free of charge), but it is another story with advisor/PI/supervisor.
After I passed my courses, I have been either explicitly or implicitly reminded by my advisor that I should not take more courses. None of any other graduate students are taking courses either in some sort of tacit acknowledgement. Taking courses takes away time from research and performing badly could cause serious problems, so it is understandable.
However, I find that after a year or two of not taking any courses, I feel less mentally "sharp". And sometimes I say to myself "I wish I had taken information theory/blackhole physics/statistical methods!" because I think they could open up more research ideas and plus some subjects are just hard when studied on your own. Finally, taking courses open up more employment opportunities, either through TAship or working in industry. I get the feeling that some/many advisors in academia (such as mine) are fairly indifferent about transitioning from graduate school to industry and do not appreciate the importance of courses/technical skills to these future opportunities.
Has anyone been able to successfully navigate through this dilemma? There are pro and con to each side of the argument and I could't make a move in fear of jeopardizing my relationship with my advisor.<issue_comment>username_1: Assuming you are getting a PhD: Your advisor is correct. Taking courses is not the purpose of a PhD. A PhD is a research degree, and PhD students should do research. If you want to take courses, you should be enrolled in a course-based degree.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: [Audit](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/52137/what-does-auditing-a-course-mean) the courses that you like, i.e., take them without receiving a grade/credit for it. You might not even need to formally audit courses, most professors will let you informally audit them. But as mentioned by others, research takes priority.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: You should talk to your advisor about *why* you want to take more courses, and discuss which one-or-two would contribute to your development as a PhD student.
Your advisor is correct in the sense that it is easy to spend too much time taking courses for interest, and you need to focus on your research. Also, to some extent you should be able to study the material without a teacher now.
On the other hand, your advisor may have a different idea from you about what you are aiming to achieve by doing a PhD. It is certainly possible that they do not think enough about being in a position to transition to industry.
Things that are not of some reasonable use to your studies you should do in your own time. On the other hand, at least in the UK it is recognised that some time (about 10 days per year) should reasonably be spent on career-building CPD.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: If you want make an value argument that appeals to the research university's historical context and you have "enlightenment ideals", maybe appeal to [Lehr und Lernfreiheit](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humboldtian_model_of_higher_education).
Probably someone could cite Weber / Foucault for evidence that enlightenment ideals are "problematic". Indeed if your advisor is hip they might also think that Lehr und Lernfreiheit is bullshit.
Regardless, I would like to see more Ph.D. students (in scientific fields in N. America who are being advised against taking courses in favor of doing research) ease up and just:
0. read along with courses they're into,
1. interrogate folks enrolled in courses they're into about the content of lectures they maybe had to miss (due to research obligations, administrivia, CS dept auditing policies, etc.);
2. just be present for courses they're into (usually oral consent from the lecturer will do, he/she might even be flattered, and won't even have to worry about assessing/grading your work!);
3. be honest about what they're doing (if it's safe) with their advisor (e.g., misbehave and own it) and their peers (invite them to audit with you);
4. go rogue (if it's safe) or just formally withdraw from the program to do what they want (e.g., doing research or building things or learning, but without any cognitive dissonance owing to the fact that "they are scared they *should* be ostracized from the group");
5. own the privilege of their choices and represent them to other Ph.D. students (e.g., if someone really needs statistical methods, they *need statistical methods*!).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: After I passed my qualifying exams and passed enough classes to get over that hurdle, I took additional courses pass/fail or credit/no-credit (with the consent of the instructor) where it was clear I could pass or get credit without it impacting my workload too much. I took a lot of courses this way and learned a lot. My advisor encouraged it. It also helped him out if the course he was teaching was shy a few people, he could ask me to register, too, if I hadn't taken it for credit already. I could have taken courses outside my area, but I mostly doubled down on topics that would reinforce my knowledge and understanding of my research: mathematical underpinnings, practical underpinnings, etc. It helped make sure that I came into campus every day and did work, went to meetings, and stopped by the office/lab.
I usually didn't take more than one course per semester this way in order to try to keep my workload sane and to be sure I was making progress on my research with the rest of my time.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: When I finished course work I found that what I really missed about them was discussing the ideas from the courses with fellow graduate students. What filled in the gap for me was an informal logic and foundations seminar that another grad student had created. We would meet about once a week at lunch time, discussing articles, books, and occasionally each other's research. It was a nice way to avoid becoming narrowly focused on your own research topic, learn about things of broader interest, and keep an active sense of community. At the same time, it wasn't very time-consuming so it was never a major distraction from our actual research. Perhaps something like that could work for you. If there isn't already something like that in your department, you could always take the initiative and organize one.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2020/09/23
| 1,533
| 6,099
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a research fellow based in the UK. All my academic experience (bachelors, masters, PhD, postdocs) have been in UK (English) universities. For the next stage, I'm considering the benefits of continuing in the UK compared with getting a position overseas. My field is biomedicine / epidemiology / public health.
Specifically I would like to consider the pros and cons of working as a lecturer in a British university compared with working as an assistant professor in a Canadian university.
Does anyone have experience of both systems and is able to make comparisons? It would be informative to have insights on:
* Salary and benefits (e.g. days of holiday)
* Pensions (boring but important!)
* Working styles
* Teaching responsibilities
* Funding provided by universities or research councils
* Work life balance
As Canada has a federal system, I'm aware there can be differences between states. Any answers with knowledge of universities in Quebec would be particularly helpful.
As a benchmark, I would characterise the UK system as follows:
* Salary for a lecturer in the region of £40,000 per year, which is low relative to the cost of living in London and the South East, but high in North East or North West England. Holidays are fairly generous (30 days per year)
* USS pension is generous as it is a final salary scheme, but takes 10% of gross salary (and may be unsustainable in the future)
* High administrative burden. Often competitive working environments.
* High teaching load for early stage lecturers
* Not much support for funding from universities, but (in my field) several external funders (Medical Research Council, Wellcome Trust, Gates Foundation).
* Hard to generalise, but work life balance often compromised by long commutes and high cost of living (more so in London/ Southern England)<issue_comment>username_1: One big difference I see between Canada and the UK is that Tenure (in the US sense) doesn't exist in the UK, where as I believe it does at some places in Canada.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I do not know exact details of the UK system but I have colleagues there so at least I have some general idea of the UK system. My impressions of Quebec come from doing grant committee work for the provincial government.
In Quebec the dominant language is French: it may or may not be a requirement to learn it but if you don’t you’d miss out on much the vibrant cultural scene. Quebec also runs a French-inspired system of education (unlike English Canada, which is much closer to a US-based system): I don’t understand the UK system well enough to compare, but salaries are lower than the rest of Canada (although the prestige is greater). The provincial tax burden is not light (although it’s not the horror stories you read compared with other provinces, except Alberta), but the quality of live is quite high: you can expect to have the means of buying a house within 5 years of your appointment (something not so clear if you are appointed in Toronto or Vancouver).
Quebec is culturally more creative than the rest of Canada: the joke is that the graduating theatre class in Quebec always puts on a new play at graduation, whereas the graduating class in Ontario always puts on a Shakespeare play. This creative drive trickles to the research level: there are more funding opportunities in Quebec (the provincial government runs its own funding scheme, on top of all federal scheme). Tuition is low compared with other provinces: it is a very attractive research environment, and many in other provinces are quite jealous of the additional government funding opportunities.
Of course there is “true” tenure.
My sense is that the UK is much much more complicated. Quebec universities do not run on full-cost accounting (I know some UK universities do) so the paperwork required in applying for and managing grants is an order of magnitude lower than what I’ve seen in the UK. Many federal grants are *individual* grants (there are also some team grants and some industry grants) and these individual grants are very flexible, with minimal oversight and simple rules (*v.g.* no business class flights). If you use this $$ poorly (nothing to show for it at the end of the grant period) nobody will care but you’re unlikely to have a strong enough file to get your grant renewed: by and large the system works reasonably well. Overall, my sense is that the Canadian and Quebec systems are much less business-like and penny-pinching than the UK system. “Big grants” aren’t so frequent: the Canadian system tends to distribute its resources over individual researchers rather than concentrate resources in a few big centers.
I do not know what you have in mind, but - say - McGill is not called the Harvard of the North for nothing. It has a history of excellent research: I don’t know about biomedicine but I know that there’s a lot of hospital-based research there (same as UK as far as I know).
Side note: I have a colleague who took a job in the UK and came back to Canada simply because the funding environment in the UK was so much more restrictive compared to the Canadian system. I suppose this is anecdotal but it does align with my own experience with the UK system (through international team grants).
Nota: you can check funding levels for federal (NSERC) grants here: <https://www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca/ase-oro/index_eng.asp>
Public employees salaries in Quebec are not public but they are in Ontario (if you make over $100k). Faculty salaries in Quebec are lower than Ontario and I do not know the *x* factor between the two, although I would guess ~0.8. You can get some of the public sector salaries in Ontario from [this link](https://www.ontario.ca/page/public-sector-salary-disclosure-2019-all-sectors-and-seconded-employees).
You might have to download some stuff to search by university or sector.
Montreal has an excellent public transport system (including subway, with subway stops at all major universities).
My impression is that teaching loads are quite acceptable.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2020/09/23
| 987
| 4,000
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a homework wherein a problem is eerily similar to a theorem we have proven and discussed before in class. Since we have a policy that the only concepts and theorems that we can apply to our homeworks and quizzes are those discussed in class, I figured that if I slightly modify a set defined in the proof of a previously discussed theorem, I would be able to prove my homework (I managed to prove it following the proof of the previous theorem).
Can I do this? Is this considered plagiarism?<issue_comment>username_1: You should cite the source to avoid all question of plagiarism or any other form of improper behavior or dishonesty, whether plagiarism or not. It shouldn't be a problem. "Following the proof of Prof. X for the YZ theorem as discussed in class ..."
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: No, this bears no resemblance whatsoever to the concept of plagiarism. The goal of homework is to get you to review what you learned in class and demonstrate that you can apply it. That is exactly what you are doing.
Moreover, the purists who will wag their fingers at you and tell you to “cite” the earlier proof are part of why we have a generation of students who have no common sense understanding of what plagiarism is or what it means to plagiarize, and instead view the avoidance of plagiarism in terms of adherence to some mechanical set of algorithmic rules whose meaning they don’t understand (and I mean no offense to you personally, it isn’t your fault that you are being led astray in such a way by well-meaning but misguided — in my opinion — educators). The professor knows what they did in class, and know that you know it. There is no need to cite anything, just write a correct proof of the result you were asked to prove. If you want to mention that the proof is a variation of something that was done in class, that may be a nice way of showing a good level of understanding of the material, but it’s not required as some kind of plagiarism-avoidance algorithm.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_3: In some courses it is *strongly intended* that you use the prior proofs. Rather than deriving everything from scratch, you're supposed to use the earlier results as building blocks.
You would write something like:
>
> Using the proof obtained in example 3.2 from the lecture notes, we can here replace [this clause] with [another, more convenient clause]. We continue the rest of the proof as follows...
>
>
>
This isn't plagiarism, because you make it clear what is, and what isn't your work.
It's also good academic practice. Someone (say, the TA grading your homework) who needs to validate this sub-proof knows where to find it, and only needs to check if you applied the prior result correctly.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: When in doubt, always cite the source. At worst you're verbose. At best you avoid a charge of academic dishonesty.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Plagiarism is passing of another persons work as your own. In this case you are using knowledge gained in class to solve a problem and therefore I don't see it as plagiarism at all. You understand the concept, or I will assume, and are using it to solve a later problem that is similar, now if you claim this as your proof then that would be plagiarism but that is not what you are doing. You are applying knowledge gained in class to another problem and that is not something to be concerned about. Most people know they are plagiarizing when word for word passing off something as their own. I assume the proof still requires you to apply what you learned not come up with your own theory.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: NO.
Often there is only one right and or easy/short way to prove something.
I did that once on an exam in grad skl.
One direction I wrote 'obvious' for the other way I said 'clear' which was the profs proof in class. I got full credit which was lucky as I had not idea how to prove that theorem:)
Upvotes: -1
|
2020/09/23
| 831
| 3,869
|
<issue_start>username_0: We submitted a research paper in physics.
In this paper, we take structural parameters from the experimental work and then perform simulations using density functional theory and present our results. No one has performed similar calculations or experiments before through which I could validate my results. One of the reviewer’s comments is:
>
> Main problem of this work is a lack of the experimental data that could validate relevant calculations and which would be very important especially in actual case, at least from my point of view. Why?
>
>
>
My question is how should I respond to this comment?<issue_comment>username_1: I would probably respond that, while the note is a good idea for future work, the current work rests on foundations. Some validation of theoretical work only comes years after first proposed. A lot of Einstein's work comes easily to mind. Also <NAME> and anything to do with the [Grand Unified Theory](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Unified_Theory). Or even gravity, I suppose.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Essentially, the reviewer is saying, you cannot/should not propose a new theory in a vacuum. One of two approaches apply:
* Do you have a new theoretical approach that will explain observations that existing theoretical approaches cannot yet explain? Demonstrate this categorically by taking the experimental results modeled with the existing theories to model with your new theory. It seems that you argue that this is not the case for your theory. So ...
* Do you have a new theoretical approach that points to new insights not yet measured by any existing experiments? State concisely what experimental measurements will be needed to validate your theory. You infer that this is your case.
Being somewhat aware of DFT and its applications as well as being experimentally inclined, I must say tangentially that I cannot trust that absolutely no experimental results (e.g. from spectroscopy) exist anywhere that can in some way validate your new theory, even in part. Alternatively, I cannot trust that your theory has absolutely no relevance to direct new experimental approaches in order to validate it (e.g. again spectroscopy).
In summary ... Einstein's Nobel prize was for a new theory that explained oddities in experimental observations (the photoelectric effect). Einstein's theories otherwise were put forward with proposals for experiments that might test their validity. You are being asked to do one or the other as well.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Density functional theory has its shortcomings, most of which are well known (bandgap issue, delocalization, etc.) and thoroughly discussed in the literature. If you stay clear of these traps, plus show that your calculations are converged (k points, basis set size, etc.), then there is no reason why you could not make your case: the theory has been extensively validated for many materials. However, if you touch one of the soft spots of the method (dispersion, charged defects, whatever) then you need to provide higher level of theory calculations (from simple corrections all the way to diagrammatic methods and quantum Monte Carlo). An expert reviewer would be aware of the limitations and point you in the right direction. However, if the reviewer is an expert regarding the material class in question but has no experience with density functional theory in particular (e.g., because s/he is an experimentalist) then it is your responsibility to argue why the level of theory is enough, based on examples and evidence from the very extensive literature. And remember that if the referee raised the question, it is likely that a reader of your paper will too, so you need to consider whether these justifications should also make it to the manuscript, not only the response letter.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/09/23
| 1,401
| 6,118
|
<issue_start>username_0: I will get straight to the point without much details about my mental state. I am currently studying Electrical Engineering and Computer Science. I would say that it is a demanding program. My school is considered the "hardest" to get into in my country, and we have many different courses involving math, physics, introductory computer science, electronics etc.
I know I have to deal with many issues with my self-esteem, but I would really love to hear some advice on what to do when I feel like I am not sufficiently prepared to take an exam. This happens even in cases where I watched every (or almost every) class, did coursework etc. throughout the semester, but found that I struggled with past papers some days before the exam. This makes me feel like I do not "deserve" to get a good mark if I don't study everything properly. It's like I imagine every possible scenario of failure in my head and I reject to even take the exam even though my school offers me the chance to take it again.
I am afraid to ask my professor for advice on this issue because I do not want him to feel like I care only about my grades and not the actual course, because in most of my courses I really try to care and find a deeper meaning. But I have seen (comparing to my classmates) that this is not a good study approach for finals. I feel confused, weak, and embarrassed.
My therapist asked me why I am so afraid, and I think it's because I relate my grades to whether I am good enough to follow my academic goals. For example, if I really like the course, I feel like I am not eligible to further follow related courses if I did not excel. And if I do not like the course, I feel like I have to excel because it's mandatory in my field and it shows my ability to adapt. I also feel like succeeding properly involves studying everything even if it's not appealing, because otherwise I feel like I am cheating my self, my education, and my "profession".
How can I deal with this?<issue_comment>username_1: Test anxiety is very common. Simply being aware that it is a normal thing to happen to students may increase your chance of success.
Treatment by a mental health professional is a good idea for severe test anxiety. Advice from strangers on the internet is not a substitute for the assistance of a mental health professional.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: It's natural to worry about exam scores, especially when a semester class only has a small number of exams. Discussing with a therapist is a good idea, however I did not see mentioned whether your anxiety is justified: how does your knowledge compare to the professor's expectations and to the average student in the class?
Can you visit the instructor during office hours to discuss your progress? That time is set aside to help students. Please don't feel bad about appearing to care about your grades. Grades often provide both the incentive for and assessment of understanding. Most instructors are happy to help students who are putting effort in, whether it is for an 'A' or genuine interest. Perhaps the professor can help you obtain past exams to practice on, or practice problems in a textbook, to self-assess your understanding.
Can you study with other students in the class? You could identify how your understanding compares to the class overall, and if other students understand better, studying with them can help you learn.
Ideally, by informally assessing your knowledge, you will identify whether you understand the concepts adequately. If your understanding is sufficient, then your anxiety is not justified, and your therapist can help you move past it. Otherwise, you will have identified topics in the class that you can work on to become better prepared for the exam.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Some tips that worked for me (which obviously aren't a replacement therapy)
1. Spend less time reading textbooks, and watching lectures and more time actually doing problems. Do every problem you can find on the internet related to the subject your studying. Mainly do your reading when you already have a problem in mind you want to solve. I found this increases my retention a lot.
1a. You should be able to think through solutions to problems with your eyes closed hours after you've worked them out. I frequently go over solutions step by step while lying in bed before sleeping. You should be able to go to a whiteboard and write the solution as if your are teaching a class without looking at any notes. Friends are a great way to test yourself.
1b. Try to really get a good intuition about the problems you're working on. It helps me to have a clear visual image of how things are working and fitting together. The more associations you make between things you know and your subjects the better.
1c. Create artificial stress while you're studying like placing a timer in front of you, doing the problem in front of people, or pretending that this is really the exam. When I was studying for the math GRE, this "exposure therapy" helped me deal with my anxiety during the real exam.
2. This might seem difficult or abstract, but it helped me to consciously admit that I felt inherently inferior and then change that belief into a different one. In particular, I adopted the viewpoint that mathematics requires hard work, like practicing an instrument, and that I *will* get better if I study right. I became very aware of feelings stemming from the belief that only "talented geniuses" can do math and consciously replaced those ideas with the idea that math is difficult but with time and effort, someone like me can absolutely learn those things.
3. Some lifestyle changes might also help. Exercising frequently and meditating can go a long way when it comes to anxiety and self-esteem. Take some time to clear your mind, reaffirm your goals, and keep your brain running smoothly. You can also use meditation to reflect on ideas you are struggling with, or ways in which you can improve your study habits as well as to just relax and give yourself a break.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/09/23
| 999
| 4,184
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm doing my bachelor's thesis at a foreign university in Northern Europe. I come from a equally strong university in Europe and have always been one of the better students at my own university. The group I'm working in right now is very well known for its work.
Since I started my project there two weeks ago I feel very stressed and progressively stupid though. I work with two master's students (doing their one year degree project) and one PhD student on a big project. They are all very nice and I get good supervision, but I just feel completely incompetent.
I tried to get the adjustments for my machine right for almost two days straight now, came extra early in and stayed extra long, but didn't manage to pull it off yet. After lunch time I asked one of the PhD students for help with one specific issue I was having. He wanted to help me right away, and while answering my question he got the entire thing up and running in 30 minutes, before he rushed to his next meeting.
I disassembled everything and tried reproducing the results from scratch with the new know-how, but still didn't get it to work on my own today. This is very embarrassing, now I will stand there tomorrow morning, once again empty handed.
I feel discouraged by the pace my three fellow students are progressing with their project to be honest. They are much more productive than me. I fear to make a bad impression in comparison to them.
Do you have some tips on how to catch up? Would it be acceptable to go to the lab on the weekends? Should I do that?<issue_comment>username_1: You started only two weeks ago. Relax. The others with whom you interact have played a role in this group for a much longer time. Nobody expects you to immediately replicate their experience.
You tell us how you asked a PhD student for help, and this student was very willing to help you. In fact, they helped you rightaway, and it led to the desired result. This is how a group is supposed to interact, so that is a nice thing. You then do not manage to replicate their solution independently. But you are a Bachelor student and they are a PhD. Don't worry! Ask the same person for help again! Tell them: "Many thanks for your help last time; it was incredibly inspiring. I tried to learn from it by replicating your steps, but I get stuck in place X or Y. Could you perhaps show me how it works?" This implies that you want to learn (by *far* the most important attribute of a Bachelor or even Master student in a research group), and that you understand parts of the solution the PhD student provided for you but not necessarily all of it. Again, this is an *ideal* way to fortify collaborations within the group: you show that the help was appreciated, didn't go unnoticed, and that you want to put in the effort to truly understand the solution.
Everybody in your group is there to learn. This holds for the Bachelor students, the Master students, and the PhD students. Do not expect yourself, as a Bachelor student, to instantly be on the PhD student level. Instead, show that you really want to become a part of the group, and that you really want to learn. Your instincts seem to be right to succeed in academia, but you should reframe them: not instantly understanding everything is not a problem, but a desire to learn is an enormous asset. Productivity is less important than a drive to improve yourself.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think the key words are in the first paragraph: "I'm doing my bachelor's thesis". The two Master's students and the PhD student have been in the business longer than you, so of course they are going to outperform you. It's no different from how you are going to outperform first-year undergraduates. The way forward is to keep at it, and you should get better naturally.
It's usually OK to go into the lab on weekends (it's possible you'll need approval however), but if you're putting in that many hours you might burn out. Bear in mind that it's one thing to be in the lab, another to actually be productive. Further, if you're alone in the lab, you won't have anyone to ask for help if you need it.
Upvotes: 3
|
2020/09/23
| 4,660
| 20,019
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've seen several questions from students about bad supervisor references but this is on the other side.
I have a PhD student whose priority during their PhD was family (had two children in 3 years) and social life. They are smart but simply did the minimum for the PhD. We had a talk some time ago and they were clear that their target was the minimum requirements set by the school and nothing more. Which is fine by me, since that what they want.
They've now asked me to write a reference letter for a very prestigious ECR fellowship. I personally know many members of the committee. The reference guidelines ask me to address the candidate's ability to work well under pressure, attract funding, take initiative, work independently, etc.
I am conflicted. My options as I see are:
1. I write a statement of facts. Worked in the group from X to Y, published N papers, etc. However, this will basically signal that I cannot support their candidacy since I don't address the specific guidelines.
2. I tell the student I cannot give a support letter. However, given they haven't worked with any other professor or group, it will leave them in bad place.
Any other options?
**Update**: Some more information based on questions/comments below.
* The student was clear after the first year of their PhD (pre-COVID) that they want to do the minimum. For example, the requirement set by the university is to have "publishable" work and not to have published. So, the student did not want to go through the publication process except for "easy" conferences (2). All of my other PhDs until now have had 1 journal accepted and at least 1 submitted by the submission date.
* The fact that they focus on family is the positive aspect for me. E.g., if they did the minimum because they were lazy, I wouldn't have problem to say I don't provide a reference letter. I don't know how many hours they actually put since I don't keep monitor (also, last 9 months have been remotely due to COVID).
* I don't believe I can truthfully say that they comply with what I'm asked to comment on. E.g., good organizational skills: they have missed multiple deadlines, missed meetings, missed report submissions for their own funding which has a fixed yearly date (!). The excuse is always family or technical problems, but for the 3 years of joint work, I cannot truthfully say they have good organizational skills. I'll not extend to other aspects, but similar picture.<issue_comment>username_1: I'm on the side of the PhD student here.
I'm tenured faculty. I too continuously have to battle with university management to ensure that I can free up enough time to also have a family life outside of the university. This is not an attempt to do the bare minimum, but if you don't fight back against management's natural impulses, you end up with an 80-hour working week, and that is incompatible with a family life.
Having children is a human right, also for a PhD student. If one of my students has two children during their PhD, good on them! There should be appropriate governmental remuneration to allow for this happenstance. If there isn't, this is the fault of the corresponding government, not the PhD student. This may not necessarily align with my primary research objectives, but it is a fact of life that is implicit in dealing with human beings, especially those of PhD student age.
Right now, you have the option to choose on which side of the debate you want to be. Do you want to propagate the opinion that an academic career is incompatible with a private life? Then write the student a cold, factual letter or none at all (basically the two options you outline). Do you want to support a healthy work-life balance for junior people on the academic career ladder? Then do better. The choice is yours.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I'd think you should have a candid discussion with the student about what they think you should write.
Yes, (as in another reasonable answer here), university administrations will never tell you you'd done enough, nor will funding agencies, nor even will departments when it comes time for salary raise consideration. Right, so one should avoid being driven by external approval, in some regards.
At the same time, the/one *ideal* of academic function is self-direction, and taking lots of initiative, regardless of bureaucratic pushes. Not "sacrificing family life", necessarily. But, also, not necessarily forgetting about everything after a 40-hour work-week, either. Much more amorphous. (Fortunately, my own family is fairly indulgent of my endless distraction [sic] by math stuff... partly, because I do manage to pay attention to them and participate, in a complicated way of integrating family-and-math.)
As a sort of diagnostic, you could ask the student to "persuade you", on a professional level. If they can give cogent reasons that *everyone* benefits from their choices about life/work balance, then it's a winning situation. If their notion of "balance" is more of a negative about the work part, you can/should point out that they are failing to offer a good exchange for such fellowships... and much other funding.
Btw, for my own PhD students, I certainly do not try to micro-manage their schedules or time allotted. If they say that they don't have time to do something for a day or two, I believe them. If they say that a family vacation will take them away from work for some days, I believe them and it's fine. Fortunately (for me and for them) no one has ever said to me that they definitely wanted to aim to limit their interaction with the mathematics, somehow thinking that "thinking about math" is in conflict with "being a good parent/partner/friend". I myself honestly do not see this supposed distinction as genuine.
Perhaps you can provoke your student to think a little about a less naive conception of "work-life balance", and then ask them why they think you should write a (helpful/supportive) letter for them?
EDIT: In addition to myriad other complicating issues, we should definitely note that (at least) the NSF currently cares about "broader impacts" and such. It's not literally about work/life balance, but *is* about impacts of one's work outside one's office/classroom and so on.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: My reading of your question is that you don't think that you can actually *recommend* the student to your colleagues. It is a separate discussion whether we think that the student was right or wrong prioritizing family, so I'm simply going to address the question of the recommendation, devoid of whatever reason you might have for not wanting to recommend them.
The problem ultimately comes down to where your allegiance lies or should lie. You're stuck between your professional ethics to only write letters that are truthful, and your personal allegiance to your former student. That is an uncomfortable position to be in, but one every faculty knows. My take is that your professional ethics provide the overriding objective for the same reason as we would expect a professional engineer to not sign off on a bridge design they know is faulty, even if their employer is generously paying them (or even if the CEO of the company is the spouse of the engineer). What respect would we, as a profession, command if we had no ethics?
So, then, how do you find a way to do the professionally right thing in a confidential way? The usual approach is to write a letter that is short and says nothing. We have all seen such letters and we know what they mean.
Now, that is ethically correct but personally not satisfying. The solution to that is probably to have a candid conversation with the student about the fact that you cannot unconditionally recommend them for the position and that they might be better off asking someone else for a letter. I've had to have these conversations, and they're not pleasant, but students in this situation generally *know* that they might not be the best qualified ones, and respect the ethical argument.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: A student who did the minimum during their PhD has very little chance of getting a prestigious fellowship. In the sciences, you must have publications to get prestigious fellowships; a student who did the minimum will not. Your role as a mentor is to guide students to attempt things they might succeed in. Tell the student they will not succeed in this application. Tell them to compare their record to past successful applicants.
You should not write the letter. It will not help the student and it can hurt your reputation. But you should have told the student that they would not get a letter for prestigious fellowships when you discussed their goals for completing their PhD.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_5: It seems to me both options 1 and 2 that you propose are perfectly ethical, and both also leave your student in a bad place.
If you're looking for a third option, I'm not sure one exists this late in the game.
You probably should have told the PhD student earlier that their choices about doing the bare minimum would hurt them specifically in this kind of way later down the road. Part of your job as an advisor is to give advice. Just because a student expresses choices doesn't mean those choices are informed. This is especially true for folks underrepresented in academia, and someone with children in a PhD program is a minority any way you slice it (people with children in the common PhD age range have less contact with academia than average, and PhD students, particularly women, are unlikely to have children and the complexities that arise around this).
Also the comment about organization may be perfectly valid, but it does give me some pause. Academia tends to be accommodating to disorganized people (think the absent-minded professor trope). It's traditionally women who are penalized for being disorganized, and men who are forgiven, so if your PhD student is a woman I would rethink a lot of this language for any recommendation you write her (the prompt isn't helping much here, but we can still work to undo bias). What other talents and skills did this student show? Being smart is pretty vague.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: **Get the student to bullet-point their positive qualities and pass the list to you. If it is accurate you can put it in your own style and write it in good conscience**
*Give them the guidelines!* Ask them to give concrete justifications and instances for each positive point they make about themselves.
If there is any inaccuracy then you can say that you are not convinced - could they provide more evidence.
When the student has provided you with their ideal set of bullet points and you have ascertained that every part of it is true, then you can write the letter in good conscience. It will be up to ECR to decide whether this is sufficient.
Example
* I have demonstrated my organisational skills by successful pursuing my studies whilst simultaneously bringing up a family of n children.
* I made the following contributions at the following conferences ...
* I have always maintained a good relationship with my supervisor.
* I satisfy the following requirements of the post because ...
* Etc.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: I think there are multiple different strands to this issue, and it is helpful to try and disentangle them and think about each separately.
1. Ignoring any matters of 'how they got here', where does the student stand today?
What does their portfolio of achievements look like (results, papers, presentations, service to the community, external recognition, etc...). How does this compare to other students at this point in their careers? This may be something you can usefully discuss with other colleagues in your institution for a somewhat 'external' opinion. Is the candidate's CV realistically competitive for the fellowship? What positive things could you write in a reference?
2. What is the student's attitude to research?
Because of the way your original question was phrased, much of the discussion here has hinged on the reasonableness of students prioritising family. However, it sounds to me as though this is a red herring. The real issue is an apparent lack of engagement with the realities of academic life, e.g. a stated unwillingness to try and publish any papers. This is at best only loosely-connected to circumstances in the student's personal life.
I think it is reasonable to take this attitude into account when writing a reference. In any job, there are people who do the minimum required for their paycheck. There is nothing inherently wrong with that as an approach -- and their work may be entirely competent -- but it is generally accepted that the people who get promoted are (or at least, should be) those who perform *above* the baseline.
3. What conversation should you have with the student? What should you write?
You probably need to be frank with the student about (a) your answers to the above questions, and (b) what you are, and are not, able to write in their support. There are surely some positive things you can say, even if there are other areas where your silence might be deafening.
In reality, it seems to me that you may be overthinking your dilemma as regards this fellowship. If students typically have 1-2 papers by the time they graduate, *excellent* students probably have more. Is anyone going to look twice at your students' application?
The more concerning issue is that the student appears to have ambitions that are not matched by their current profile. This is perhaps a more useful focus of discussion: what does the student really want? Where do they want to be in 5 years? How do they see themselves in comparison to their peers? This may be an uncomfortable conversation to have - but personally I'd rather be told if I'm wasting my time and energy pursuing something not (currently) realistic.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: In my past experience several of my endorsers asked me to send them a draft, in order to spare them the trouble of recollecting all the details.
You could ask him to do the same and then have a frank, true-to-the-facts, **face-to-face discussion** on the statements contained in it. So you can position yourself in spoken words first, and then move on to the final version, which you sign, without compromising your standards.
If the candidate has a fair sense of self and fair recollections, you get a helping hand, at no embarrassment.
If he is attempting to drop names (yours), it will be easy for you to recall the milestones of your shared work experience and bring the necessary nuances into the draft, without further justification at the point of editing.
There could be better candidates with a poor supervisor who then get a reference biased downwards. If he gets a reference biased upwards, the **system of reference letters** ends up twice as unfair upon producing both false positives and false negatives. Lower sensitivity, lower specificity. So your concerns are justified. The prestige of the grant and reviewers is a secondary consideration here.
My two cents.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: Before you write anything you should talk to the ex-student.
And speak very clearly and frankly.
Acknowledge his/her intelligence and consistent commitment within the limits of the priorities that were set at the beginning of the programme.
But make it clear that you can't write in the terms necessary to win this fellowship (e.g. 'excellent', 'outstanding', 'dedicated', 'avid team player', 'very obliging colleague', etc) of someone whose commitment level was always indexed to an acceptable standard plus a bit more. To write otherwise in a letter would be untrue and unfair to the selection panel for the fellowship.
I would advise that you do NOT allude in any way to the amoral argument, i.e. that, if you did recommend someone for the fellowship and they disappointed their new employer, your bum-steer would be held against you by that institution. Any such reference would likely make you sound like an influence peddler rather than the independent-minded and ethical professional that you should be - and that we trust you really are.
So, in fairness to the student, he/she is entitled to a reference for any job that needs testimony of his/her abilities during the PhD programme. But make it clear that your reference must fairly reflect the limits as well as the strengths of his/her past commitment - and *for this particular appointment* your reference is unlikely to help in him/her being selected.
EDIT
====
The OP has not mentioned this explicitly but it may well be the fact that few current vacancies exist for new PhDs in certain fields and this man/woman with 2 children has to put food on the table. This would create an inhibition on the ex-supervisor's part in "laying down the law" to the PhD: it might be presented to other staff-members as overly harsh or insensitive to the PhD's human responsibilities. Academics are often sensitive to how their opinions and actions are perceived, however reasonable or correct such opinions or actions may be.
This elite fellowship may be one of the few available in this particular field right now and a job is a job . . .
I'd like to say otherwise but I think this possible situation is all the more reason for a frank exchange, one-on-one (no spouses or colleagues allowed in, all behind locked doors with no casual entrants able to bust in) in the supervisor's university office. I think a phone call would be a two-against-one as the PhD's spouse may be nearby and this would encourage playing the offended party when disappointed.
**None of us has the right in any sense to preferential consideration for a job based on our family responsibilities - no legal right, no moral right.**
The PhD made a choice at the start of the programme. Now he/she has to man/woman up to the consequences of their limited commitment. Going back to their supervisor and tacitly (sort of asking with their eyes rather than uttering the shameful words) expecting consideration of their parental necessities when drafting a reference for a fellowship beyond their merit is plain beyond the line. And a supervisor so asked has to be unambiguous in the response. And in the reasons why.
I would advise you to rehearse your lines before meeting the PhD. It makes it easier to say them on the day. We are all with you in spirit.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_10: I really don't understand what the question is here.
The student has openly said they only want to do the bare minimum of work.
They have indeed only done the bare minimum.
They are now either sufficiently stupid, or sufficiently brass-necked, to ask you to write a recommendation letter for them.
Just write a statement of the facts (as in paragraphs 2 and 3) and let them take the consequences of their own lifestyle choice.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: You had a talk with the candidate when the candidate clearly stated about their desire to meet the bare minimum. You can have a similar talk now along the lines - ‘The bare minimum doers cannot be recommended by me for this scholarship since it has a very high bar.’
The fact that the candidate may not get a good recommendation from you is not really a matter of discussion today. It got implicitly decided long back when you had the first discussion where the candidate decided to meet the bare minimum.
---
Caveat:
It is possible that while the scholarship sets a very high bar but does not really follow up with it. In that case there may be people who have also done bare minimum just like your student but they will get the scholarship because their guide is not as strict about the rules. If that’s the situation, then it is up to you to decide whether you want to conform to common standards or you want to stick to your guns.
Upvotes: -1
|
2020/09/24
| 916
| 4,080
|
<issue_start>username_0: I did my Masters Thesis at a reputed organization, under a supervisor who is an expert in the field. The organization is notoriously protective about the data I acquired from there which I need in my calculations in my thesis. I would like to publish a paper with his name too, though he had very little to do with my actual work. But I am afraid that if I ask him, he will say no, owing to the over-protective nature of the organization (though it was I who took the readings and collected the values myself). I have the option to publish it without naming my supervisor or the organization. What would be the right approach here?<issue_comment>username_1: Email your supervisor: Ask them whether they'd like to co-author a paper derived from your thesis. Move forwards from there. You needn't write the paper before getting your supervisors input. You should ask for guidance whilst writing the paper.
>
> I have the option to publish it without naming my supervisor or the organization.
>
>
>
Actually, you don't.
Publishing without naming your supervisor could be considered plagiarism, because they had an input. You say, *he had very little to do with my actual work*, but you should question whether you could have completed your thesis without him or whether he guided you, if so, that's his input.
Although you might be able to publish without being affiliated with the organization, you should acknowledge their support. (They provided resources for you to conduct your research.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It sounds like you need to consider three distinct issues:
1. **Trade secrets / copyright:** Is the data truly yours to publish? I am not a lawyer, but depending on location, type of employment and contracts / NDAs you may have signed, the simple fact that you took the readings and acquired the data might not make you legal copyright holder. What you may need - given that the organization in question is *notoriously protective* or even *over-protective* of their data - is permission to publish by the head of that institution, even if you do not intend to publish the entire data set but merely results derived from it. Formulations like *notoriously protective* make it seem highly advisable to look through any formal papers you may have signed prior to starting there.
2. **Academic integrity:** Even if advisors seem to have very little to do with a project, they still may have provided guidance or maybe even just the opportunity to acquire data (as in, they did the work of putting together equipment necessary to acquire the data). In those cases, it is still necessary to put the supervisor in the author list.
3. **Affiliation:** Putting the organization in the affiliations is - as far as I understand the situation - necessary, because without their equipment / setup, you could not have collected the data. Think of the CERN or DESY: Sure it's you spending the night on site when you have beam time, but you'd still put that organization in the affiliations.
I may be mistaken, but your question sounds like you feel that academic integrity warrants putting your advisor as co-author, but if you do that, people might notice that you publish work based on data acquired at that institute. And that institute might object to you publishing that data, hence you'd rather avoid "waking sleeping dogs". If that's the case, i.e. if people at the institute could object to you publishing the data, you should ask before publishing.
If it turns out they'd rather not have you publish but have no legal way to keep you from publishing, there's no harm in asking and you can always publish anyways. But if they have legal means to keep you from publishing, just publishing anyways could be a very bad idea with potentially serious consequences for your reputation and your career (plus perhaps penalties to be paid, but again, I'm not a lawyer).
Email your supervisor, ask them how to proceed. It is very likely you're not the first who wishes to publish somthing based on research done there.
Upvotes: 3
|
2020/09/24
| 718
| 3,089
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am about to defend my PhD in materials engineering. My work is related to numerical modeling of an additive manufacturing process. When I joined for my PhD, I was offered a different topic which was rigorous and 100% in my interest. However, my research topic was changed after few months into something much simpler and less rigorous but still aligning 70% to my interest.
I have couple of papers and I am decently published at my particular field. But I feel that I am doing very simple work, something even a master's student could do in a year.
I was an experimentalist before my PhD. However, I was frustrated with carrying out experiments and thus opted for a completely computational research. I think it was a mistake. I used to find doing a good Experimental work much easier than a good computational work.
Even though I like them, I am objectively bad at mathematics and physics. I shouldn't have gone for computational studies. I am good with simple work but I will never be able to get published in computational mechanics and numerical methods intensive journals (Journal of solid and structures, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering).
I publish in applied journals like additive manufacturing, surface and coatings technology, materials and design, where new numerical methods need not be developed or theories need not be implemented for successful simulations. Existing models can be repurposed for my work. I just use a open-source software to carry out my simulations without changing anything in the software's source code. I just write python and Matlab scripts to analyze the simulations.
I am worried about my future career. My work is too simple for academic or industrial positions. I don't know what to do after graduation.<issue_comment>username_1: One reason that people like yourself see their own work as "simple" is just that they are the world's foremost expert in that narrow subfield. They (you) know it better than anyone and you've lived with it for a long time so you see how it fits together. This is related to [Imposter Syndrome](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impostor_syndrome), of course.
Your dissertation and degree aren't the end of your career, but the beginning. You've crossed one "finish line", the degree, but that opens out into a world of opportunity. You aren't limited now to what you have done in the past but can start to move to adjacent areas if you wish. The degree process is a pretty narrow funnel, but, once through it, the opportunities open again.
Don't be discouraged. Leverage what you have into what you want.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: *My work is too simple for academic or industrial positions. I don't know what to do after graduation.*
While you will not win a nobel prize with such applied research, it is surely not simple work. And it is surely useful work. There is many companies in industry that will be more than happy to hire someone with this skill-set, saying this as someone working on the interface of academia and industrial R&D.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/09/24
| 464
| 1,930
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am having trouble with this study situation. Recently I was offered a master thesis topic at work where I work a part time student job. My role is Java Developer and master thesis topic is related to software development. However, the master study I am currently enrolled is in Electronics Engineering. My bachelor was also in Electronics. But my all previous full time work experiences are in the software industry.
Now I am wondering if it is a bad thing on my resume if my master thesis topic is not directly related to Electronics. Am I hurting my profile here if my goal is to find a full time job quickly?<issue_comment>username_1: One reason that people like yourself see their own work as "simple" is just that they are the world's foremost expert in that narrow subfield. They (you) know it better than anyone and you've lived with it for a long time so you see how it fits together. This is related to [Imposter Syndrome](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impostor_syndrome), of course.
Your dissertation and degree aren't the end of your career, but the beginning. You've crossed one "finish line", the degree, but that opens out into a world of opportunity. You aren't limited now to what you have done in the past but can start to move to adjacent areas if you wish. The degree process is a pretty narrow funnel, but, once through it, the opportunities open again.
Don't be discouraged. Leverage what you have into what you want.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: *My work is too simple for academic or industrial positions. I don't know what to do after graduation.*
While you will not win a nobel prize with such applied research, it is surely not simple work. And it is surely useful work. There is many companies in industry that will be more than happy to hire someone with this skill-set, saying this as someone working on the interface of academia and industrial R&D.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/09/24
| 1,338
| 5,573
|
<issue_start>username_0: (I'm a PhD student in mathematics, for context.)
What do people mean when they say that claims in a teaching statement should be "evidence based?"
For background, I have been watching my wife go through drafts of teaching statements and she has been getting pretty relentless criticism that it's not enough to say, "I design my courses to achieve X, Y, Z," she somehow needs to provide "evidence" that the course achieves these things. I used to think this meant I should really keep very exhaustive data of how my students were doing (i.e. spreadsheets with test scores), but I'm not sure that's realistic as a PhD in math (as opposed to a PhD student in education).
What can I do now, as an instructor, to facilitate writing an "evidence based" teaching statement in the future?<issue_comment>username_1: Like other academic disciplines, the literature on education research includes evidence-based results for various teaching methods. The "evidence" being a measurement of student outcomes (how well students achieved specific learning objectives) for various methods in comparison (e.g. active learning vs. lecture). One way to argue for an "evidence-based" course is to cite literature supporting your course design, teaching methods, assessments, etc.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree with your concern that sometimes "evidence based" is sometimes tossed out with less-than honorable intention. Just as on this website the use of "citation needed" varies between useful and snarky.
According to my memory and Wikipedia (proper citation needed), the term was in use in medicine before it was used in education. Ideally, it refers to policy and population-based medicine more than individual medicine, as patients have a nasty habit of getting a disease not fully studied.
In medicine, there is some push-back from those who think the role of intuition and common sense are now downplayed too much. See the following and all the follow-up:
[1] Smith, <NAME>, and <NAME>. "Parachute use to prevent death and major trauma related to gravitational challenge: systematic review of randomized controlled trials." BMJ 327.7429 (2003): 1459-1461.
In mathematics education (I am a math professor) there is similar tension, especially at the university level. There are lots of trials, some with good controls, of larger classes, like calculus or Newtonian mechanics 101. The small number of students who take more specialized classes, and the variations in student populations, classroom architecture, for example, mean that there is never going to be solid evidence from a trial that closely matches a lot of courses.
There is, however, a lot of informed writing on more advanced education that one might call a case studies. Given limited data, what can we say? For example, I have read things like the following:
[2] Braun, Benjamin, et al. "What Does Active Learning Mean For Mathematicians?." Notices of the AMS 64.2 (2017).
One can also look for items that cite an article, as there may be rebuttals.
In writing a teaching statement, or a curriculum re-design document, why not take the time to review some of the literature that is relevant? If you enjoy teaching, you should enjoy some of the education literature. Notice I said some. I would say the same about mathematics literature. Find a few sources you find informative and be sure to balance those out with common sense. Not everyone reading a teaching statement will be impressed by citations to the literature.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I think the verbage "evidence-based" is often a little misleading to a STEM researcher. When we hear "evidence", we think of proofs or scientific experiments with significant sample sizes and controlling of confounders. Clearly, such hard data is not usually available in your teaching statement. However, it's also not really what people are asking for when the want to see "evidence" - normally, plausible anecdotal data is entirely sufficient.
More generally, what people often mean when they ask for evidence is that the current text is simply not sufficiently convincing, often because it "tells" rather than "demonstrates". It's not so different to how we tell PhD applicants to write their Letters of Motivation - everybody can write that they love teaching (by itself this is a meaningless, empty statement), it's better to explain what you do that shows that you love teaching.
I can give an example from my own teaching statement for promotion to Associate Professor a while back. The initial version had a paragraph that read something like this:
>
> I redesigned course XYZ and improved student success as well as student evaluations.
>
>
>
I received the fair criticism that I should be providing more evidence, because the current statement isn't particularly convincing. So my final version instead read something like this:
>
> I redesigned course XYZ [explain changes]. After implementing these changes in 2017, the percentage of failing students dropped from an average of 20% to 13%, despite a technically more challenging exam design. Additionally, the course evaluation improved from an average of 3.2 to 4.4. This leads me to believe that my changes were effective, both in terms of student learning and student motivation.
>
>
>
This is clearly not hard proof that my course is now indeed better - maybe my exam wasn't actually harder, or maybe I just got a smarter class this year. But it's a whole lot more convincing than simply writing "I did well".
Upvotes: 5
|
2020/09/24
| 1,324
| 5,636
|
<issue_start>username_0: My goal is to serve as journal reviewers as much as possible, and I have recently changed affiliation. I have published several papers using my old affiliation's email address which is now closed since leaving, but I have set up an automatic reply message informing senders of my new email in the Office365 system which is good for 1 year after account closing. I wonder what will happen if an editor finds me as a potential reviewer based on my publications and reach out to me using my old institute's email address. Do most submission systems (eg. Manuscript Central) handle automatic replies well? Do journals or editors typically take effort to research on reviewers' recent contact info before reaching out? Also I do have an ORCID account and a personal webpage, but as my name is very common I don't think it helps much in this situation.<issue_comment>username_1: Like other academic disciplines, the literature on education research includes evidence-based results for various teaching methods. The "evidence" being a measurement of student outcomes (how well students achieved specific learning objectives) for various methods in comparison (e.g. active learning vs. lecture). One way to argue for an "evidence-based" course is to cite literature supporting your course design, teaching methods, assessments, etc.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree with your concern that sometimes "evidence based" is sometimes tossed out with less-than honorable intention. Just as on this website the use of "citation needed" varies between useful and snarky.
According to my memory and Wikipedia (proper citation needed), the term was in use in medicine before it was used in education. Ideally, it refers to policy and population-based medicine more than individual medicine, as patients have a nasty habit of getting a disease not fully studied.
In medicine, there is some push-back from those who think the role of intuition and common sense are now downplayed too much. See the following and all the follow-up:
[1] Smith, <NAME>, and <NAME>. "Parachute use to prevent death and major trauma related to gravitational challenge: systematic review of randomized controlled trials." BMJ 327.7429 (2003): 1459-1461.
In mathematics education (I am a math professor) there is similar tension, especially at the university level. There are lots of trials, some with good controls, of larger classes, like calculus or Newtonian mechanics 101. The small number of students who take more specialized classes, and the variations in student populations, classroom architecture, for example, mean that there is never going to be solid evidence from a trial that closely matches a lot of courses.
There is, however, a lot of informed writing on more advanced education that one might call a case studies. Given limited data, what can we say? For example, I have read things like the following:
[2] Braun, Benjamin, et al. "What Does Active Learning Mean For Mathematicians?." Notices of the AMS 64.2 (2017).
One can also look for items that cite an article, as there may be rebuttals.
In writing a teaching statement, or a curriculum re-design document, why not take the time to review some of the literature that is relevant? If you enjoy teaching, you should enjoy some of the education literature. Notice I said some. I would say the same about mathematics literature. Find a few sources you find informative and be sure to balance those out with common sense. Not everyone reading a teaching statement will be impressed by citations to the literature.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I think the verbage "evidence-based" is often a little misleading to a STEM researcher. When we hear "evidence", we think of proofs or scientific experiments with significant sample sizes and controlling of confounders. Clearly, such hard data is not usually available in your teaching statement. However, it's also not really what people are asking for when the want to see "evidence" - normally, plausible anecdotal data is entirely sufficient.
More generally, what people often mean when they ask for evidence is that the current text is simply not sufficiently convincing, often because it "tells" rather than "demonstrates". It's not so different to how we tell PhD applicants to write their Letters of Motivation - everybody can write that they love teaching (by itself this is a meaningless, empty statement), it's better to explain what you do that shows that you love teaching.
I can give an example from my own teaching statement for promotion to Associate Professor a while back. The initial version had a paragraph that read something like this:
>
> I redesigned course XYZ and improved student success as well as student evaluations.
>
>
>
I received the fair criticism that I should be providing more evidence, because the current statement isn't particularly convincing. So my final version instead read something like this:
>
> I redesigned course XYZ [explain changes]. After implementing these changes in 2017, the percentage of failing students dropped from an average of 20% to 13%, despite a technically more challenging exam design. Additionally, the course evaluation improved from an average of 3.2 to 4.4. This leads me to believe that my changes were effective, both in terms of student learning and student motivation.
>
>
>
This is clearly not hard proof that my course is now indeed better - maybe my exam wasn't actually harder, or maybe I just got a smarter class this year. But it's a whole lot more convincing than simply writing "I did well".
Upvotes: 5
|
2020/09/24
| 431
| 1,981
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently doing undergraduate computer science (machine learning) research, and I'm wondering how much one has to contribute to be considered a co-author (and therefore listed as such)? I've found that, during my research, questions often arise – questions for which I don't know where to look, or what I'm even looking at, but suspect that specific professors would (such as mathematics professors). If I occasionally email various professors and ask them questions (for instance, if what I've come across looks like it might be an optimization problem, then I'll email a professor who is doing research on optimization), then would this be considered sufficient contribution to be listed as a co-author?<issue_comment>username_1: Answers to occasional queries don't call for coauthorship. Several important ones from a single person warrant an acknowledgment. Someone who reads your manuscript and makes suggestions as well as corrections might qualify: ask.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: This differs widely by field. The general principle is (or should be) that co-authors contribute to the *intellectual content* of the paper. The actual ideas that make it worth publishing.
But there are fields, such as high energy physics where nothing can get done without the participation of a lot (lot) of technicians. They sometimes get listed as "authors". But people in that field understand the intent. The first few authors came up with the ideas and framework. The rest actualized it in some sense. There are a few papers in which the list of authors is longer than the paper itself.
If you are asking general mathematical questions of experts to help you understand, then it is unlikely that they would warrant authorship. This remains true even if the questions are quite deep. If you ask them to help you prove the theorems or come up with important applications that you will include, then they probably do.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2020/09/24
| 1,966
| 7,805
|
<issue_start>username_0: The question [How should I approach a Tokyo University professor to join their lab?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/30285/how-should-i-approach-a-tokyo-university-professor-to-join-their-lab) has an answer by RoboKaren saying:
>
> For professors in Japan, taking on students is a tremendous
> responsibility and burden. Unlike in the United States or Europe,
> professors are responsible for even the extracurricular activities of
> students (i.e., getting arrested; showing up drunk and groping
> someone; having an apartment so messy that the landlord complains,
> etc.). They are also responsible for the student's career after they
> graduate.
>
>
>
This sounds very interesting as I have never heard such things about any other country before.
So, I want to ask:
1. What happens/could happen to a Japanese professor if their student has e.g. a messy apartment?
2. Is there something similar for undergraduate students (who, I suppose, do not have a professor in the sense above)? Is the university somehow responsible for them?
3. Where is this responsibility stated? Is it e.g. in the law, or is it rather some non-official convention that everybody follows, or something in between?<issue_comment>username_1: From my little experience studying in Japan,
(1) No, the professor doesn't even go to your apartment room. Why would they? Unless you two are really close.
(2) If they are arrested, maybe the university will feel somewhat responsible too.
(3) Never heard of it. But they do have the culture of responsibility: don't burden other people.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Are Japanese professors responsible for their students' behavior outside the university? Legally perhaps not (I'm no expert), but culturally, yes.
>
> What happens/could happen to a Japanese professor if their student has e.g. a messy apartment?
>
>
>
The professor gets disgraced. It's like being the father of someone who later goes on to become a serial killer. Nothing directly happens to you, but it's still going to be very unpleasant. Did you fail as a father? Even if you think you didn't, perhaps your neighbours will think you did.
>
> Is there something similar for undergraduate students (who, I suppose, do not have a professor in the sense above)? Is the university somehow responsible for them?
>
>
>
Yes, if they are being directly supervised by the professor.
>
> Where is this responsibility stated? Is it e.g. in the law, or is it rather some non-official convention that everybody follows, or something in between?
>
>
>
It's a social expectation, similar to how in many societies children are expected to take care of their parents in their old age.
Check out what happened to stem cell scientist [<NAME>](https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-28658269) in 2014: his student faked data, leading to a scientific misconduct probe. Prof. Sasai was cleared of misconduct, but he felt deeply ashamed and later committed suicide. Granted, this was an academic issue, but it illustrates what Japan's expectations of their teachers are.
**Edit**: for a [non-academic situations](http://www.cosmonication.de/2006/07/teacher-role-in-japan.html):
>
> Probably the strangest tasks (in the eyes of Western teachers) are things like guarding the campus and ordering the fuel oil. They are also partly responsible for their students outside school. Japanese students have to follow several rules in their leisure time: they are not allowed to smoke and to drink alcohol, to go to discos or to have a job by the side. In case of disregarding these rules, the teacher is obliged to inform the parents or even to make home visits (cf. SCHÜMER 1999, p. 34). As one can see from all this, the tasks of a Japanese teacher go far beyond giving lessons.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The involvement of Japanese professors with the everyday life of students is excessive compared to eg European or North American universities. However, I feel a lot of exaggeration and see a lot of incorrect statements.
First of all, responsibility means a lot of things, not just legal responsibility. University groups in Japan are very tight, similar to other school-based groups, school clubs, or workplace environments. Since many university students are far from home, and they suppose to spend long hours in the university lab, the lab is their home in many ways. Because of these strong ties, if you have a problem, ideally others try to help. If you do stupid things, it also reflects badly on the others.
The positive side is that you often have more personal help than other places where dedicated offices are the ones who mainly take care of you. Since foreign students are generally pretty helpless, accepting a foreign student generally means a lot of extra pampering from the point of view of the host lab. This is from translating every single document for you to helping you to find apartments, doctor etc when you need and when your local knowledge is not enough to do so.
While these strong personal ties between lab members may be unique, the whole idea that any educational institution cares about its reputation when you do something stupid is far from unique. The difference is that if there is any problem, the Prof/head of the lab is your mediator between you and eg the university, and she/he can be in a hard place if he has the reputation to have problematic students in a country where reputation is everything. No one wants to be the professor who has to tell the university or the journalists why did you steal/rape/got into a drunken bar fight.
About specific statements:
* No one cares if you have a messy apartment. That is your problem. The owner of the apparent may not even see the place ever, neither who was your boss. Most apartments are trashed, anyways, that is why you have deposits to cover it.
* If you ask your professor as guarantor for something, then yes, she/he can have legal troubles related to the specific contract, but it is a less common scenario.
* If you commit something illegal then police contacts the university, and your prof is most probably involved in the "what to do now?" discussion. She/he will be not responsible in terms of any punishment, but it is unpleasant work and guaranteed a bad reputation. But this should not be the main reason to not rape or grope imho. Note, other universities will also be upset if you do anything illegal and will kick you out.
* Undergrad students belong to a lab from 4th year. Before that, you belong to a department, causing them the headache with your problems.
* Research misconduct is a separate scenario, but if you hire and hype a talent who turns out to be fake all through her carrier, you will get burned, independent from the country.
* About the COSMOCOMMUNICATION article: those statements are definitely not true to universities(the writer talks about high schools/middle school teachers) Campuses are guarded by security; above legal age, students can smoke, drink freely. In fact, campuses now have separate smoking corners (before you could smoke wherever), and students often drink in the lab together as it is the cheapest option. Official drinking parties are part of university life, often in excess. Drunk students may cause trouble, but Japanese society traditionally very tolerant of anything that happens under the alcoholic influence (it is recently changing). Note in other countries, too, your mid or high school will be upset if you turn up drunk or you smoke. "Discos" are packed with university students, and since scholarships are rare almost all university students work on the side ("baito"). Even foreign students with scholarships can have work permits (with restrictions).
Upvotes: 3
|
2020/09/25
| 752
| 3,184
|
<issue_start>username_0: It happens quite often that I have done some work and have got some result. If I pause working on that same problem for some time and then get back to it later, I find a mental resistance towards continuing it. For some reason, I feel intimidated to confront my own work and thus lack motivation.
How do I get rid of this mental barrier?<issue_comment>username_1: This feeling is the worst. Ways I've found to alleviate it:
* If possible, get into some kind of collaborative rhythm with someone. Having a meeting or a short-term deadline can be a really good motivator for just getting yourself over that initial hump of icky feelings about your work.
* Along the same lines: Instead of thinking "where am I in this mess, and what come next?" it's sometimes better to think, "How can I explain what I've done so far to someone else?" Again, meeting regularly with others helps. You can also accomplish this by writing up some slides as if you are presenting what you've already done for a future seminar. They will probably come in handy, and it can get you back in touch with why you liked the problem in the first place. The next steps usually come naturally when you're familiar with the details of the problem again.
* brute force method: set a 20 minute timer and force yourself to work for 20 minutes, then take a 10 minute break. Adjust the time you commit to working down as much as you need to. I keep the 10 minute break constant, as I've found longer makes me feel like I'm starting over at the bottom of the motivation hill, and shorter isn't enough of a break to look forward to. This can be highly inefficient but sometimes it's the only way to get started. For me, once I'm in the groove I typically start snoozing the timer because I don't want to stop working.
* Longer term solutions: working through your feelings of shame around your work. There are some free resources online for this: journaling prompts or meditation exercises. The point is to get used to acknowledging awful feelings like fear or shame calmly without feeling panic, and over time you decondition your anxiety. This is supposed to help with avoidance behavior, though I haven't found immediate success here. If it works, it takes a lot of practice.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: A simple tip that I use: keep a log with quite detailed notes of what you are doing and why you are doing it this way. I often found that the obstacle to continue on some previous work is to recover the train of thought which led me there, and leaving indications for my future self is very useful for this. It also has other advantages: obviously I'm prepared to explain my work from the notes, and sometimes it helps me realize in retrospect directions that I overlooked for example.
I personally use [TiddlyWiki](http://tiddlywiki.com/) for my notes but of course that's matter of personal preference, a good old physical notebook can be just fine.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I envision a better future version and/or extension of my work, and then I get motivated to make it real. You can also envision a publication, some impact, etc.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/09/25
| 612
| 1,891
|
<issue_start>username_0: Normally a python library has a paper or user manual by the same name.
<NAME>'s uproot doesn't appear to, the closest thing I can find is <https://arxiv.org/abs/2001.06307>
Should I cite that paper or cite the github repo? (<https://github.com/scikit-hep/uproot>)<issue_comment>username_1: I would citate it like this:
<NAME> et al. \*Awkward Arrays in Python, C++, and Numba. CHEP 2019 proceedings, Jul. 2020.
However, this is the publication place where it is supposed to be published but not very sure about it. However, it should work for other academics to find the paper.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: You can cite the paper using the arxiv number and add a link to the github repo in a footnote. As a basic example:
>
> **Methodology**
>
>
> In this work, we make use of the `uproot` package\* for array
> calculations [1].
>
>
> `* www.github.com/scikit-hep/uproot`
>
>
> **Bibliography**
>
>
> [1] Pivarski et al., "Awkward Arrays in Python, C++, and Numba",
> arxiv: 2001.06307
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Uproot and Awkward Array both have Zenodo badges, which link to a page that has a lot of ways to cite the software (copy-paste to BiBTeX, etc.)
* [awkward-array](https://zenodo.org/record/3952674#.X25RA3VKiEI)
* [uproot](https://zenodo.org/record/3952728#.X25QMHVKiEI)
The papers are conference proceedings that emphasize different things, not all of which are the software itself. (One of them covered user feedback in a series of interviews, very different from a design document.)
New versions (including Awkward 1 and Uproot 4, after the name swap is done) will be added to the same sequence, so if someone follows one of these DOIs to its Zenodo page, they'll find cross-references to newer versions. So all in all, I think this is a better way to cite them. `:)`
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2020/09/25
| 433
| 1,815
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a professor who is teaching an upper class man renaissance art history course. I am very passionate about this subject so I already have lots of prior knowledge.
I found some inaccuracies in her lectures and tried to confront her about them, providing sources and all. She still insists she is correct and graded me unfairly. Again, this is an upper class course and she teaches it like an introductory level course. The information she provides is inaccurate and she teaches by asking us to a memorize each picture and its statistics (name, date, medium, size, location), and covers none of the historical elements of the piece artist or era.
I'm very frustrated with her and I'm not sure what to do. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.<issue_comment>username_1: Your professor sounds simply incompetent - sorry you have to deal with this, but it is an unfortunate fact of life that one runs across such people every once in a while, in academia and pretty much everywhere else.
As for what to do: about the unfair grading, follow the process for appealing a grade. About her general incompetence, if she is *grossly* incompetent, a reasonable option would be to complain about her to the art history department. If she is only mildly incompetent, you can drop the class or leave a bad review at the end of the semester. Those are your options really, I doubt anyone will be able to offer anything substantially different. Good luck!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I have been in a similar situation with a statistics professor when I was in college. I think that the best option would be to talk to the department chair. This is assuming that what you are discussing is factual errors, of course, and not different interpretations of art, etc.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/09/25
| 1,712
| 7,389
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm frustrated by these short term contracts and would like some advice. I've been offered several one or two month extensions after my fixed term ended in May. My PI said he *may* have longer term funding next year but for now he wanted me to stay while waiting for grant results. I wondered if I should continue to live on these short term contracts and wait for the uncertain grant results or start looking for another job? I want to stay in academia.<issue_comment>username_1: My advice would depend on your options. I suggest that if you have no other good options that you continue with this. But simultaneously you can and should look for something more permanent.
A short term situation can help get you over the bridge to something better, but don't neglect the search for that something better. And if you have to leave "at a moment's notice" then be prepared to do that.
I can't say whether it is "normal". It can be a good thing if you work it right, however. Just keep your acceptance contingent on a better offer.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: No, that is not normal.
Yes, you should look for another job. Never rely solely on a possible grant for the future of your employment.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It's sometimes seen as bad form to keep a postdoc past the end of a fixed term contract (excluding the +1 year in the typical 2+1 format of my field). Though I know of labs in adjacent fields where this practice is pretty common.
The general guide is if you want someone around longer, recruit them for a more prestigious position. A 5-year job is more prestigious than 2-year, tenure track is the best, etc. Extracting continuous fixed term work is a little scammy, but it definitely happens. See also: keeping a grad student around forever in TAships so you don't have to pay them a postdoc salary when they are basically at the level of experience of a postdoc, and intimately familiar with your lab (good for you, bad for the student who probably needs more broad experience).
Definitely keep looking for another job.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: As a fixed-term postdoc you should pretty much always be looking for another job, and your PI should expect this. Unless you have more than about 18 months left it is worth keeping an eye out for other plausible postdocs - it takes time to go through the process, if you get it they may be flexible about start date, and even if they aren't you have probably gained a year or so of security if the new job is 2 years. If you have longer than that left, is there anything semi-permanent you would be competitive for? It is a bad idea to wait until your postdoc is almost finished to start looking - academic jobs are difficult to get and you should expect to make multiple applications before finding something.
So definitely start looking now, if you haven't already. Of course it is nice to have an extra couple of months to fall back on if you don't get something else, but that's how you should think of them. And you should think of the possibility of your PI getting extra funding as no different to any other potential job you haven't got yet - you need to be pursuing multiple options to give yourself the best chance to get one of them.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I actually think this is not completely abnormal- with a caveat. This is always a possibility when your PI has some additional funding floating around; however it is in most cases intended to give you a backup when you have applied for other positions but were unsuccessful. In other words, it should be used as a lifeline to give you a few more months to find another position.
If you find yourself here, hopefully it is only because you were applying for lots of other things, and are still waiting for decisions on some of them. In any case, you should be applying for **everything** as if your future career depends on it (because it does). **Do not** count on your professor being funded to keep you around, because this is far from guaranteed.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: To me, this sounds like your PI is effectively trying to give you a bit of bridge funding to keep you around while they try to get real funding for you.
This is not "normal" in the sense of a desirable situation, but you already left desirable outcomes behind when your position ended without you having either received a new contract from your PI or having obtained a new position for yourself elsewhere.
You need to be searching *hard* for a new position elsewhere. If your PI happens to land grant money in time to make you an offer for a position, that's great, since it sounds like you'd like to keep working for them. But right now, they don't have it to give you, or else they would already have done so. If you want to stay in academia, you're going to have to start finding your own positions and money, and now is the time to do so.
The only remaining question is whether you are better off staying employed on short-term contracts with your current PI while you search. Having a short gap on a CV won't hurt your search for a new position, but if you're enjoying working with your current PI and doing so won't inhibit your search, there's no reason not to stay employed while possible.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: >
> Is it normal to have several one or two month extensions after a fixed term contract postdoc?
>
>
>
Unfortunately, yes, in many places.
In the research groups in which I have encountered in the USA, UK, and Canada, more than 90% of employees are on temporary contracts. In all of them, the situation you describe happened. I've seen colleagues who were on their 17th contract extension. I've seen colleagues who chained temporary contracts at the same institute for more than 30 years. When project n ends before project n+1 started, either the advisor would find bridge money 1 or 2 months at the time, or colleague would be temporarily unemployed. When an extension happened, sometimes the new contract would come several weeks before the end of the last one. Sometimes several days before. Sometimes after, which either means working for free hoping the promised retroactive pay was going to happen, or filing UB40. If you need a visa with a contract renewal the situation is even worse.
This is my experience at universities, where each professor is more or less their own island. The situation may be a bit better at (government) research labs, but I'm not sufficiently familiar with those to comment on it specifically.
It's the fate of those who stay in Academia and are good enough to produce good research but don't manage to get tenure. I've personally managed to avoid this by securing my next post-doc well before my previous one finished, which has had the effect that I've never actually finished a post-doc to the nominal ending date; no one has blamed me for this in the slightest.
Some countries have laws or policies protecting how long one can be on temporary contracts or how many temporary contracts can be chained. In those, such researchers will be either forced out of academia or forced out of the country. If you find yourself on your 10th short contract, you may want to think about alternatives to academia — or not, if you're happy to accept the perpetual uncertainty. This is academia in 2020.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/09/26
| 287
| 1,297
|
<issue_start>username_0: If I write a paper, and another person provides a computer program that visualizes the idea, where should I mention the roles of the authors? Is the "acknowledgements" section appropriate for this? Or it is considered a bad tone to delineate the contributions of the co-authors?<issue_comment>username_1: I suggest that you work this out with your co-author and write it up in a way you both agree to. For publication, an editor might have some suggestions, but it is up to them and the standards of that journal (or conference). Just write it the way you think it should be and submit it.
However, for co-authored papers, it isn't really necessary to detail the nature of the contributions of the authors. Let the paper stand on its own. Trying to detail it might give the impression that someone's contribution was more important than the other, when, in fact, they were just "different".
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: If the journal wants you to specify which co-authors contributed which parts of the work, then the journal's guidelines for authors will tell you that clearly, and give you instructions for where in the paper to do it. If the journal's guidelines don't say anything about it, then you don't need to specify which authors did what.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/09/26
| 743
| 3,271
|
<issue_start>username_0: Since the start of the semester in September,
my university has been offering only online-only teaching,
due to COVID-19 restrictions.
As the COVID-19 situation in our local region has been improving,
the university is now switching to **mixed-mode teaching**,
i.e., some students will continue to attend classes online,
while students can apply to attend classes in person.
Teaching classes in person is something I am used to —
I would walk around,
ask students to answer questions,
etc.
I have also gotten the hang of teaching classes online —
I would show my slides by sharing my screen,
I would read the chat,
check if students have raised their hands and have questions,
give students online poll questions,
etc.
I feel quite confused about how to teach efficiently using mixed-mode teaching,
because half of the students could be online,
while the other half are in class.
* If I were to walk around and talk to the students in class
using a microphone and amplifier,
the microphone on my computer could pick up what I am saying,
but the webcam will not be able to track me.
* Right now I am considering just being present in the classroom,
and teaching online as if there were no face-to-face students in class,
while asking the face-to-face students to watch me on their phones or computers.
Maybe I could interact with the face-to-face students during the lecture breaks?
**What are your suggestions for effective mixed-mode teaching?**<issue_comment>username_1: Have you considered using a Swivl, we have used them on our ITE programme to support teacher observations. The camera follows your movement around the classroom while you wear a mic on a lanyard which is connected via Bluetooth. This would support the online learners you have in feeling more engaged? You could also prepare some flipped resources on a pallet or something similar so the group f2f and online could collaborate.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Don't do it (unless it is a pure lecture already)
=================================================
This is not to say that it is impossible, but still...
If you simply giving a lecture, or other unidirectional teaching, there is probably a better experience for the physical attendees, so you should offer it. Have some way of preferably real-time communication with the distant people. Even better, have someone else besides you monitor that and communicate questions and remarks to you as appropriate.
However, a pure lecture is (typically and most of the time) not an effective way of teaching. You want to have the students thinking and talking, preferably with each other, and also with you. In a physical context talking with some neighbours is fine and in Zoom and other electronic alternatives you have breakout rooms and similar solutions. If you want to both at the same time, the overhead is much greater and the electronic participants have the default issue that you don't really know what is going on there.
I would recommend instead going full digital and using the benefits of whichever platform you have in use for that. It might be slightly worse for those who could be present otherwise, but it will be much better for those who would be using digital means anyway.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/09/26
| 351
| 1,486
|
<issue_start>username_0: Im curious how important is the stature of an author of a recommendation letter (both for phd positions and fellowship applications).
A more answerable question would be what is the difference from a reader's viewpoint of (1) a letter that comes from a very new (< 1 year) non-tenure track faculty member with a very good relationship and experience with the recomendee versus (2) a well established tenured professor with only minor interaction/experience with the recomendee (but enough to feel comfortable writing a letter).<issue_comment>username_1: There is more to the story. A weak letter from a "strong" person means very little. If they can't say much about you to support your candidacy, based on what they know, and just send a "form" letter, then it won't have much impact.
On the other hand, a letter from someone who knows you well can read as a much more enthusiastic endorsement.
But, it is the reader who gets to judge. If they actually "know" the writer then it is likely to have more weight, rather than the abstract reputation of the writer.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: When there is a large pool of readers, the stature of your letter writer is overrated. "Famous" professors are often unknown to most other professors.
If the competition is within a single university or a small country, then stature might be important, depending on local culture. But usually letter quality will count for more.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/09/27
| 921
| 4,111
|
<issue_start>username_0: This fall, I'll be applying to PhD programs in statistics in the U.S. I'm currently a full-time student in an applied math master's program in the U.S.; until this fall, I was a part-time student and a full-time data analyst at a financial services company. It looks like I'll only be able to get two good recommendation letters from professors, so I'm considering asking my former work supervisor to write one for me. She was my supervisor for two and a half years, during which time we worked together closely on many projects. She doesn't have a PhD in statistics or any other field, but she was a data analyst before becoming a manager. What sorts of things should I ask her to write about in her letter? The professors I'm going to get letters from taught statistics classes that I took and are supervising statistical research that I'm doing; I'm guessing that I should ask my former supervisor to write about things that my professors might not touch on, but I'm not sure what those things should be.<issue_comment>username_1: The readers of such letters will normally be looking for predictions of success in the academic program and thereafter. The past is less important (what you have already done) unless it supports that prediction of success.
If the letter writer understands that, and they are supportive, then you should be fine. But a "bald" statement that "I predict the success of this person." is too easy to discount. It needs to be a bit more subtle than that.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Having written letters for students outside my discipline, here are some things she might be able to write about that your professors might not.
* Ability to work collaboratively in a team.
* Ability to explain statistical concepts to non-statistician clients/team members.
* Flexibility.
* Ability to take on new challenges, such as with a particularly difficult set of data or complicated sample.
* Ability to communicate results effectively in writing and presentations.
* Organization and reproducibility of your work.
* Work with diverse groups.
* Desire and willingness to learn new things.
These are all things that a faculty member looking to bring someone into their work group might want to know and would value. If the letter writer can provide examples of this that would be very good.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Often, PhD applicants come along with transcripts showing solid grades in their undergraduate courses. However, this does not always translate into an ability to *apply* the material in real-world settings, or to find and successfully pursue interesting/important questions. These are naturally important skills for success at research, and may be areas where your supervisor's reference can be very helpful. Some specific questions that I would value seeing addressed in such a reference (which obviously may need some refinement depending on exactly what your current job involves):
* Can you work effectively without close day-to-day supervision?
* Can you come up with useful ideas/questions/tasks for yourself? Are you an effective problem-solver?
* Are you able to weigh up the pros and cons of different strategies and arrive at a sensible recommendation for what to do next?
* How do you respond when someone disagrees with you about the correct approach to something?
* Are your solutions realistic, effective and properly-tested?
* Are you able to adapt your thinking/approach as circumstances and requirements evolve?
* How do you respond if it turns out you're wrong about something or have made a mistake?
* What do you do if you're stuck on something?
* Can you explain your work clearly and concisely? To non-specialists? To experts? In conversation? In a formal presentation? In writing?
* How do you deal with colleagues? Are you collaborative? Are you good at teaching someone something new?
* Are your technical skills up to scratch?
* How do you respond when under pressure (e.g. deadlines)?
Finally, remember that examples are worth far more than unsubstantiated statements.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2020/09/27
| 1,555
| 6,584
|
<issue_start>username_0: I used to be a PhD student in one of the top research institutes in Germany. Then I realized I have a mental illness and my mother insisted that I go to a psychologist. He told me that I have a moderate level mental illness and prescribed me some medications.
I started taking them and felt very happy but I also lost my ability to focus and was not able to work anymore. I lost my position and went to another doctor and realized the initial prescribed medication was too much. I changed my medication but I still could not focus and was very slow to work.
It took me two years to find another PhD position in a not very good university. During the PhD, I tried to replace the medications with sports and I was mostly successful.
Now I am at the end of my PhD and have become more sober. I have realized that my peers have become assistant professors or senior researchers and this makes me very disappointed. I also have realized that my supervisor is not very good and does not have many connections for postdoc positions.
I still wish I had not listened to my mother and had tried to treat myself without medication. I feel like all my dreams to have an academic career are destroyed. Do you think these feeling are rational?<issue_comment>username_1: Everyone experience a different life. Some experience life as a beautiful journey free of any hassles. Some experience it like a nightmare (As is the case for the majority of people in underdeveloped countries). Some begin with pathetic conditions, but end up achieving glory.
There was a person, who struggled a lot to reach to University. He chiefly found it difficult to graduate from high school and his teachers used to remain upset about his performance. Particularly, he and his questions seemed childish. He anyway pursued university education, but after graduation, could not find any means of earning. He started to give tuition to school kids but the parents were worried that he did not teach things that could bring academic glory in their child's marksheet. If you see, he was basically a failure compared to his peers. His peers were very successful in their goals. He was <NAME>, if you did not realize by now.
It doesn't matter whether you got a bad start in life. It doesn't matter whether you got a bad break in life. What matters is what you do **after** that bad part of life is over. Do not lose hope.
The truth is you are on an unequal footing compared to your peers. Your peers did not experience mental illness. You did. There is no basis of comparison. You have to take one big step in life, which is also known as "hope". You do not know perhaps how valuable you are, how talented you are than your peers. It is the effect of the incidences in your life that **SEEM TO SUGGEST APPARENTLY** that you are far behind.
Why not make a one time life goal to get your **life back on track?** I am 100% sure you will smile at your past and you will reach far ahead than your peers no matter which university you attend or what supervisor you have.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: *(this answer is based not on my personal experience, but I know a number of people struggling with depression, some of them also in academia, and some quite close to me)*
I don't think it's rational to decide that your academic career is hopeless. You *are* on a PhD track after all. You *are* still in a position where you can do good work, make people notice you, and ultimately get a good career going. Especially in Germany my feeling is that *where* you do your PhD is not very indicative of how well your career will be going afterwards - I know professors graduating from the smallest universities that I have never heard about in other contexts, and I know plenty of graduates from TU Munich that went nowhere after graduation.
What you need to do - and I am aware that this every difficult - is to let go of what happened in the past and focus on the future. How can you bring yourself into the best position? If your advisor does not have too many contacts you will need to work on these contacts yourself (honestly, this is nothing particularly unusual - this is the situation that at least 2/3 of PhD candidates find themselves in, not every advisor is an international superstar). If you can't get a postdoc via reference, keep your eyes open for posted positions. Go to conferences, meet people, make people be aware that you are or will be on the job market. And even if your academic career plans indeed do not work out, there will still be plenty of other opportunities for a PhD holder to pursue. Don't get married to one specific career path, and don't tie your self-worth to whether you make one specific thing work or not.
---
That said, the elephant in the room is that you *also* need to take care of yourself. Self-treating a depression with "sports" is dangerous - maybe what you are actually doing is distracting yourself without actually working on the underlying problems, and this has a tendency to only work for so long. I strongly recommend you to give therapy another shot. You don't necessarily have to agree to take medication (although, as I said in a comment above, not all anti-depressants make you tired, but it is true that pretty much all of them potentially come with some problematic side-effects), but some therapy or treatment is long-term really the only way forward. That said, you are perfectly in the right to be picky when choosing what psychologist / psychiatrist(s) to work with - many are frankly very bad at their job, and even the better ones may be a bad fit for you personally.
Again, your focus needs to be looking forward how to improve your life, not looking backwards at what went wrong before. This isn't easy for anybody, and I know that depression only makes it harder to focus on a positive outlook rather than things that went badly in the past. A lot of this has to do with acceptance - accepting that you have in fact a medical condition, and that you will need to do and deal with some things that people without that condition don't have to bother with (and some of them may indeed be impacting your ability to perform in a workplace). We accept this to be the case with non-mental medical conditions, and it's also true for depression.
Ultimately, you need to remember that long-term your health is more important than your career. You can certainly still have both, but if you decide to ignore your health because of your career there is a good chance that 10 years from now you have neither.
Upvotes: 3
|
2020/09/27
| 1,182
| 4,871
|
<issue_start>username_0: A referee wrote:
>
> The experimental results tried to confirm but did not attempt to reject the model.
>
>
>
Obviously my null hypothesis is that my model is wrong, and I rejected that hypothesis. What does the referee mean?
Details: the null hypothesis is that the model does not significantly explain the data. So I think if the null hypothesis is not rejected, then my model is not confirmed and not rejected. Confirm a model is much, much harder than not reject a model in statistics.
Did the referee mean that I have to set the null hypothesis as my model is correct and then try to reject that hypothesis?<issue_comment>username_1: Of course, it’s hard to be any certain without intimately knowing your work and you have to judge whether the referee’s request is any reasonable, but:
This sounds like a request for [Popperian falsifiability](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability): The referee wants you to perform an experiment, analysis, or similar that – given your a priori knowledge – could reject the model.
>
> Obviously my null hypothesis is that my model is wrong […]
>
>
>
I do not find this so obvious. In many cases, a model being wrong does not pose a feasible null hypothesis, because it would have to include every alternative model. There are exceptions to this such as when your claim is that some model has predictive power and you can investigate the null hypothesis that its predictions are as good as chance. But even then, your null hypothesis is something different from “my model is wrong”.
>
> Details: the null hypothesis is that the model does not significantly explain the data.
>
>
>
That does not sound like a null hypothesis. First, the word *significant* (in the sense of statistical testing) does not make sense within the hypothesis as it is a property of the data with respect to the null hypothesis. Second, what does your null population look like? For any given model, there is an infinity of models that are an even worse description of the data. Are they present in your null population?
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Here is an example.
* Hypothesis: Penguins only live in Antarctica.
* Alternate hypothesis: Penguins only
live outside Antarctica.
Experiments
* Attempt to reject the alternate hypothesis: Look in Antarctica for penguins.
* Attempt to reject the hypothesis: Look outside Antarctica for penguins.
To gain useful information, you need to do both types of experiments. The reviewer thinks you only did the first type of experiment, finding penguins in Antarctica and rejecting the alternate hypothesis. The reviewer wants both kinds of experiments because the reviewer correctly suspects that penguins live both inside and outside Antarctica.
Formally speaking, hypotheses should only be rejected based on evidence and not confirmed.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: It's been many years since I've been in Academia, so I may be wide of the mark, but my interpretation of what the referee is saying – loosely speaking – is that your experimental data is "too easy" on your hypothesis. While your experiments tend to suggest the hypothesis might be true ("*results tried to confirm [...] the model*"), they do not (in the opinion of the referee) sufficiently "stress" the hypothesis by including "difficult" data.
Taking an analogy with software engineering, it is common practice to perform [unit testing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_testing) on any new block of code. While it is important to include tests that represent "normal" input data (that "*[try] to confirm [...] the model*"), it is also important to include "edge cases" and "difficult values" that are essentially chosen to try and "break" the new code ("*attempt to reject the model*").
For a simplistic example, consider a function `add( param1, param2 )` designed to add two numbers together. A simple, if slightly naive, set of tests might check that `add(1,1)==2`, `add(2,2)==4`, `add(5,5)==10` and `add(10,10)==20`. Passing these tests gives *some* evidence that the function is working correctly, but they don't really *stress* the code. Suppose that instead of writing `result = param1 + param2` in the body of the function, you had `result = param1 + param1` (either through "finger trouble" when first creating it, or a later search-and-replace that changed more than intended). Those tests will still pass, but they won't detect that the function is merely doubling the first parameter.
In conclusion, I believe the referee is saying that while the experimental data you've included does tend to support your hypothesis, you've not chosen a *sufficiently wide range of experimental data*, and that you cannot claim that the hypothesis appears to be true *even in the face of experiments deliberately designed to disprove it*.
Upvotes: 3
|
2020/09/27
| 3,170
| 13,624
|
<issue_start>username_0: I will be giving lectures for the first time this semester starting in 2 weeks (online due to covid), some students already started to add me and follow me on social media (LinkedIn mainly for now). I rarely use LinkedIn, and really %99 of the people there are people I know in real, collaborated with, from college etc. It is already a messy jungle. I see sometimes an overly passionate kid who made a request and I don't mind accepting their request, but I also want to be fair to all so I don't. I recently began to enjoy Twitter and although most of my followers are professionals I sneak in personal likes, comments, tweets and I enjoy it that way, but with students following I don't know if I will be able to 'act human' (which I wouldn't mind if I were already an experienced, confident, accomplished professor (those are the best of the people) but at this time I am not comfortable with it). Do you change your name to not be found easily (I want colleagues to find me though)? Do I go private? I post during workshops/conferences (which makes most of my new connects) and often like/comment on others as well. Do you accept their requests? Where is your line with social media?<issue_comment>username_1: We created our own in-house social media that is under our control to solve this exact problem. We created our own Discord server with channels for specific courses and some general, fun and support channels. The students come in with their own discord IDs but have to supply the administrator with their student ID to unlock access. So for the teaching staff they can be de-anonymised and poor behaviour dealt with.
This leaves any out-of-work social media out of the equation as it attenuates the need to link up with other media and also give us control over the messages and deal with "shit storms".
We have separate mechanisms for "in-class" chat which takes place in MS Teams, Canvas VLE and other tools. Students now have more channels than they can ever need!
This of course is a departmental approach that may not work for individual academics.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Years ago I used to accept student friend requests on the Facebook platform, but I came to regret doing that. At some point I stopped accepting student friend requests on social media.
<NAME> in *How to Teach Mathematics* makes the point that you need some amount of social distance from your students to hold their respect, and to not do that is a common mistake for younger/newer faculty. I've certainly walked that path myself. (U.S. system here, maybe that varies by institution and/or country.)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: My line:
On the first day of classes I tell the students that I don't want to be contacted by social media or by any means other than the school e-mail. The school also gives students a nice way to provide username_10ymized feedback, which no one has ever used so far.
If students send me friend requests on Facebook et al (which I don't really use), I delete the requests (it's happened a few times).
If students send me friend requests on LinkedIn anyway, I accept the requests after the end of the semester. (I can imagine a scenario where I might want to delete the request, but it hasn't happened yet.)
On at least 4 occasions I remember, former students messaged me via LinkedIn about recommendation letters for graduate school, advice regarding internships, etc. I don't know, maybe they don't have access to school e-mail anymore. I'm a little ambivalent, but so far nothing bad has happened.
I have no doubt that some students create class-related social media discussion groups. I also trust that if something happens that needs my attention (e.g. many people not understanding the material), they will contact me by school e-mail or make an appointment for office hours.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: As far as social media goes, especially Twitter in your case, you should be **very** careful about who can see your activity. Particularly if you find yourself gravitating towards any type of "controversial" conservative political content, the stuff that you do on social media can be incredibly consequential as is evident by the University of British Columbia Board of Governor's Chair 'voluntary' resignation for liking a tweet from <NAME>. Keep in mind, you might not gravitate to that material now, but Twitter has a way of dragging people into the fray.
You should always be aware of the fact that what you think is reasonable can be completely taken out of context and weaponized against you. Unless your contacts are people that you trust on a personal level, you should really practice keeping your social media network tight. I understand your want to 'act silly' on the internet, but you need to be aware that the enjoyment that you get out of 'acting silly' could be weaponized against you by your own students that view the world and your actions from a very different lens.
Besides, what do you get out of having students on your Twitter feed? If you want to maintain some type of social connectivity with students, particularly after classes, then LinkedIn might be the best bet given the professional themes around it. Ultimately, you need to weigh the benefits you get from your own social media activity with the real possibility that you could lose your career over something as juvenile as liking a tweet.
<https://tnc.news/2020/06/21/a-ubc-exec-liked-conservative-tweets-now-he-has-apologized-and-resigned/>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I get LinkedIn requests constantly from current and former students. I ignore them unless I have significant additional contact with the student outside of the classroom, such as if they work for me as a research assistant.
No one ever asks why I didn't add them and, to my knowledge, no one has ever taken offense.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: My university recommends that faculty never interact with students on social media.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: I think there is no general answer regarding all social media, but that the answer should depend on *what you do on that particular site*.
If you use LinkedIn for building a professional network only and do not post or like anything, than accepting students there seems perfectly fine. There may even be benefits for you (seeing what graduates become or leading to direct contacts to companies). If you use an account (like Facebook or Twitter) for private stuff, you probably shouldn't accept invitations from students. Also you need to be aware that some platforms are asymmetric in the way that people can see what you are posting without your need to allow that. Using such a site and actively blocking students can be a hassle (and may look strange).
Finally, there are "social media" channels that can be temporary and partly username_10ymous (e.g. I created a channel in a chat app dedicated to a specific course and students are invited with a link but can choose to be username_10ymous or not - apart from that channel, no information about accounts is exchanged). I do not see any problems with that.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: There is no problem with using Twitter if you use the proper privacy settings. Under the tab "settings and privacy" you can select: "Protect your Tweets: Only show your Tweets to people who follow you. If selected, you will need to approve each new follower."
And the "Receive messages from anyone" option is unchecked by default, so you should make sure this is indeed unchecked.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: Coming from a current student and grower-upper of this new era of information, once a three-letter agency employee, who has done very personal tutoring, coaching, etc- I strictly keep a social media account (a pseudonym so to speak) separate from my *real life* identity. I hardly use social media with my own name. It may come from a lack of written qualifications yet (working on it) and my rather contrarian writing, but social media is not a good place to use your real identity unless it is strictly for friends and family unrelated to work or school.
I will often, even just in the process of citing works, look for the author's social media accounts. I like to get an idea of whether I feel I have, if I disagree with them or find their work too easily criticized, tinted them poorly when perhaps they have changed their mind, seem to be in a different state of mind now, etc. Be aware that if not protected (which I will also explain below) they can find *everything* you have ever posted, done, or liked. There's no guarantee even if protected they can't. Twitter is not incredibly safe.
Protecting your tweets on Twitter gives an air of elitism, and I mostly regard those folks as having something to hide (if you don't want to be seen, why bother with the website?), whether it be opinion or just not realizing the point of Twitter is some measure of social exchange. I agree fully with protecting your messages from anyone.
Following this, I would keep one for my real-life identity (or my expressed published name/identity) that is strictly for professional use. Example: speaking with another professional colleague, making a declarative statement on a subject and needing my qualifications available, announcing papers I release, announcing awards, generally just a portable resume and new-age LinkedIn since LinkedIn will become a joke as soon as people realize it's mostly falling out of favor with the newest generation of workers. All I get are scammers.
Students may add this account, *but this would be the account where there will be no interaction with them whatsoever*. Sneak in likes if you would want, but remember: everything you do that is against the grain they expect, whether it be liking a snarky contrarian comment, will be taken much further than you predict it to. The passionate kid will take the like as confirmation he's right when he should likely be challenged and helped in making his argument/belief stronger. An exception would be a graduate after the fact whom I may want to promote in some way (assuming I have such clout if it were a professional account).
I would protect the DMs of absolutely from everyone, and give a contact email for questions that is officiated (@overpriceduniversity.edu) (maybe even a separate one) since a lot tends to get filtered from non .edu emails if they were to contact you (not always true ofc). There is certainly a good deal of information exchange happening on social media, aside from the social part- much of it is nonsense, but to see and understand the honest, kneejerk reactions of individuals to certain topics can help one understand the general public opinion, even if the topic is fabricated.
I hope my perspective helps a bit, since in these coming decades, this integration of life, the internet, schools online, and our coming pandemic of total information access obfuscated by FUD is going to be much more difficult to navigate for those who did not grow up in it.
In summation: my line is in bold but italic. No underline. ***/***
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: Simple solution: I do not have, and have never had, an account with any of the major social media websites.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: I have tiers of social media and things I will and won't say on each platform.
So,
**LinkedIn**: I will accept a connection from anyone I have a genuine professional relationship with. This includes students from my department who have taken my classes. I say no to people who I have no connection with, or I know socially. I don't really post anything on LinkedIn.
**Twitter**: I mostly use twitter for professional, and professional adjacent content. I don't vet who can follow me, or who can see my tweets, but people who know me socially are going to get bored of the academia talk pretty quick. I will follow students I have a significant relationship with: graduate students in my department who work on things in the same area as me, people I've co-authored papers with etc. I never say anything on twitter I wouldn't mind saying at the top of my voice in the middle of campus with my boss watching. I generally keep away from national/party politics, but do comment on academic politics (e.g. I post quite a lot of union content).
**Facebook**: I have my Facebook completely locked down so people who aren't my friends can't see anything. People on here are almost entirely non-professionally related to me — I don't even really have other academics from my department, who I would normally think of as friends. I'm much freer about what I say on Facebook.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_12: The only hard and fast rules I keep to in regards to social media are:
* I don't conduct any school business whatsoever over social media. If students have questions about class material, grading, etc. it needs to go through official (FERPA-compliant) channels.
* I don't add any students myself (current or former) on any social media.
On the other hand I won't deny requests from students either.
From the perspective of minimizing your political liability, I agree with the other answers here that the best policy is to keep social media on complete lockdown. But to be frank: life's too short to live it locked away in a deep, lightless room of the ivory tower (obviously, other reasonable people might disagree). Of course using social media as a public figure carries risk and I accept that risk and its potential consequences.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/09/27
| 3,242
| 12,165
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am passionate about research, I believe in science and I get excited about it. For this reason, I have decided to start a PhD. Last year I started a PhD in a foreign country but it turned out to be unsatisfactory from different points of view - the work was poorly organized. The supervisor was not providing guidance and knowdlege and I decide to try to change the situation. I won other 2 position in Europe and this was a surprise for me, it means that people really see that this is what I really want to do. Having 2 options was not easy and in the end I decided to go in a very good university in Sweden with a very good project and a lot of industrial connections. My boyfriend is currently living there and he told me how well the PhD are structured in Sweden. I am very very sure that on the working aspect I will have absolutely no problems. I have a lot of fears when it comes to the weather. I have lived in central Europe and it was not sunny everyday and for me it did not matter. Soon I will have to leave my country for Sweden and I started to not sleep at night, to abuse a little bit of alcohol (I am ashamed of it, but yes) and sometimes I cry all the time saying that I do not want to spend my years there. When I think about the project and the university I am very very happy, when I think about the country less, because when I was there, I had not really a good feeling. I do not want to quit my second PhD. I want to start a new PhD being sure of what I am doing.
What should I do? It would probably mean that I will not have a possibility anymore and so I have to give up the idea of getting a PhD. I don't know why I changed my mind, if it is just fear or I really do not want to go.
Please, do not close the topic, I really need an advice. How much social life and location can make a difference in your life? I would like to hear some experiences.
Thank you!<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I do not want to quit my second PhD.
>
>
>
It would be unfortunate if you needed to quit -- but not the end of the world.
>
> I want to start a new PhD being sure of what I am doing.
>
>
>
In my experience, it is rare to ever be completely sure of what you are doing.
>
> How much social life and location can make a difference in your life?
>
>
>
A lot.
>
> What should I do?
>
>
>
Ultimately, only you can say.
That said, you've already accepted an offer in Sweden. You're very happy with the university, and apparently your boyfriend is there. In your shoes, personally, I would go and try to make the best of the situation. It won't be for the rest of your life, and if things go badly then you can reevaluate later.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Sweden consistently ranks in the top-ten happiest countries in the world. See, for instance, this ranking from 2019:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Happiness_Report#2019_report>
It is natural to feel anxious when considering moving to a new, foreign country. It is a big step to make. If you feel like you occasionally need to indulge in a socially-accepted drink of your choice to quench that anxiety, that is fine, as long as it remains within reasonable limits. So don't beat yourself up about it, and make sure it is limited to a phase that passes.
The project, the university, and your boyfriend all seem to be factors pointing towards a non-zero probability that you will have a good time. The negative factors you outline, read a lot more confused to me:
>
> I have a lot of fears when it comes to the weather. I have lived in central Europe and it was not sunny everyday and for me it did not matter.
>
>
>
You have fears when it comes to the weather, but your previous negative experience did not matter to you?
I know people who did their PhD in Finland, who were not necessarily happy about the short days in Winter, but as a converse you also get loads of long sunny days in Summer, which can be nice.
>
> when I was there, I had not really a good feeling
>
>
>
Can you formulate why? I've been to Sweden three times, and it appealed to me. This needs not be anyone's experience, but you also don't provide us with a compelling reason on what's wrong with Sweden.
I see many factors that would allow you to succeed in Sweden. You provide us with a general feeling of anxiety, which is not to be discarded! It is important to address those feelings, and writing about it on StackExchange might help you already. However, it is also not really a good reason to reject a good opportunity. Your original post does not provide us with reasons why you would not succeed in Sweden. Culturally, Sweden and Central Europe are quite far apart. So why not try? Even if it doesn't work out, that won't trap you in Sweden forever.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: We can't really answer this question because it's about your preferences. It's obvious you are expecting to suffer in your new program. Is that worth quitting your program? That depends on the severity of what you are experiencing and how treatable your problems are. Based on what you wrote, you don't really have the experience of living there yet and are suffering from anticipation anxiety. It's quite strange to judge Sweden harshly without having given it a fair shot. Moreover, things that you don't like about a country are frequently treatable (sun lamps, for example).
Even if it is difficult to live there, is it worth quitting the program? If it were me, no. You are only going there for a few years, not the rest of your life. If it were me I'd bear down and get it done without complaining. In fact, I did not like the location where I got my Ph.D. at all, but I never thought of quitting.
But I may have very different preferences than you do. You say you are passionate about research, but I think maybe you need to take stock of your true preferences and see if that is really the case. Based on what you read here, I don't see research as your primary motivation. Quite frankly, if the location of your Ph.D. is that major a consideration for you, you may be happier with a different life than the one you will get by pursuing a Ph.D.
Good luck, whatever you choose.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> Last year I started a PhD in a foreign country but it turned out to be
> unsatisfactory from different points of view - the work was poorly
> organized. The supervisor was not providing guidance and knowdlege and
> I decide to try to change the situation.
>
>
>
I'm sorry to hear that, but this can happen in any country!
>
> I won other 2 position in
> Europe and this was a surprise for me, it means that people really see
> that this is what I really want to do.
>
>
>
It could mean that, but it's hard to know exactly what something like this *means*. Maybe the reason you got in was because your grades were excellent and the admissions committee found their interactions with you to be very professional.
>
> I am very very sure that on the working
> aspect I will have absolutely no problems.
>
>
>
I appreciate this, but *please* be careful. I've heard about too many PhD projects go sour, even when the student thought the lab they were entering was a *perfect* fit. To be "very very sure" that there will be "absolutely no problems" seems naive to me, just be careful not to expect "absolutely no problems": there's always some problems in a PhD journey.
>
> I have a lot of fears when it comes to the weather.
>
>
>
10 million people live in Sweden every day, and 20 million live in Scandinavia.
That being said, some people can absolutely not be comfortable in hot/humid weather, and some people can absolutely not tolerate the cold. Stockholm, Uppsala, Gothenburg and Malmo are really not too different from a lot of other cities in UK, Northern Europe, Toronto, New York City, Montreal, etc. Nights may be longer and days shorter, but for millions of people this is reality. I have friends at Umeå University, and *that* is far enough North that weather may start to become more of a concern. Is your university going to be all the way up there, or further South like the other cities I mentioned (you don't have to say the exact city if you don't want)?
>
> I have lived in central Europe and it was not
> sunny everyday and for me it did not matter. Soon I will have to leave
> my country for Sweden and I started to not sleep at night, to abuse a
> little bit of alcohol (I am ashamed of it, but yes) and sometimes I
> cry all the time saying that I do not want to spend my years there.
>
>
>
I think there's something more going on than just the "weather". Your boyfriend is there, you have spoken of the Swedish research group with utmost high regard, and Sweden is considered one of the best countries in the world to live in, and most universities are in the South which isn't too different weather-wise from Canada, northern USA, northern Europe, and UK (hundreds of millions of people's homes!). But feel free to say if the university is Umea University or in a similar location.
There's not enough information to know what underlying causes might be causing you to abuse alcohol, but universities in Sweden also have world-class health care and mental health care (counseling, therapy, psychotherapy, etc.).
>
> When I think about the project and the university I am very very
> happy, when I think about the country less, because when I was there,
> I had not really a good feeling.
>
>
>
You say "very very happy" for the university and project, but "less happy" for the country. It sounds like the pros outweigh the cons. You did not say "very very unhappy" for the country and "less unhappy" for the university and project.
>
> I do not want to quit my second PhD.
> I want to start a new PhD being sure of what I am doing. What should I do?
>
>
>
What is the other option?
>
> It would probably mean that I will not have a
> possibility anymore and so I have to give up the idea of getting a
> PhD.
>
>
>
Also, there's nothing wrong with not getting a PhD either. I know people that quit their PhD programs and hate themselves for it, but they are further along in their careers than I am, and I'm jealous of them for it. Scientific American has this article called "[The Emotional Toll of Grad School"](https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/the-emotional-toll-of-graduate-school/) which is another reason why I feel that doing a PhD can sometimes be over-rated.
>
> I don't know why I changed my mind, if it is just fear or I
> really do not want to go.
>
>
>
It seems like there's something more than just the weather, that's bothering you :)
>
> Please, do not close the topic, I really need an advice. How much
> social life and location can make a difference in your life? I would
> like to hear some experiences.
>
>
>
I lived in the following countries:
Age 0-21: **Canada**
Age 21-25: **UK** (PhD)
Age 25-26: **Japan** (postdoc)
Age 26-27: **Singapore** (postdoc)
Age 27-28: **Japan** (postdoc)
Age 28-29: **Canada** (postdoc)
Age 30-31: **USA** (postdoc)
Age 31-Now: **Canada**
During those years I also spent several months as a "visiting researcher" in Germany, Hong Kong, Mainland China, and other countries.
Every country has it's differences, and in some of those countries I sometimes literally felt like I was living in Hell because I could speak the language, plus the culture and expectations of me were completely different from what I was used to. But I don't regret a single one of those experiences. All the ups and downs made me what I am today, and I'm smarter and wiser than I would have been if I stayed in one country my whole life. If you can speak English, language won't be a big problem in Sweden, and the culture won't be too different from what you're used to in Central Europe. I know people that had terrible experiences in some countries, but I've never heard of it happening in Sweden (that doesn't mean it can't happen, and I appreciate that everyone is different and that you have specific concerns about the weather).
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2020/09/27
| 1,257
| 4,779
|
<issue_start>username_0: Yale has changed [their language](https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/09/18/yale-strikes-freshman-upperclassman-official-publications), but I don't see a clear alternative here.
At this point, I think referring to students by their specific class years ( "First-Years and Sophomores" vs. "Juniors and Seniors") is the best alternative for now, particularly because of the [ambiguity around](https://english.stackexchange.com/a/344215/100692) what class years the terms "underclassman" and "upperclassman" really refer to.<issue_comment>username_1: I doubt that you will find a widely used term at the moment. Language takes a while to catch up to social changes and the standards of what is acceptable differ around the world. Most new changes to the language are seen as clumsy at first and take a while to reach acceptance and it may initially be only locally in any case. Even this system, which tries to be gender neutral, balks at "themself".
Change will come. Do the best you can in the short term and be aware that some choices are exclusionary.
And even "underclass" has a social meaning outside academia, that may be unintended. Language is hard and only imperfectly mapped to thought processes.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Referring to years verbosely makes sense to me.
>
> First-years and sophomores
>
>
>
>
> First and second years
>
>
>
Or if you want a different meaning
>
> First through third years
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I think Yales' terminology is appropriate, though I find it may be more prudent to refer to the program being attempted (undergraduate, graduate, master's, doctoral, post-doctoral, etc) and just append First-Year; is it important to dictate which year they are in aside from the first?
If more specificity is truly needed, Last(Final?)-Year may also be applied in that way, or 'Last-Year Graduate Student.' If in the middle years, state the year as suggested. That seems more than appropriate.
First/Last go together, as opposed to Initial/Final, so First/Last would be at least consistent in its lexicon.
Such as a First-Year Undergraduate being a literal first of the first year.
A First-Year Graduate student being the first year of the graduate program.
Etc.
My own criticism of my suggestion is that it may not translate into other academic systems cleanly if their progression structure is different. I can only speak for the American way.
I cannot yet comment so I apologize for responding to the other answer and if inappropriate can be edited out by whomever. In regards to 'themself', it does give me a bit of trouble in syntax. Despite being in both communities it is relevant (linguistics and LGBT), it feels *wrong* to say out loud. In my own writing and having to reference, speak with and about gender-neutral individuals, 'themselves' is read just as well and can be the same as 'themself' depending on the syntax of the sentence. "They completed the task themselves." as long as the article is defined already, it sounds appropriate. If it isn't, it will sound, again, a bit strange. "Ash completed the task alone." resolves the issue completely, and avoids repetitive pronoun usage.
This is a failure of English with the lack of a third person singular neuter. Many other languages have it. Apologies again for the digression, but it may still be valuable in gender-neutral academic writing. I would appreciate any comments or perpsective on this.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: The phrases "lower-division students" and "upper-division students" are often used to refer to students in the first two years or the last two years (respectively) of a four-year degree. See, for example, [this page from U. Texas Austin:](https://catalog.utexas.edu/general-information/academic-policies-and-procedures/classification-of-students/)
>
> Undergraduate students are classified as freshmen, sophomores, juniors, or seniors, based on the number of semester credit hours passed and transferred, regardless of the hours’ applicability toward a degree. ... **Freshmen and sophomores are referred to as lower-division students; juniors and seniors, as upper-division students.**
>
>
>
See also [this page](https://www2.calstate.edu/apply/transfer/Pages/lower-division-transfer.aspx) and [this page](https://www2.calstate.edu/apply/transfer/Pages/upper-division-transfer.aspx) from Cal State classifying transfer students in this way. This dichotomy is also (and perhaps more frequently) applied to courses, for examples, see [UCLA](https://www.registrar.ucla.edu/Academics/Course-Descriptions/Course-Numbering-and-Description-Guide) and [U. Washington.](https://registrar.washington.edu/curriculum/assigning-course-numbers/)
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/09/27
| 1,523
| 6,739
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently working on my MSc thesis under a PhD candidate's supervision. She has very recently published a paper as first author in a well-known journal where she claims to have followed methodology used by her colleagues and co-authors (in their other papers). However, I know that this is not true and that the PhD candidate is fully aware that she's lying too. I know that she has lied because the thesis of MSc students who worked under her previously state something entirely different from what the PhD candidate has cited as source in her paper.
Question: What I don't know is if this act qualifies as scientific misconduct and/or how severe this is. If yes, then what is an act like this called?
Some of the differences between the methodology she has actually used, and the one she claims to have used are minor. The issue is that there are so many of these "minor differences" that they might end up having major influence on the results. e.g for how long samples were centrifuged, rpm of centrifuge, temperature settings of gas chromatography machine, etc.
The major (?) difference pertains to composition of nutrient broth (microbiology) which I'm confident she has never even prepared throughout the course of her PhD.
Unfortunately, it's clear to me that the PhD candidate's supervisors don't care about this since they seem to be working in tandem to increase each other's h-index. So, reporting to them won't make much of a difference. But for my own sanity, I would like to know just how big of a deal is this kind of act?<issue_comment>username_1: The issue here is not citation, it is correct reporting. If a method varies from the cited version, the appropriate thing is to say something like "Method from FrozzBozz et al.[73], modified by change of RPM from 3000 to 6000, growth media from LB to M9, and phase of the moon from new to full."
But did the method actually differ?
Now, there are definitely arguments to be made about the level of detail that is necessary and appropriate in protocol reporting. For example, the details about how a sample is shaken may or may not matter, but are often omitted because people are often simply not very systematic about this. Likewise, layout of samples on a 96-well plate is typically not reported, even though there are sometimes locality effects. Thus, many of the things that you are concerned about might be reported by one group but not by another.
The key distinction between reportable and non-reportable method details is whether a reasonable reader might expect them to have a significant impact on outcome. In many fields, this is more clearcut: for example, an algorithms paper reporting the number of iterations required to solve a problem would not declare the system the algorithm is run on, but one reporting the time of execution would. In biological sciences, however, it is often quite unclear and reasonable people have very different perspectives here. Thus, the Ph.D. candidate might not even believe that they have meaningfully changed the method at all!
My advice it to start by approaching it from this perspective, in a non-confrontational manner. Start by just asking for help in understanding the differences in method. If they do not explain in a way that makes sense, then it would be appropriate to escalate to the PI that ultimately supervises both of you, and ask for help in figuring out what details of method variation are appropriate to include. No need to get into accusations of lying at this stage, and you both might end up learning new things in the process.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Hanlon:
>
> Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
>
>
>
This appears to be an error or laziness, rather than misconduct. These things often happen when a student does an experiment and the supervisor writes about it. The supervisor thinks they know what the student did, but they don't.
Usually it is not a big deal. However, if the error has life safety implications, you might still need to point it out.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: There are a lot of experimental details in this area of science that often are really arbitrary in the end. Centrifuge settings are a very common example of that. In many cases it really doesn't matter if you keep stuff in the centrifuge for too long or at higher g than necessary. But on the other hand there is often no real benefit to trying to determine the actually necessary settings. For non-critical steps it is very, very common to use somwhat excessive settings that you know are generally reliable, but almost certainly are not optimal. In those cases, if someone would centrifige a bit harder or a bit shorter, it wouldn't matter at all.
In chemical reactions there is another case that happens very often. Reaction times up to 8 hours are kind of common, above that you'll quickly get to "over night". Performing a reaction for exactly 14 hours is kind of annoying if you also want to sleep, and in many cases keeping the reaction for a bit longer doesn't do any harm. So it makes sense to just try the reaction over night, and if that works without issues, you generally don't try to figure out if anything between 8 hours and over night would work, it simply wouldn't get you any benefit.
Knowing which parameters are critical, and which ones are arbitrary is a very important skill. It's often impossible to determine that from papers alone. Even the composition of the growth medium can be irrelevant, depending on what exactly you do with your bacteria.
Strictly speaking, you really should mention any deviations from the protocol in your paper. If you deviate, you didn't do it exactly as mentioned in your reference and you should mention that even if it doesn't matter at all. Personally I'd strongly prefer to list the methods explicitly in every paper anyway (at least for the major methods used), chasing down a series of "as performed in citation XYZ" is no fun at all. But in the area I worked, there are quite a few changes that might look significant that I probably would ignore entirely. Depending on the exact topic, there can be a lot of non-critical steps that don't affect the result in the end. They might affect the yield a bit or something like that, but not the conclusion of the paper. Of couse omitting these details isn't entirely correct, it would be better to be exact here, but it's also not really scientific misconduct.
Answering your question is impossible without the exact details and domain knowledge. It really depends on whether the parameters that differ are important or not. I personally wouldn't assume misconduct from these facts alone.
Upvotes: 3
|
2020/09/27
| 1,039
| 4,310
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am creating all homeworks, quizzes (two per week), exams (2x75 questions), review questions (2x75), projects, 20-page lecture notes (two per week), and answering all student e-mails, along with grading, every week for a large class.
The professor is new to this course and only has the lecture slides ready by Friday night so I am expected to prepare everything for the week within a few days. The professor has created no content for this course at all, and I put in at least 40 hours a week.
For context, I am a biotechnology graduate student at a large R1 US university. My contract says that I am paid $15/hr and set at 20 hours a week.
Is the professor allowed to have me doing this much work?<issue_comment>username_1: In most institutions, a TA position comes with an associated number of hours per week the be expended. In some cases, the TAs are actually paid by the hour, required to file timecards. In other cases (like my own Ph.D. experience), the TAs are given a number of credit-hours, just as though being a TA is taking a course (and it often is effectively a course on how to teach).
In either case, you first need to find out from your employer (the department, not the instructor) what the actual expectation is. Typically this will be somewhere between 5 and 24 hours per week---the lower end tends to be "grader only" TAs, the upper end for more extensive responsibilities like yours. If you are regularly working a lot more than that (as it sounds like you are), then something is wrong. Maybe you are being given too much work, maybe you are not working efficiently---it is impossible to tell without knowing your far more about you and your situation.
What I would recommend, however, is to start by spending the next week or two documenting the actual hours you work on each task, and then bring that to the instructor for a discussion about how to address the issue. If they are not receptive, then the next step is your department leadership.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> The professor has created no content for this course at all, and I put in at least 40 hours a week. Is the professor allowed to have me doing this much work?
>
>
>
It depends on the individual university, but in practice **almost certainly not.** I a math professor in the United States, and by that standard this sounds absurd. From what I can tell, the professor's behavior is completely out of line.
When I was a TA, I was responsible for: running discussion sections, holding three office hours a week, grading, and answering emails. And, if I felt nice (which I generally did), running review sessions before exams. *That's it.* I was not responsible for creating any of the content for the course.
**I would recommend making an immediate appointment with the graduate director, and asking what the expectations of your TA role are.** Remember that, as a graduate TA, the **graduate director is your boss,** *not* the professor for whom you teach. If your graduate director tells you that writing exams or preparing lecture notes is not within the scope of your duties, then you can and should ignore any requests from the professor to do it anyway.
Good luck to you!
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: The two salient points here are: "*I put in at least 40 hours a week*" and "*I am paid ... 20 hours a week*", which is a mismatch and you shouldn't be required to do so much.
The follow-up question is whether you are paid for 20h/wk annually and required to do extra during semester/term? Is the workload exceptionally high right now at the start of term, but will calm down in the coming weeks?
In either case you should talk to your professor first and explain that this is a very large amount of work to complete and goes well beyond your contracted hours (in the short term at the minimum). Listen to what they say in reply and what changes they propose and see if you can resolve it between yourselves. If you are unable to resolve it between yourselves after following up on the changes you agree then you can raise it higher within your department. I would personally avoid escalation before taking the chance to discuss it with your professor and ensuring it's not a simple misunderstanding or poor-estimate from their side.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/09/28
| 1,684
| 6,917
|
<issue_start>username_0: The referee process is technically double blind but I managed to figure out the identity of the referee by writing style. I am 100% sure about this finding.
The referee rejected my paper and I cannot understand several points raised by the referee. May I send a very polite and humble email gently ask for a little bit further comments? To my understanding this action does not break any rules.
Will the referee hate me for this, or if the referee later complains to the editor about my email, will the editor punish me?
Re: This thread is not about referee identification. Besides writing style I have one other ethical source to confirm that identity. I almost never claim 100% but in this case I can claim this.<issue_comment>username_1: If the review is unclear, you should contact the editor for clarification, and not the referee. This would be true even if the peer review was not blinded. The editor is in charge of peer review.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: No you should not contact the suspected referee. You may think you're 100% sure but there is still a chance you're wrong. Also anonymous reviewing is there to give the referee a chance to be honest and critical and thus not fear retaliation if they reject a paper. You emailing them (if you have the right person) breaks this. Would you be as critical a referee if you started getting emails from authors after rejecting their papers? Especially if the author is more senior than the referee?
If you want more information, ask the editor. You can also ask the editor to ask the referee if they wish to be de-anonymised to make communication easier. Also at the end of the day, the editor rejected your paper, while the referee only suggested rejection. This may seem a minor distinction but it means it is the editor's decision (who could if they want reject the referee's suggestion if they thought the referee was wrong).
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes you can contact the referee, and this is probably your only chance of getting useful feedback. The referee's reaction to such an unusual request very much depends on their personality. The worst that can happen is that your email gets ignored.
A similar situation happened to me once. I was the referee in that case. But the author raised the subject orally, a long time after the article was rejected, and was shy about asking direct questions or claiming explicitly that I was the referee. So I did not confess and dropped the issue. If I had been contacted in writing with specific questions, I would surely have answered.
Contacting the editor is hopeless. Most probably, the editor does not know your article in enough detail to say anything helpful. And editors tend to be very busy.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: There is no way you can be 100% sure based on writing style. Indeed, if such a writing style is so distinctive, another referee in your field could mimic it to deliberately mislead you. Several people have told me that they write their reviews to give the impression of being from a different country (US vs UK English, dropping articles to appear Russian, deliberate mistakes with common words to look French or German).
Regardless, it seems like a terrible idea to go outside the peer-review system. Contact the editor if you have questions regarding a referee report.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: Don’t. It is entirely inappropriate to contact a referee unless the editor has given you explicit permission to do so. (Conversely, as a referee it is inappropriate to contact an author unless you have the blessing of the editor.)
If you think the report is unclear on some points, answer them to best of your ability and highlight in the cover letter to the reply your interpretation of the objection.
If you have questions or objections, raise them through the editor. Remember that, when the identity of a referee becomes known, it exposes this referee to possible future retaliation; I would feel most annoyed if I were contacted directly by an author, and I would contact the editor to complain about the situation.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_6: If you sent me the email, here is how I would reply:
>
> Dear High GPA
>
>
> I am [not in the habit of telling people if I refereed their paper](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/87402/40589) - that would be a most inappropriate thing for me to do, and it is similarly inappropriate for you to ask me to break the referee’s anonymity. So I cannot addresss any of your questions. If you need feedback about your paper, I suggest that you talk to your adviser or a colleague.
>
>
> Sincerely etc
>
>
>
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_7: As said by others, your contact point for the review process is the editor and, if your are not happy with him/her, the editor-in-chief.
Adding to that.
Nobody prevents you to ask any trusted peer for opinions on your research progress. If you feel like doing this with the person in point, you ought to reframe such an initiative so as to clear any appearance of mingling in the peer-review process, including the emotional facets of it (you mention hate as a proxy for dislike, I suppose). A substantial time lag puts you on the safe side there. Then, the situation becomes one of sharing your research progress ahead of publication.
From your post it is not clear whether your paper has been rejected by the editor. Did you have one referee only? Then, this is a question to raise at the editor's.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: You must contact the editor. Write your reasons (if there are wrong comments by authors, state that have not carefully reviewed the manuscript by giving reasons) and wait for the decision of the editor. If he/she finds it as rebuttal arguments the latest decision (rejection) of your submission will be rescinded and . According to my experience, this is the best way.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: If you care about your career, you should NEVER contact the referee directly.
Otherwise, you are almost guaranteed to be rejected by the journal's editor, and you risk being rejected permanently from that journal (i.e., they will never accept any paper from you again).
If you absolutely must, then contact the editor about your problems, but even mentioning that you know the identity of the referee is very risky.
Ideally, you should mention your complaints solely about the contents of the review; the identity of the referee is irrelevant in this case (unless you have reasons to believe that the referee recognized your identity based on your research topic, and is trying to harm your career intentionally).
There are situations in which referee and author come to find out each other's identities, but this normally happens by accident. And if it happens, the professional thing to do is to not talk about it.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/09/28
| 843
| 3,594
|
<issue_start>username_0: My manager (one of the recommenders) said that he is working from home for several months due to coronavirus. It will not be possible for him to give the recommendation letter on the letterhead.
Instead, he said that he would submit it via email.
My question is, will this letter count towards my application?<issue_comment>username_1: In this era of networked printers, few people ever actually load letterhead paper into a printer any more. Instead, most organizations have electronic "identity" or "branding" collections that include templates for letterhead, business cards, etc.
As such, in my experience, most recipients (in the US and Europe at least) expect letters to arrive in PDF format. Many will not even *allow* a letter to be sent physically any more.
For most recommenders, then, using "letterhead" just means taking care to use the fancy formatting to make a good impression, just like one might wear formal clothing to make a good impression at a fancy event. In dealing with academics, however, eccentricity is to be expected, and variation from norms is often tolerated.
Bottom line: your recommender should probably be able to use letterhead electronically. If for some strange reason they can't, it shouldn't be a big deal, as long as it's still easy to tell they are a real and respectable person (e.g., emailing from an institutional address).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, it will count. Since you write "manager" I assume it's someone in industry, not academia, and so your manager may not be familiar with academic letters of recommendation.
Probably the most important thing is that the letter should be a *separate PDF document*, and not just an email message. If the organization has an electronic letterhead, your recommender should use it. If not, then the recommender should put all the information one would find in a letterhead at the top of the letter. It should absolutely be mailed from the organization of the recommender, and not from <EMAIL>.
I have a facsimile letterhead and a scanned signature in blue that's set up as an Acrobat stamp. I can make a PDF look like a scanned paper letter more easily than I can print and scan a paper letter!
Finally, if your recommender is not an academic, here is some advice I've written about writing letters of recommendation which the recommender may find helpful. <http://ksuweb.kennesaw.edu/faculty/rbrow211/recommendations/recommend_advice.html>
The advice about FERPA is specific to the United States, and if your recommender is not an academic at an institution where you've studied, it does not apply at all. It *probably* doesn't apply for a letter of recommendation from an academic as there is a specific exemption in FERPA for such letterd.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I am not sure about this. You ask if a letter send by email without letterhead and without signature will be ok. If the system only accpects LOR via some annoying online portal, then the safe answer is no. The letter might never even get into the system.
You need to check with the place you are applying. My *guess* is that if they accept a LOR by email, then the letter you propose will probably be fine.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Many universities have online systems for submitting recommendations in which the recommenders will get an email with a link to submit. In many of these they can paste the recommendation into a form or else upload a PDF. No signature needed. I usually do PDF with my letterhead template but it's not necessary.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/09/28
| 904
| 3,608
|
<issue_start>username_0: In the course of browsing a couple of positions for brand-new (STEM-related) assistant professorships (in North America), I am wondering whether it does make sense if one applies for such positions before her Ph.D. graduation. For example, an advertisement asserts that
>
> These positions require a Ph.D. or equivalent in engineering or a
> closely related discipline **at date of hire**
>
>
>
The job announcement has only supplied a period for application submissions, say, Nov. 2020 until May 2021. My Ph.D. defense is around early 2021, but I think if I wait till that time, the positions may have already been occupied without any chance of competition for me. But if I act before graduation, will my potential application be considered when I have not yet sealed my Ph.D.?<issue_comment>username_1: Most people apply for positions while still students. That is normal. The "date of hire" could mean various things, depending on the institution. Don't worry too much about it, and apply. If there is any sort of issue they might be able to finesse it a bit, but likely they intend that early 2021 graduates are part of their intended outreach.
The date of hire is not usually interpreted as the date you get an acceptance letter, but the date you actually become an employee (with a paycheck).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In the 21st century, > 90% of assistant professors of engineering (and other STEM fields I am familiar with) have a PhD in hand and postdoctoral experience before they get their job.
Even if you already have completed your PhD, you face steep competition.
>
> These positions require a Ph.D. or equivalent in engineering or a closely related discipline at date of hire
>
>
>
This statement is traditional boilerplate which in no way indicates the (much more difficult to get) qualifications needed to actually get the job.
Note that in some humanities fields, it is traditional *not* to hire people who already have PhDs as assistant professors.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: **Talk to your advisor.**
It is absolutely possible for a person to get hired for a tenure track position straight out of their PhD (and when that happens, the person must have applied before they graduated). I know several people who had that happen to them. So in that sense, you are overthinking things. However, I’ll repeat: talk to your advisor. Just because something is possible doesn’t mean it’s likely, and the likelihood and difficulty of securing a position in such circumstances will vary wildly between research areas, countries, and different tiers of universities in any given country.
So again, sorry to sound like a broken record, but you’ll have to ask your advisor to find out whether applying to such jobs makes sense in your situation or not.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: The job listing says
>
> These positions require a Ph.D....at **date of hire**
>
>
>
So the requirement raises one question: *Will the applicant have the degree, at the date of hire*?
>
> But if I act before graduation, *will my potential application be considered when I have not yet sealed my Ph.D.*?
>
>
>
Yes, your application will be considered *if it notes that you will have your degree on the date of hire* because you will then satisfy the requirement found in the job listing.
This obviously makes you responsible for sealing your Ph.D. If a job applicant asserts that the applicant will seal a Ph.D. then whoever assesses that applicant's application will assume the applicant is correct.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/09/29
| 197
| 866
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was reading my own paper published in 2018 and I noticed that in one of the sections I wrote **"<"** instead **">"** to indicate greater than or greater value, although the preceding sentences is clearly stating/suggesting that it should be **">"** greater. I was wondering if I should write or send an erratum to the journal editor?<issue_comment>username_1: No.
I would guess almost every mathematics paper (mine included) has at least one typo of this magnitude.
As you indicate, readers can easily correct the typo for themselves, and some might even do it subconsciously.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: On some journal websites it is possible to comment on specific publications. If your journal allows this, you could simply post a comment pointing out the minor error (I have occasionally seen authors do this).
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/09/29
| 790
| 3,457
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have authored my first paper for a journal. I talked to some co-authors, hoping that they would help me with the design and intellectual work, but eventually their contribution has been minimal. I was not bold enough and they did not help. They don't satisfy the ICMJE authorship recommendations, since they have only provided manuscript review (<http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html>), and provided limited feedback, and allegesly-impressed praise. All the design, and hundreds of hours of work is mine. They did not provide institutional or financial support and they are not my bosses or leaders.
Should they be excluded from the authorship? Do journals prefer a "well-published" teacher as the co-author of a paper?
I believe it would be overly fair to include them as acknowledgements, but I'm not sure what to do.
How do you suggest this "bad news" should be delivered to them? I really struggle with communication.<issue_comment>username_1: I understand this situation and I know colleagues having this situation. This is a tricky situation and could potentially hamper the progress of your paper and future collaborations. Firstly, although this is the right thoughts to ensure that authorship is properly credited, your co-authors may take this negatively and may affect future collaborations with them (but this differ from one author to another).
On a similar situation where it may explain why revision authors cant substantially provide a lot of comments, I recently co-authored a paper where I was invited during the "revision stage" only, I agreed since the main authors justified why I was invited and how I contribute. While helping on the revisions (of an almost complete paper) and ensuring that information are curated well, I realised it's challenging to provide a rigorous edits and feedbacks on the body of the paper as it is already good and it only needs some insights on areas I am working on. I am not sure what is the extent of feedback you need for your paper, I suggest pondering well before making such decisions, consult your trusted co-author or your supervisor.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I believe: The OP has written, but not submitted, a manuscript, which they discussed with some potential co-authors, who provided minimal input.
If the OP didn't discuss authorship, then they can immediately proceed to submission without listing the potential co-authors. (**Discussion doesn't generally merit co-authorship.**) Even if authorship was discussed, they may be able to immediately proceed, it really depends on the discussion.
For instance, the OP may have offered co-authorship in exchange for *help...with the design and intellectual work* and if there's no evidence of fulfillment, the OP can immediately submit without listing the potential co-authors. It gets tricky when the OP is unsatisfied, but there's evidence of partial fulfilment.
If the OP is in a position to immediately submit, then they are under no obligation to communicate with the potential co-authors. Nonetheless, the OP could send a thank you email, e.g., *Thanks for your input on XYZ. Your wisdom helped improve my manuscript (attached), which I'll be submitting to ABC. I've listed you in my acknowledgements, which I trust is okay.*
For trickier situations, I'd need more information to offer advice.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/09/29
| 4,392
| 17,908
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is it acceptable for a person to be a researcher if she/he has a mental disorders or illnesses?
Are there laws that either prohibit or not prohibit mentally ill to perform research? Caveats?<issue_comment>username_1: It's certainly *possible*, e.g. Einstein and Newton are [speculated to have Asperger's Syndrome](https://www.autism-help.org/points-%20aspergers-einstein-newton.htm).
The real problem is whether the researcher is able to have productive ideas in spite of the mental disorder/illness, and there are certainly some illnesses where that would not be the case.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: The details will no doubt vary between countries, but I would be surprised if anywhere has a blanket prohibition on 'mentally ill' people 'performing research' - apart from anything else, both terms are rather loosely-defined.
However, there are almost certainly a range of considerations that might affect whether people with certain conditions can easily work in a given research area. For example, research in some areas might require security clearance or special licenses, and medical history may be a factor that is relevant to whether these can be obtained/maintained.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I have never heard of any restrictions. In fact, in many countries it may even be illegal to ask someone about mental illnesses before hiring them. (A strong "crazy" vibe in the interview process might deter potential employers, though.)
Also, the very nature of science is to abstract away the humanity of the researcher as far as possible. It shouldn't matter whether you're depressed, manic, autistic or whatever else it might be - if you have interesting insights that allow for testable predictions, or you can perform experiments that are reproducible, and the referees of your papers and other researchers find value in the work you do, why should you not do research?
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Let's turn this around and ask the converse. How could you tell if a researcher has a mental illness or similar disorder?
Modern understanding of mental illness has moved towards a recognition that humans have an extremely wide range of functional cognitive and behavioral patterns. This means that most mental illness exists on a spectrum, where the boundary to illness is quite fuzzy, is only considered an illness [if there is a persistent impact on a person's ability to function](https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/mental-illness/symptoms-causes/syc-20374968).
So if a researcher is producing work that is passing peer review in reasonable publication venues, then they are clearly functioning at a level sufficient to conduct scientific research, and that research is being found to be acceptable. That's it. There is no other scientific bar.
Some levels of mental illness will, of course, make it difficult or impossible for a researcher to produce acceptable research. For example, a person suffering from severe dementia would likely have a difficult time accomplishing any task in their life, including research. This isn't about saying it's not *acceptable* for any given person to conduct research, however, but rather that some illnesses will inhibit a person from actually accomplishing the task.
In certain niche cases requiring certification, significant impact from a mental illness on a person's trustworthiness may also preemptively bar a person from conducting research on subjects requiring that certification. For example, a person with schizophrenia not responding to treatment might not be able to work in a medical field requiring the handling of confidential patient information or at an organization that requires a security clearance.
In history, unfortunately, we find a very different situation. Until surprisingly recently, for example, [homosexuality was considered a mental disorder](https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/hide-and-seek/201509/when-homosexuality-stopped-being-mental-disorder), and many people were denied work on the basis of their sexual preferences. I believe this remains the case in some repressive nations today.
Bottom line: in any modern liberal society, mental illness is no bar to research in and of itself, though it may become a barrier if it affects ones' ability to function as a researcher.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_5: A blanket ban would almost certainly fall foul of disability protections and/or patient confidentiality requirements, and so could not legally be implemented
Employers (including research institutes) are prohibited from discriminating on the basis of disability (unless it can be shown to make the person genuinely unable to perform the role in question) and, in fact, are obligated to make reasonable adjustments to enable a disabled person to perform the role, when requested. As such, if someone has a mental illness severe enough to qualify as a disability, they could not be prohibited from performing research in general (although people with certain illnesses might not be able to perform research in certain specific areas, i.e. those requiring specific clearance, or dealing with vulnerable people)
Additionally, people are not generally required to disclose medical information to their employer, their medical records cannot be obtained without their consent, and people cannot be discriminated against for refusing to provide such medical records. This means, people with a diagnosis, but no need for adjustments, would not need to identify themselves as mentally ill to any research institute and so could not be prohibited from performing research
Lastly, many people suffering from mental illnesses lack any diagnosis so there are likely people with mental illnesses who couldn't identify themselves as such to their employer to be discriminated against, even if they wanted to
Obviously, the exact details will vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but the existence of disability as a protected class, and medical confidentiality is pretty universal in the developed world
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: In the United States, the ADA covers anyone with “physical or mental impairments that substantially limit one or more major life activities, such as seeing, hearing, speaking, walking or breathing.” It is illegal to discriminate against people with these conditions in hiring if they are qualified. From the FAQ on the EEOC website about the ADA: "A qualified individual with a disability is a person who meets legitimate skill, experience, education, or other requirements of an employment position that he or she holds or seeks."
This means in most cases it is illegal to prohibit someone from doing research if that person falls under the vague term "mentally ill" as it is colloquially used.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: **It depends on several factors**
1. Where you live
2. What type of research
3. What type and level of mental illness
**Anecdotal evidence**
**A.** I managed to have a good and varied career including research despite having recurrent bouts of depression from the age of fourteen. I'm retired now but it was only a few years ago that I was diagnosed as bipolar. This made complete sense of a lot of events in my life that definitely weren't due to depression. Sometimes my family and friends thought I was crazy - it turns out they were right!
In fact during manic episodes I could be incredibly creative and efficient and these intense periods of work cancelled out my lack of productivity due to depression.
However, I'm officially bipolar 2.
People who are bipolar 1 can undergo much more extreme changes in mood. I've met many and they tell tales of believing they can fly or thinking they were Jesus and so on. They would also take on huge undertakings that were in theory possible for a determined healthy person but not for someone who would later be incapacitated by depression.
**B.** I have met many people with different forms of mental illness. If you are someone who regularly meets demons that tell you what to do (I'm not joking or taking this lightly, I know such people and they are usually lovely to know) then you will probably be on pretty strong drugs that may slow your thinking down so much that you are incapable of thinking deeply. If you suffer badly from paranoia then you may find it difficult to work with others and they may find it difficult to work with you (I was there for a period of months years ago so I know).
---
**Answer**
As I say, it depends on those three factors. If the law doesn't prohibit you in your country then it's up to you to decide what you can manage. Get a doctor to back you up if necessary.
The main thing is to make sure you have psychological backup in place. In decent universities there will be counselling and student mental-health facilities - I used those.
If you are convinced you can do it then go all out for it! Don't let anyone stop you! Just make sure you have contingency plans in place.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: It's not only the case that mentally ill people are not generally prohibited from doing research\* (as explained very well in @username_4's excellent answer). To counter a separate apparent misconception in the question that has nothing to do with mental health, I think it's a bit misleading to say that anyone is "allowed" to be a researcher. What I mean is that academic and scientific research are a much more open and democratic type of profession than many others. One does not need a license or to be a member of some professional society to be a researcher. One does not necessarily need to have a PhD or other advanced degree. One can be mentally ill, physically ill or disabled, a legal minor, even a convicted criminal. The scientific community will generally be quite accepting of high quality work coming from *anyone*, as long as the work itself was not done unethically or illegally.
To summarize, the idea that you need to ask someone for permission to be a researcher because you suffer from some medical condition or other special circumstance strikes me as kind of absurd, and I think paints a distorted picture of the true reality of how academia works.
\* Setting aside some very specific exclusions having to do with research with connections to military defense or other similarly sensitive areas, where a history of sufficiently serious mental problems may be disqualifying in certain situations.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: You would be excluded: If you have a mental illness where your research will damage or endanger you, because of the nature of your research and illness. Or if you have a mental illness where your research together with your mental illness makes you a danger for others, because of the nature of your research and illness.
For example, there are plenty of mental illnesses where the effect is that you may just be out of action sometimes. For much research, no problem. But if you are a chemist heating up some material on a bunsen burner, and you are sometimes incapable to remove that material from heat, that could be dangerous. Still, no problem if you have a research assistant who watches out.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_10: In the United States, mental illness is considered a disability and US labor law [typically forbids](https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/depression-ptsd-other-mental-health-conditions-workplace-your-legal-rights) discrimination based on disability status when not relevant to the job at hand.
However, there are some exceptions to the rule that a researcher might encounter:
* People with severe mental illnesses are [typically ineligible](https://news.clearancejobs.com/2010/03/19/mental-health-and-final-security-clearances/) for US Government security clearances, which might present an obstacle to doing certain research of military value. This may be significant in some fields. The National Security Agency [has claimed](https://web.archive.org/web/20140521222856/http://www.nsa.gov:80/research/tech_transfer/advanced_math/) to be the largest employer of mathematicians in the United States, and typically all of them will need Top Secret security clearances.
* People with severe mental illnesses, or are taking certain medications, [may not](https://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=20455) pass a FAA medical exam. This may prevent a researcher from flying an airplane or a large drone. Although if one's research project involves flying, presumably they can outsource the flying to a qualified pilot.
* Having a severe mental illness [may impact](http://jaapl.org/content/46/4/458) one's ability to obtain or retain a license to practice medicine, although this is unclear and may change in the future. This might impact a medical researcher's career, although there are notable researchers with mental illness like [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kay_Redfield_Jamison). Instead of an MD, she has a PhD in clinical psychology and has considerable experience with patients.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: I do not have a reference, just anecdotal evidence from training and working in the field of psychiatry. There are many psychiatrists, psychiatric nurses, and other allied professionals who do perform research and have performed research over many, many years. They have made enormous contributions to the field. Even before the advent of medications and more effective psychotherapy, this was done. It is not at all uncommon. Their disorders are controlled by some means. If they are not, and they do not recognize this, their colleagues help them. This is incredibly common in this field.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_12: I presume that this questions stems from a concern about the scientific career of someone who is or may be treated for a mental illness/psychiatric disorder. In that case it really depends on:
1. Whteher the patient ever had the legal rights over their healthcare taken away (in the UK, this is called 'sectioning under the mental health act'), and in general what the medical classification of their illness was.
2. The kind of research you want to do
3. Where you want to work
Regarding 1, there are many people suffering with depression for instance, in any profession, and this goes undiagnosed and might not even be noticed by colleagues. Heck, the person might nit even know they are depressed. There would be no grounds on which to prevent such a person from working in research, legally (though I have seen companies get rid of employees with mild anxiety/depression which had some effect on their work, which is a nasty and illegal thing to do). Even if you visit your GP and they tell you that they think you are mildly depressed and put you on antidepressants, I do not think this counts for anything officially unless you were diagnosed by a psychiatric specialist.
Regarding 2, if you are a working on something top secret then your employer may be a bit more selective to avoid secrets being leaked. I don't know exactly what employers ask in these situations and it is probably job-specific, but I would be very hesitatant to employ someone who is on antidepressants as these can make you somewhat chatty. I would be interested whether this counts as discrimination even for such jobs were workers are handling highly confidential material. I think these more stringent selection criteria would also apply for research with highly dangerous materials (nuclear weapons, biological warfare and class 4 biological agents.
Point 3: As far as I am aware, if you are sectioned in the UK, you can no longer work in the military or any research related to/backed by the military, but there is no problem with you later becoming a doctor/surgeon! Different sectors have different policies.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: I just stumbled over this YouTube video of a TED talk. It seems highly relevant, even if your condition doesn't happen to be schizophrenia. The speaker *is* schizophrenic and *is* a high-powered researcher. Plus she is a mental-health advocate.
[I Am Not A Monster: Schizophrenia | <NAME> | TEDxPSU](https://youtu.be/xbagFzcyNiM)
>
> <NAME> puts a face to schizophrenia and helps empower college
> students through the upcoming non-profit Students With Schizophrenia.
>
>
> <NAME> is an astronomer, activist, and writer as a Penn State
> Schreyer Honors College scholar pursuing a major in Astronomy &
> Astrophysics. Cecilia is the founder and current president of the Penn
> State Pulsar Search Collaboratory. She has been participating in
> pulsar research continuously since December of 2009, co-discovering
> pulsar J1930-1852 with the widest orbit ever observed around another
> neutron star, competing in the International Space Olympics held in
> Russia, and co-authoring her research in the Astrophysics Journal.
> Cecilia is a mental health activist in fighting against the negative
> stigma towards mental illness. She is the founder and chief executive
> officer (CEO) of the soon to launch non-profit Students With
> Schizophrenia which is the only non-profit in the United States
> focused on empowering college students with schizophrenia.
>
>
> This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format
> but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at
> ...
>
>
>
**Note** I removed some links from the quote because they weren't working following my Copy and Paste. However the working links can be found by clicking on SHOW MORE under the Youtube video.
---
**EDIT**
Here's an update to what's happened since this talk. The organisation has changed its name from *Students with Schizophrenia* to *Students with Psychosis*.
<https://sws.ngo/>
<https://sws.ngo/resource-direction/>
<https://sws.ngo/newsletter-2020/>
Upvotes: -1
|
2020/09/29
| 4,442
| 18,175
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am wondering about the CV format for PhD application. In professional setting, for example, in the research experience part, I write a lot about what I did in my research rather than doing so in the cover letter. The cover letter on the other hand should be short. This is recommended by the career service center.
Should I do the same for PhD application? Or maybe I should write about my research in my CV and repeat the same thing in the cover letter?<issue_comment>username_1: It's certainly *possible*, e.g. Einstein and Newton are [speculated to have Asperger's Syndrome](https://www.autism-help.org/points-%20aspergers-einstein-newton.htm).
The real problem is whether the researcher is able to have productive ideas in spite of the mental disorder/illness, and there are certainly some illnesses where that would not be the case.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: The details will no doubt vary between countries, but I would be surprised if anywhere has a blanket prohibition on 'mentally ill' people 'performing research' - apart from anything else, both terms are rather loosely-defined.
However, there are almost certainly a range of considerations that might affect whether people with certain conditions can easily work in a given research area. For example, research in some areas might require security clearance or special licenses, and medical history may be a factor that is relevant to whether these can be obtained/maintained.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I have never heard of any restrictions. In fact, in many countries it may even be illegal to ask someone about mental illnesses before hiring them. (A strong "crazy" vibe in the interview process might deter potential employers, though.)
Also, the very nature of science is to abstract away the humanity of the researcher as far as possible. It shouldn't matter whether you're depressed, manic, autistic or whatever else it might be - if you have interesting insights that allow for testable predictions, or you can perform experiments that are reproducible, and the referees of your papers and other researchers find value in the work you do, why should you not do research?
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Let's turn this around and ask the converse. How could you tell if a researcher has a mental illness or similar disorder?
Modern understanding of mental illness has moved towards a recognition that humans have an extremely wide range of functional cognitive and behavioral patterns. This means that most mental illness exists on a spectrum, where the boundary to illness is quite fuzzy, is only considered an illness [if there is a persistent impact on a person's ability to function](https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/mental-illness/symptoms-causes/syc-20374968).
So if a researcher is producing work that is passing peer review in reasonable publication venues, then they are clearly functioning at a level sufficient to conduct scientific research, and that research is being found to be acceptable. That's it. There is no other scientific bar.
Some levels of mental illness will, of course, make it difficult or impossible for a researcher to produce acceptable research. For example, a person suffering from severe dementia would likely have a difficult time accomplishing any task in their life, including research. This isn't about saying it's not *acceptable* for any given person to conduct research, however, but rather that some illnesses will inhibit a person from actually accomplishing the task.
In certain niche cases requiring certification, significant impact from a mental illness on a person's trustworthiness may also preemptively bar a person from conducting research on subjects requiring that certification. For example, a person with schizophrenia not responding to treatment might not be able to work in a medical field requiring the handling of confidential patient information or at an organization that requires a security clearance.
In history, unfortunately, we find a very different situation. Until surprisingly recently, for example, [homosexuality was considered a mental disorder](https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/hide-and-seek/201509/when-homosexuality-stopped-being-mental-disorder), and many people were denied work on the basis of their sexual preferences. I believe this remains the case in some repressive nations today.
Bottom line: in any modern liberal society, mental illness is no bar to research in and of itself, though it may become a barrier if it affects ones' ability to function as a researcher.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_5: A blanket ban would almost certainly fall foul of disability protections and/or patient confidentiality requirements, and so could not legally be implemented
Employers (including research institutes) are prohibited from discriminating on the basis of disability (unless it can be shown to make the person genuinely unable to perform the role in question) and, in fact, are obligated to make reasonable adjustments to enable a disabled person to perform the role, when requested. As such, if someone has a mental illness severe enough to qualify as a disability, they could not be prohibited from performing research in general (although people with certain illnesses might not be able to perform research in certain specific areas, i.e. those requiring specific clearance, or dealing with vulnerable people)
Additionally, people are not generally required to disclose medical information to their employer, their medical records cannot be obtained without their consent, and people cannot be discriminated against for refusing to provide such medical records. This means, people with a diagnosis, but no need for adjustments, would not need to identify themselves as mentally ill to any research institute and so could not be prohibited from performing research
Lastly, many people suffering from mental illnesses lack any diagnosis so there are likely people with mental illnesses who couldn't identify themselves as such to their employer to be discriminated against, even if they wanted to
Obviously, the exact details will vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but the existence of disability as a protected class, and medical confidentiality is pretty universal in the developed world
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: In the United States, the ADA covers anyone with “physical or mental impairments that substantially limit one or more major life activities, such as seeing, hearing, speaking, walking or breathing.” It is illegal to discriminate against people with these conditions in hiring if they are qualified. From the FAQ on the EEOC website about the ADA: "A qualified individual with a disability is a person who meets legitimate skill, experience, education, or other requirements of an employment position that he or she holds or seeks."
This means in most cases it is illegal to prohibit someone from doing research if that person falls under the vague term "mentally ill" as it is colloquially used.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: **It depends on several factors**
1. Where you live
2. What type of research
3. What type and level of mental illness
**Anecdotal evidence**
**A.** I managed to have a good and varied career including research despite having recurrent bouts of depression from the age of fourteen. I'm retired now but it was only a few years ago that I was diagnosed as bipolar. This made complete sense of a lot of events in my life that definitely weren't due to depression. Sometimes my family and friends thought I was crazy - it turns out they were right!
In fact during manic episodes I could be incredibly creative and efficient and these intense periods of work cancelled out my lack of productivity due to depression.
However, I'm officially bipolar 2.
People who are bipolar 1 can undergo much more extreme changes in mood. I've met many and they tell tales of believing they can fly or thinking they were Jesus and so on. They would also take on huge undertakings that were in theory possible for a determined healthy person but not for someone who would later be incapacitated by depression.
**B.** I have met many people with different forms of mental illness. If you are someone who regularly meets demons that tell you what to do (I'm not joking or taking this lightly, I know such people and they are usually lovely to know) then you will probably be on pretty strong drugs that may slow your thinking down so much that you are incapable of thinking deeply. If you suffer badly from paranoia then you may find it difficult to work with others and they may find it difficult to work with you (I was there for a period of months years ago so I know).
---
**Answer**
As I say, it depends on those three factors. If the law doesn't prohibit you in your country then it's up to you to decide what you can manage. Get a doctor to back you up if necessary.
The main thing is to make sure you have psychological backup in place. In decent universities there will be counselling and student mental-health facilities - I used those.
If you are convinced you can do it then go all out for it! Don't let anyone stop you! Just make sure you have contingency plans in place.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: It's not only the case that mentally ill people are not generally prohibited from doing research\* (as explained very well in @username_4's excellent answer). To counter a separate apparent misconception in the question that has nothing to do with mental health, I think it's a bit misleading to say that anyone is "allowed" to be a researcher. What I mean is that academic and scientific research are a much more open and democratic type of profession than many others. One does not need a license or to be a member of some professional society to be a researcher. One does not necessarily need to have a PhD or other advanced degree. One can be mentally ill, physically ill or disabled, a legal minor, even a convicted criminal. The scientific community will generally be quite accepting of high quality work coming from *anyone*, as long as the work itself was not done unethically or illegally.
To summarize, the idea that you need to ask someone for permission to be a researcher because you suffer from some medical condition or other special circumstance strikes me as kind of absurd, and I think paints a distorted picture of the true reality of how academia works.
\* Setting aside some very specific exclusions having to do with research with connections to military defense or other similarly sensitive areas, where a history of sufficiently serious mental problems may be disqualifying in certain situations.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: You would be excluded: If you have a mental illness where your research will damage or endanger you, because of the nature of your research and illness. Or if you have a mental illness where your research together with your mental illness makes you a danger for others, because of the nature of your research and illness.
For example, there are plenty of mental illnesses where the effect is that you may just be out of action sometimes. For much research, no problem. But if you are a chemist heating up some material on a bunsen burner, and you are sometimes incapable to remove that material from heat, that could be dangerous. Still, no problem if you have a research assistant who watches out.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_10: In the United States, mental illness is considered a disability and US labor law [typically forbids](https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/depression-ptsd-other-mental-health-conditions-workplace-your-legal-rights) discrimination based on disability status when not relevant to the job at hand.
However, there are some exceptions to the rule that a researcher might encounter:
* People with severe mental illnesses are [typically ineligible](https://news.clearancejobs.com/2010/03/19/mental-health-and-final-security-clearances/) for US Government security clearances, which might present an obstacle to doing certain research of military value. This may be significant in some fields. The National Security Agency [has claimed](https://web.archive.org/web/20140521222856/http://www.nsa.gov:80/research/tech_transfer/advanced_math/) to be the largest employer of mathematicians in the United States, and typically all of them will need Top Secret security clearances.
* People with severe mental illnesses, or are taking certain medications, [may not](https://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=20455) pass a FAA medical exam. This may prevent a researcher from flying an airplane or a large drone. Although if one's research project involves flying, presumably they can outsource the flying to a qualified pilot.
* Having a severe mental illness [may impact](http://jaapl.org/content/46/4/458) one's ability to obtain or retain a license to practice medicine, although this is unclear and may change in the future. This might impact a medical researcher's career, although there are notable researchers with mental illness like [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kay_Redfield_Jamison). Instead of an MD, she has a PhD in clinical psychology and has considerable experience with patients.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: I do not have a reference, just anecdotal evidence from training and working in the field of psychiatry. There are many psychiatrists, psychiatric nurses, and other allied professionals who do perform research and have performed research over many, many years. They have made enormous contributions to the field. Even before the advent of medications and more effective psychotherapy, this was done. It is not at all uncommon. Their disorders are controlled by some means. If they are not, and they do not recognize this, their colleagues help them. This is incredibly common in this field.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_12: I presume that this questions stems from a concern about the scientific career of someone who is or may be treated for a mental illness/psychiatric disorder. In that case it really depends on:
1. Whteher the patient ever had the legal rights over their healthcare taken away (in the UK, this is called 'sectioning under the mental health act'), and in general what the medical classification of their illness was.
2. The kind of research you want to do
3. Where you want to work
Regarding 1, there are many people suffering with depression for instance, in any profession, and this goes undiagnosed and might not even be noticed by colleagues. Heck, the person might nit even know they are depressed. There would be no grounds on which to prevent such a person from working in research, legally (though I have seen companies get rid of employees with mild anxiety/depression which had some effect on their work, which is a nasty and illegal thing to do). Even if you visit your GP and they tell you that they think you are mildly depressed and put you on antidepressants, I do not think this counts for anything officially unless you were diagnosed by a psychiatric specialist.
Regarding 2, if you are a working on something top secret then your employer may be a bit more selective to avoid secrets being leaked. I don't know exactly what employers ask in these situations and it is probably job-specific, but I would be very hesitatant to employ someone who is on antidepressants as these can make you somewhat chatty. I would be interested whether this counts as discrimination even for such jobs were workers are handling highly confidential material. I think these more stringent selection criteria would also apply for research with highly dangerous materials (nuclear weapons, biological warfare and class 4 biological agents.
Point 3: As far as I am aware, if you are sectioned in the UK, you can no longer work in the military or any research related to/backed by the military, but there is no problem with you later becoming a doctor/surgeon! Different sectors have different policies.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: I just stumbled over this YouTube video of a TED talk. It seems highly relevant, even if your condition doesn't happen to be schizophrenia. The speaker *is* schizophrenic and *is* a high-powered researcher. Plus she is a mental-health advocate.
[I Am Not A Monster: Schizophrenia | <NAME> | TEDxPSU](https://youtu.be/xbagFzcyNiM)
>
> <NAME> puts a face to schizophrenia and helps empower college
> students through the upcoming non-profit Students With Schizophrenia.
>
>
> <NAME> is an astronomer, activist, and writer as a Penn State
> Schreyer Honors College scholar pursuing a major in Astronomy &
> Astrophysics. Cecilia is the founder and current president of the Penn
> State Pulsar Search Collaboratory. She has been participating in
> pulsar research continuously since December of 2009, co-discovering
> pulsar J1930-1852 with the widest orbit ever observed around another
> neutron star, competing in the International Space Olympics held in
> Russia, and co-authoring her research in the Astrophysics Journal.
> Cecilia is a mental health activist in fighting against the negative
> stigma towards mental illness. She is the founder and chief executive
> officer (CEO) of the soon to launch non-profit Students With
> Schizophrenia which is the only non-profit in the United States
> focused on empowering college students with schizophrenia.
>
>
> This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format
> but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at
> ...
>
>
>
**Note** I removed some links from the quote because they weren't working following my Copy and Paste. However the working links can be found by clicking on SHOW MORE under the Youtube video.
---
**EDIT**
Here's an update to what's happened since this talk. The organisation has changed its name from *Students with Schizophrenia* to *Students with Psychosis*.
<https://sws.ngo/>
<https://sws.ngo/resource-direction/>
<https://sws.ngo/newsletter-2020/>
Upvotes: -1
|
2020/09/29
| 1,181
| 4,871
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am in a bit of dilemma regarding my career aspirations.
I am a mechanical engineering graduate from one of the top 5 IITs in India.
I have a average CGPA of 8.87/10 (top 20 in my class).
I have taken close to six mathematical courses like: Maths1(grade A), Maths2(grade B), Transform Calculus(Excellent grade), Partial Differential Equations( Excellent grade), Probability and statistics( grade A), Control systems( Excellent grade).
Currently I am working as a quantitative analyst for credit risk team at an investment bank, the job here has drawn me closer to the field of mathematics and statistics and through a lot of self-study, I have decided to pursue a masters course in statistics/applied mathematics and possibly use that masters degree for phd applications later.
I am in my mid-twenties currently.
I have self studied the entire statistical Inference book from Casella and Berger to supplement my knowledge/fill in the gaps.
However the problem lies in the application part for the masters program as they require an undergraduate degree from mathematics and letters of recommendation, while I can arrange for letters of recommendation from my manager here at workplace and a few professors whom I did my bachelors project with/took their courses, however I am not sure how relevant they will be.
I understand that because I don’t have a undergraduate in mathematics, even if I get admissions, they won’t be into any top coveted programs but I am willing to put in the extra effort/fill up the gaps using my experience in that college for graduate school admissions later on.
Does this sound like a plausible plan or am I working for a lost cause?
Do I stand a chance with my profile for admissions into decent masters courses in mathematics in US?
Can attending a decent mathematics masters program work as a stepping stone into some good graduate programs?
Any insights would be helpful.
Thanks in advance.<issue_comment>username_1: Take the GRE subject test in Math. If you do well few will care about your background.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> I am a mechanical engineering graduate...
>
>
> I have decided to pursue a masters course in statistics/applied mathematics...
>
>
> the masters program ...require[s] an undergraduate degree from mathematics
>
>
>
If your degree is in Mechanical Engineering, and the masters course "require[s] an undergraduate degree from mathematics" then that raises one question: *Is your Mechanical Engineering degree a degree in mathematics*?
If the answer is *Yes*, then you "stand a chance."
If the answer is *No*, then you are "working for a lost cause."
In case my answer is confusing, I'll explain by saying that I don't know what qualifies as a "degree from mathematics" but I assume it might include more than just a Mathematics degree. Since many degrees require intense mathematical study, other degrees might be considered "degree[s] from mathematics." For example, Statistics or Geometry or Calculus might be subtypes of undergraduate mathematics degrees. And perhaps Mechanical Engineering, which does require intense study of mathematics, is one of those which would be counted as such.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I think your plans for your future are quite reasonable, but my thoughts count for very little. Many engineers have a mathematical bent of mind and I believe many mathematics departments (especially in applied fields like statistics) will recognize that. An example of an engineer who became a mathematician is: [Raoul Bott](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raoul_Bott). In all probability, you are not going to be Raoul Bott (prove me wrong), but I think it's worth pursuing the career goals you want. Your job, is to make a convincing case for yourself and to find the right department for you. You can do this by talking with people who have achieved what you are trying to achieve, getting their feedback on their department and your application (especially statement of purpose).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: This sort of dilemma is often country and culture-dependent. Some areas of the world will be far more strict about what is / isn't a 'maths degree'. Usually here (UK) I see it phrased as more like 'a degree with a high quantitative component' which includes computer science, physics, engineering, etc, but I don't know much about the Indian academic culture.
My recommendation would be to just contact someone at an institute you're interested in and ask them. Either they say yes, and now you know, they say no, and you don't need to bother applying, or they don't answer, in which case the only thing you lost was the time sending the email. This also might vary by instutite, it's unlikely any answer will apply to every institute, even within the same country.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2020/09/29
| 2,156
| 9,159
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was just wondering out of curiosity. Nothing relating to my own circumstances.
In what language do scientists in facilities like the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (whose campuses are there in Barcelona, Rome, Heidelberg etc...) communicate?
Do scientists communicate in German in the Heidelberg laboratory, or in Spanish in the Barcelona lab? I am assuming so because obviously the majority of the scientists in Heidelberg laboratory will be German and the majority in Barcelona will be Spanish and the majority in Rome will be Italians.
Is this true?<issue_comment>username_1: I am in Norway in mathematics. I use...
* Norwegian with the Scandinavians and Germans/Austrians. The people from Scandinavia also do this.
* Finnish with the Finn(s)
* English with the others.
* The Germans/Austrians speak German with each other. I have also heard a bit of French, I think, and certainly a bit of Spanish from other foreigners.
* Essentially, people speak the native language of some participant in the discussion when possible, and default to English otherwise.
Official announcements are almost always in Norwegian and often in English.
The situation was similar in Denmark: Danish was used with the people who could understand it (had been there for long or spoke a compatible language) and English otherwise.
Note that the non-academic people, especially older ones, might not be fluent in English.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: From my perspective of working in multiple European universities in different countries:
In a "closed" conversation setting, it will exclusively depend on the people involved in the conversation. The prime requirement is to use a language that every participant understands and speaks. A secondary concern is to use a language that people are particularly comfortable in. As a result, a meeting of two German researchers and a German student in a Swedish university will usually be held in German.
In an "open" conversation setting, people usually prefer to use a language that will allow other people to understand and join the conversation (usually English). Exceptions happen and might be considered as rude by some.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I'm doing a postdoc in Europe, and my fellowship has me traveling around a lot. Also note that I do physics, not MCB, though I don't think there would be much difference.
My experience is that English is the official language of science, and all seminars, journal clubs, and talks (except outreach) are in English. Socializing will depend on the group. Also the language you hear the most at work has more to do with the nationalities represented in your group, not the local language. I heard a lot of Italian when I was visiting Switzerland.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: My experience is from the 1990's at a Dutch institute, so a bit dated perhaps. There were a number of people at the instutute from non-Dutch speaking countries, from across Europe, Asia, and the US (including me). And, the Dutch generally learned a variety of languages in school (the only Dutch people I met who did not speak any English at all were the nice couple in the downstairs apartment who personally experienced the liberation of Amsterdam in WW2).
All science was done in English, both to include all the visitors but, more importantly, they published in English language journals since they had the broadest reach. Almost all the Dutch science courses were taught in English, using English language textbooks. (It was really funny to hear Dutch trying to discuss science in Dutch - every other word was a technical English term). But, all the conversation at coffee or tea was in Dutch, unless there was a non-Dutch person involved. Ultimately, that was why I learned Dutch so they would not have to switch because of me.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Europe is a big place, with 50 countries, 10 million km², and almost 750 million inhabitants. What applies at an international research institute in Netherlands, Belgium, or Germany will not apply to a regional institute in Russia. There is no single answer that applies to all European institutions.
In much of central and western Europe, science groups are typically international and communication between scientists is often in English. This is not universally true: at the German weather service for example, all internal communication, including between scientists, happens in German, including with foreign scientists working at DWD (but with foreign visiting scientists they will speak English). I'm told it's the same at the French weather service. But even this is not universal, as I've seen some groups that try to accommodate for non-German speaking scientists. Elsewhere, there are scientists and engineers in Russia who understand (almost) no English at all (I don't have statistics on how common this is, but anecdotally it's not exceptional, based on experiences by a colleague who went to a spectroscopy conference in Russia).
In the end, any general answer will be too general to be useful. One way to find out for a specific institute or group is to look for vacancy notes, which may or may not include language requirements. For example: the Swedish weather service publishes scientists vacancy notes in (both Swedish and) English and include an encouragement to learn Swedish if hired. The German and French ones mostly advertise them in German or French respectively only and include a requirement for a moderate command of the language (usually CEFR B1 or B2, but I've seen everything from optional A2 to required C2). It's safe to assume that if they require to know the language of the country at B2 level, that communication normally happens in the language of the country.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: I work in an international research institution in a German speaking country. The standard language on campus is English and all communication, meetings, events etc. are either in English or in English and German simultaneously. Private conversation usually depends on the languages shared by the people in the conversation, as pointed out by username_2. With some people I even speak English in private even though we share other languages because, in my experience, once you get used to using a certain language with a person, that language sticks.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I've only been to such institutes, mainly ESRF, as a visitor, but English was the practical working language, used for a lot of conversations, and everything official (the latter in addition to French). Training was delivered in English. Almost every conversation seemed to have people of many nationalities, and took place in English. This was both for true work matters, and going to lunch with the group I was visiting, but it wasn't a courtesy to me specifically - other groups did the same. The only I times I spoke French on the site were getting food in the canteen, and a brief conversation in the bike parking with someone who turned out to be German anyway.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_8: I'm British, and spent 12 months as a placement student at CERN from 1995 to 1996. I believe that everyone had to have a reasonable competency in either English or French. They were then taught the other. I was already very good at French, hence I was placed in the top class for French, in which we spoke almost exclusively in French, learning some quite complex grammar. My fellow British student spoke no French, was placed in the bottom class, and after 12 months could get by. Some of his classmates, one Austrian in particular had no interest in learning French, and spent most lessons doodling high energy physics stuff.
My office consisted of three Spaniards and me. Our immediate manager was a French-speaking Belgian. His manager was Swedish. His manager was British (and was an old boy of the local rival school to me in Coventry, by huge coincidence). Thus, most conversation amongst us was in English.
In the final week of my time there, the Belgian explained something to the Spaniards and a visiting Parisian in French, then came to explain it to me in English. I told him I already heard. This was the first time he realised I was pretty much fluent in French, and swore/laughed for a while, when he realised that he'd never once thought to ask.
In the staff restaurants, most nationalities mixed a lot, and spoke either English or French, depending on the make-up of the group, with the preference tending towards English. The Spanish didn't mix so much, not for any other reason than keeping different working hours (MUCH longer lunch etc). Likewise for socialising outside of work. My "gang" was mostly British, Dutch, Belgian, French, Spanish, Austrian and German, and we mostly spoke English if addressing the whole group, but obviously the French and Belgians spoke to each other in French, and the Germans/Austrians used German.
For meetings and technical discussions, it was almost 100% English, unless it was known that everyone present was happier with another language.
Upvotes: 3
|
2020/09/29
| 446
| 1,736
|
<issue_start>username_0: In the first round, we get two reports from the Editor. Referee A just rejected it and referee B said that he is not sure.
Since referee A had made a mistake, we appealed to this manuscript. At the same time, we said that the report of Referee A should be ignored by the Editor since he/she said some ugly words beyond the academic.
The Editor sent our manuscript to B, C, and D.
As for C and D, they support our work. Reviewer B says that the current work is not sufficiently novel for a PRL. In my opinion, he just gives us 40 of 100. At the end of the report, Referee B said that some results are interesting.
In this case, what will happen? We did not reply to the Editor and referees in the second round yet.<issue_comment>username_1: The best you can do is to reply to the comments of the referees the best as you can and try to convince the editor that your paper is sufficiently novel for PRL. Try to answer very polite but on the other hand with some strong arguments. I would rather stay on the factual level about your paper and not start to discuss a relationship of referee A and your professor with editor.
But do not be disappointed if the editor will reject - the PRL is very selective. See the try as a possibility to improve your paper.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: When I was a Ph.D. student (c. 20 years ago), there was a member of the PRL editorial team who used to tour universities giving talks on how to succeed in getting published in PRL. IIRC, his main thesis was that the chance of success is improved by giving the manuscript a "self-similar structure" whereby it made the same set of points three or four times in successively increasing levels of detail.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/09/29
| 678
| 2,955
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an undergrad from a pretty unknown Asian university and I would be applying to PhD programs (mostly US) in pure mathematics this application cycle. However, my major is physics and my intention to switch fields came relatively late, and therefore very few math professors know me very well. I have taken as much upper division pure math courses as my schedule allowed, with courses in analysis, algebra and geometry/topology. I will hopefully have taken 11 one-semester upper division and graduate courses by graduation, but 6 of them will be taken this year.
I am now trying to gather the three recommenders needed for application. My thesis advisor is a math professor and I have been doing some independent study under him for quite some time, but I was struggling in choosing the remaining recommenders. I have a few candidates:
1. A physics professor from an Ivy League university supervising a summer research project on supersymmetry, though this particular project is not very mathematically intensive,
2. A math professor from my home uni teaching me a graduate topology course this semester (this is the first graduate course that I have formally taken due to curriculum constraints); I don't have much interactions with him though,
3. A math professor from my home university who taught me an undergrad algebra course on representation theory last semester: we had a bit more interactions but I haven't worked closely with him,
4. A math professor from my home university that I have been doing some small group study under, but he is not very closely involved (our small group does meet weekly but he only occasionally comes in and discusses) and we started fairly recently; since I also hope to do an MPhil under him if I don't get an offer, I'm a bit worried whether asking him for a letter at this stage will make him feel negatively about taking me in as a master student.
Any advice would be helpful. Thank you!<issue_comment>username_1: The best you can do is to reply to the comments of the referees the best as you can and try to convince the editor that your paper is sufficiently novel for PRL. Try to answer very polite but on the other hand with some strong arguments. I would rather stay on the factual level about your paper and not start to discuss a relationship of referee A and your professor with editor.
But do not be disappointed if the editor will reject - the PRL is very selective. See the try as a possibility to improve your paper.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: When I was a Ph.D. student (c. 20 years ago), there was a member of the PRL editorial team who used to tour universities giving talks on how to succeed in getting published in PRL. IIRC, his main thesis was that the chance of success is improved by giving the manuscript a "self-similar structure" whereby it made the same set of points three or four times in successively increasing levels of detail.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/09/29
| 676
| 2,890
|
<issue_start>username_0: In my country, many institutes have the custom of TAs evaluating and distributing the marks of students of that particular course the TA is handling.
I am wondering whether it is a part of academic culture in the US or not.<issue_comment>username_1: While not universal in the US, TAs often grade student assignments and give the papers back to the students in a small group (section). Even exams, which might be graded jointly by all the TAs (one or two questions each for all papers), might have the papers handed back by individual TAs.
Of course, electronic marking is sometimes used and students sometimes get their marks directly from an automated system.
But the TA is often expected to have some knowledge of the progress of students in their section, so seeing the grades (and comments) is pretty common.
The professor, who is ultimately responsible for grading, will probably prepare grading rubrics for the TAs and will handle special cases on request, either from the TA or a student.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: **Yes, this is common in the United States.**
With the assumption that "Evaluate the answer sheets" means "Grades assignments/projects/exams"
In both my undergrad and graduate studies and personal experience as a TA, assignments/projects/exams were often graded by a TA.
In my experience I've found that a Professor will generally only participate in the grading process when:
1. The subject is very specialized. i.e. a semester project, or something that aligns with a professors specialty
2. The amount of student in the class is very low (< 50). Many of my smaller undergraduate classes were graded by professors either exclusively or in conjunction with TAs.
If we look at something like [Penn State's School of Science TA Info Page](https://science.psu.edu/bmb/undergraduate/teaching-opportunities) they specifically list grading a a responsibility of a TA. This responsibility along with the prerequisite that the TA either took that class and did well previously or has extensive knowledge of the subject is very common across Universities in the United States.
You also mention that a TA would "prepare presentations, frame questions, do a textbook reading, take small lectures" This can also be true, but varies more between professors than the position as a whole.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I think a lot of it depends on the size of the institution and whether there is a graduate program in that subject at the particular university.
At a R1 institution (major university), you could expect to have a graduate student or upper division undergraduate student grading your work in introductory courses.
At smaller regional schools and community colleges, it is fairly uncommon to have teaching assistants or funds for graders, so the professor grades the majority of the student work.
Upvotes: 3
|
2020/09/29
| 588
| 2,379
|
<issue_start>username_0: I no longer feel comfortable with my master's degree (Master of Divinity). Especially for theologists, the title of education should not be racially problematic (calling myself a master might make others feel like slaves). I don't need the MDiv for my job, so I am reaching out for having my degree invalidated.
Now, if I want to have the term "Master of Divinity" changed to a more welcoming title, where would I start? Is there a committee responsible for these titles? Let's assume this applies to the US first, before going global.<issue_comment>username_1: No, generally speaking, degrees cannot and won't be renamed after you've received them. While it would be fine to not use the title in day-to-day life (e.g. an email signature), most people would consider it inappropriate to leave it off a resume or CV. Degrees are only revoked when you did something fraudulent to obtain it.
You also cannot rename it (in formal contexts) as the comments suggest, e.g. to "MSc in Theology." You shouldn't insert things like "of Science" or "of Arts" where they don't belong in any context, though.
As far as your specific objection, I don't think it's anything you have to worry about, and I say that as someone pretty far to the left.
If you truly did want to remove "master" from all degrees, you would have to talk to 1) your university and 2) the accrediting body for theological degrees. I cannot imagine you would be very successful.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You should keep in mind that the “master/slave” dynamic is not inherently racist, particularly as it is applied to a graduate degree. You can definitely view the word “master” as racist if you try to and spin it to fit that type of narrative if you feel like, but most seeing that you have a “masters” degree, will not presume that you’re a racist or that you are racially insensitive for achieving a masters degree.
Nevertheless, you’d need to speak with the institution that awarded you the degree and they would, I imagine, have to put out a statement of some kind to apply it to all degrees awarded in the past and future. While I understand you feel a certain way, you should bare in mind that it’s really just not a big deal for an overwhelming majority of people. If you do want to appease a small margin of people though, I wish you luck on your journey.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/09/30
| 606
| 2,478
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently a Phd candidate, and I have managed to publish several articles in major journals in my field ( it is within social sciences). I am not quite sociable; I am the kind of person who prefers to work alone and spend time researching and writing. That is why I am not into the practice of presenting at conferences.
I am sure I can have like four conference presentations towards the end of my PhD. Do you think it is bad for my job prospects (to get a faculty position) that I do not have many conference presentations and that I tend to prefer tp work on publishing journal articles.
I would really appreciate your feedback.<issue_comment>username_1: No, generally speaking, degrees cannot and won't be renamed after you've received them. While it would be fine to not use the title in day-to-day life (e.g. an email signature), most people would consider it inappropriate to leave it off a resume or CV. Degrees are only revoked when you did something fraudulent to obtain it.
You also cannot rename it (in formal contexts) as the comments suggest, e.g. to "MSc in Theology." You shouldn't insert things like "of Science" or "of Arts" where they don't belong in any context, though.
As far as your specific objection, I don't think it's anything you have to worry about, and I say that as someone pretty far to the left.
If you truly did want to remove "master" from all degrees, you would have to talk to 1) your university and 2) the accrediting body for theological degrees. I cannot imagine you would be very successful.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You should keep in mind that the “master/slave” dynamic is not inherently racist, particularly as it is applied to a graduate degree. You can definitely view the word “master” as racist if you try to and spin it to fit that type of narrative if you feel like, but most seeing that you have a “masters” degree, will not presume that you’re a racist or that you are racially insensitive for achieving a masters degree.
Nevertheless, you’d need to speak with the institution that awarded you the degree and they would, I imagine, have to put out a statement of some kind to apply it to all degrees awarded in the past and future. While I understand you feel a certain way, you should bare in mind that it’s really just not a big deal for an overwhelming majority of people. If you do want to appease a small margin of people though, I wish you luck on your journey.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/09/30
| 704
| 3,052
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently received a grant (JSPS Kakenhi) to support research funds. For personal equipment, I will be listing a computer and camera. The computer is for computational parts of my research and the camera is to document fieldwork for professional-level photos that can be used in press releases, presentations, and publications.
I plan to ask the funding source (JSPS Kakenhi) directly. However, I am curious to know, in general, how funding agencies view individuals using equipment for personal projects (in addition to their intended research uses).
Is it in general appropriate or inappropriate (ethical or unethical) to use the camera as well for personal use in a manner that would not render it less useful for its research use? What should become of the camera after the two-year research support concludes? Is it only appropriate/ethical to use the camera for personal uses *after* the research funding end date?
Thank you for sharing your experience and knowledge.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Is it in general appropriate to use the camera for personal use in a manner that would not render it less useful for its research use?
>
>
>
It is inappropriate because it creates the false impression that the funds were spent for personal purposes instead of research purposes. Do not do it. However,
it is not unethical if the funds were really spent for research purposes.
>
> What should become of the camera after the two-year research support concludes?
>
>
>
The owner (usually the university) should continue to use the camera for research purposes until it is disposed of as worthless. There may be a process for the university to sell the equipment, but usually this process is deemed more effort than it is worth.
>
> Is it only appropriate/ethical to use the camera for personal uses after the research funding end date?
>
>
>
The funding end date does not matter.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Generally, the rules will say that the equipment is only to be used for research purposes. In practice, no one is going to mind if you watch a bit of netflix, or send some personal emails on your work laptop. No one will even check. I routinely use my work laptop (purchased on a grant) to edit holiday photos, and even have a couple of games installed. Similarly, no one is going to mind if you use your research camera for a few snaps of the research group's social lunch, but I wouldn't use if for your weekend side hussle of paid wedding photography. Its about being reasonable.
One important consideration is that these piece of equipment are often portable. This means that they can be lost/stolen, and no one is going to be very happy if your research camera is stolen while you are on a bar trip.
In both the last two places I have worked there have been schemes to purchase personal items of equipment like this when you leave the university. The price is often only nominal because the university writes off the value of small consumer electronics after 3 years.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/09/30
| 1,366
| 5,584
|
<issue_start>username_0: From the answers to [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/156010/35909), it is clear that TAs in the US are usually responsible for grading students' work.
In my country, most of the TAs face the following challenges:
>
> 1. Students confront TAs and attempt to negotiate for extra marks in order to pass, or to improve a grade;
> 2. Students confront TAs and attempt to negotiate for extra marks by using a friend's answers as evidence to support their case;
> 3. Students inquire about the subtle methods used in grading: the amount of marks awarded for each step, the reason for a decrease of even 0.5 marks, or they ask to see the solution manual, *etc*.,
>
>
>
And then these conflicts evolve into personal enmities, which may eventually cause the TA serious consequences (a heated confrontation, loss of students' respect, *etc*.).
The issue is worst if the assignment's answers are quantitative or mathematical. There is no solution manual and sometimes no way to guarantee consistent and fair marking over a great number of student assignments (even for a single particular question).
So I want to know how TAs in the US—or in other countries—avoid these complications. What are the key techniques?
Note: *Some say it's a minor issue. No. It is a major issue and often arises with TAs in my country, where the professor is not involved in the distribution or evaluation of grades.*<issue_comment>username_1: Tell students that, **"a TA's grades are final and non-negotiable,"** and that, **"any disputes should follow the usual channels."** Or, ideally, have your boss (the prof or whoever) or their boss (whoever runs, or has control over, the department) tell them.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In the United States, the professor responsible for the course should take responsibility for resolving disputes (but not requests for corrections and clarifications). There is an expectation that they will be heavily involved in grading, even if the bulk of it is done by teaching assistants.
In some cases, the professor may choose not to involve themselves in grading at all, and leave it up to teaching assistants to resolve disputes. I do not agree with this practice, but if you are stuck with it, you can handle disputes by:
* Using a rubric to grade.
* Resolving all disputes using the rubric.
* Refusing to compare the work of different students. In the USA, comparing students' papers runs a risk of violating privacy laws.
Ultimately a portion of students will never agree with you about how you grade (they want to learn something different from what you are expected to teach) and this simply must be tolerated.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The ultimate solution to this problem is for the professor to spend time and set question papers that are not ambiguous or amenable to varied interpretation by students.
You state:
>
> The issue is worst if the assignment's answers are quantitative or
> mathematical.
>
>
>
I think it is actually the other way around. Mathematical/statistical/OR/Computer Science and other computational or proof-based courses are rather easy to grade. The reason is that these subjects tend to have exactly one right answer **as long as the question is framed with sufficient care**.
As an example of a carelessly worded question which will eventually lead to student and TA/professor grading disputes is the following.
>
> There are two identical machines. There are two jobs waiting to be
> processed on these two machines. Job 1 takes 2 hours and Job 2 takes 3
> hours. How quickly can both jobs be processed?
>
>
>
Now, when setting the question paper, the professor may have in mind an unstated assumption that a job cannot be broken down into smaller jobs that can be parallelly processed. Hence, in the professor's mind, the right answer is 3 hours.
However, students may interpret this problem in such a way that the jobs can be broken down into smaller components that can be processed parallelly. In that case, the right answer is 2.5 hours. Students are not wrong in this case. The question was just silent on whether the job can be broken down into smaller components or not.
In social sciences, such as linguistics, art history, gender studies, development economics, there are very few "right" answers. A clever student can dispute any grading key set by the professor and implemented by the TA. Hence, you are likely to see higher amounts of grade inflation in such fields as compared to fields like math/physics/OR/statistics/CS/Engg, etc.
Finally, the professor should clarify these details in the very first session of the course that it is difficult to differentiate too finely between different wrong answers. Professors are not omniscient, and neither are the TAs. So, the student is not expected to dispute scores/grades too aggressively.
Inspite of all of this, there will still arise grading disputes and this is certainly one of the more unpleasant experiences of being a professor.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: One way to resolve this for the instructor to specify that assignment marks will not be reviewed unless there is an obvious error by the marker or a mechanical error in entering or adding the mark, and that all reviews will be done by the instructor once at the end of the term.
The effects of this are:
1. that students typically stop fighting for fractional marks that have practically 0 impact on the final grade at the end of the term, and
2. that students do not negotiate with the TA.
Upvotes: -1
|
2020/09/30
| 2,435
| 10,378
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently doing my Masters in a program that has both a practicum component and a thesis component. My research supervisor and I had been working over the past few years on a thesis topic. The last time I spoke with her was at the end of March and we were close to defending a research proposal (I just needed to do a few edits to the proposal). Unfortunately, the Covid-19 pandemic happened, and research was closed down for a few months during the summer. At the same time, I had to adjust to doing my practicum placement online. I didn’t hear anything from my supervisor during the summer and to be honest, I didn’t get in contact with her because I understood that her expectation was that I would get in touch once I had something to share.
In September, I tried to get in touch with my supervisor using her university email and I kept getting an error that it was “undeliverable”. I tried looking on the faculty listing and noticed that I could no longer find her there. I got in contact with one of the graduate student assistants in my program and told them about the situation and they told me to email my supervisor on her personal email.
I finally received an email from her, and she informed me that she left the university at the end of June because her the funding for one of her programs was cut. She also mentioned that she had informed the head of the department with my name and thesis topic and asked them to check in with me. I was never informed about this change. My supervisor didn’t send me an email to inform me when this happened in June and I still haven’t been contacted by anyone from the department.
I have tried to get in contact with a professor at my department and they basically said that I need to get in contact with a different person who would set me up with a new supervisor. This prof informed me that depending on how that conversation goes and who the possible available supervisor would be, I would have the following two options:
1. start working on a completely new research topic + proposal with a new research supervisor – which would mean that I would have to start my lit review all over again
2. possibility of continuing my current proposal if someone is willing to take it but knowing that no one has any expertise in that area
Considering that there is no one else in my department that focuses on my topic and I was counting on my supervisor’s expertise to guide me, my only option is to start all over again. This means that I will have to delay my graduation by a year. I feel so burnt out and the thought of having to start all over again is excruciatingly painful.
So, my question is:
1. Am I right to be upset that no one informed me that my supervisor was leaving/has left? I am not sure if I am justified in expecting the department to have gotten in contact with me by now? And expecting them to not have put the burden on me to figure out who to get in touch with to sort this situation? I feel like if I was informed in June, I could have started on literature review for a new topic much sooner rather than wasting time on my current topic.
2. What are my options here? have you been in a similar situation? what should I do? Part of me wants to just push through and start the new project. Another part of me wants to give up on the thesis and just switch to an equivalent program without a thesis.<issue_comment>username_1: Is your supervisor out of academia or does she simply switch the university?
Is there some possibility at your university, that someone external be a second supervisor of a thesis?
If not:
Maybe it will be fine for her if you find some "official" supervisor at your university, without the expertise, but she will be for you there to answer some questions you have? It can be that at the end the work will be published, so this would be also beneficial for her.
I would contact her if such a possibility exists, if yes, I would then start to look for some supervisor at your university who is fine with this.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Am I right to be upset that no one informed me that my supervisor was leaving/has left?
>
>
>
While it sounds like your subject (counselling psychology) is much closer than mine (mathematics) to understanding human emotions, I would suggest that it may not be productive to think of emotions in terms of "right" and "wrong". I don't know what your personal relationship with your advisor was, or what the norms/expectations are in your field/department with respect to supervisor relationships. While in most instances, I would expect a supervisor to let their students know personally if they are leaving the institution, it sounds like this may have been a sudden leave and supervisory expectations for masters theses can be quite different than for PhD theses. (In math in the US, the former is quite rare.) To continue...
>
> she had informed the head of the department with my name and thesis topic and asked them to check in with me. I was never informed about this change. My supervisor didn’t send me an email to inform me when this happened in June and I still haven’t been contacted by anyone from the department
>
>
>
With the pandemic and other disasters, I would guess that someone accidentally dropped the ball, so you could be upset, or be understanding, or some combination of both, but I don't think that any particular "choice" of these emotions is "right."
Anyway, after you learned this, did you contact the head of the department? If not, try this and/or the graduate student director if your department has one. Presumably your former supervisor's goal was that the head of the department would try to find you a new supervisor under which you can continue your current project. I don't know how it is in your field/department, but in mine if your thesis was essentially done, we would just have someone else formally complete the supervision even if we don't have an expert in the area.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: 1. I think your advisor should have set you up with another advisor before she left. Also she should have informed you, a meeting would be nice. It really is the least she could do, and In my experience this is common (including setting up with another advisor part)
2. Now, you can find an advisor on your own and defend to keep your topic. You will have to advise yourself a bit but if the new advisor is on board, why not?
3. Don't you already have a committee for your thesis? Usually there is the advisor but also additional committee members whose topics are somewhat close. Well, pick the second one or the third.
4. If you are very fond of your advisor, you can try to switch universities - you would be transferring credits (all or some at least), so you wouldn't start over a program per se but of course still you would lose time. And I wouldn't count on your relationship with your advisor considering you haven't been in contact often.
5. Even if you would have to start over a thesis, can't you find a tangent that can make what you have so far useful?
6. Check with your advisor more often in the future :)
7. Also, if you have a good match, starting over might not be the worst idea. A thesis doesn't happen over time, mostly the time here and there you focused and got an insight matters most and makes up the most of the thesis. This time you can try to focus and stay in touch with your advisor and push through! A lot of time is spent procrastinating anyway, and be honest where you currently stand with your current thesis and evaluate your situation (not in semesters but in progress)
I have witnessed people having to switch advisors, topics, start over, change institutions. It happens.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: This was something I dealt with more than once as steward and executive officer for my Graduate employees union.
First of all, your feelings on the matter are completely valid. I know it's a scary place to be, and I'm really surprised that Universities don't have better established protocols for dealing with this. Try not to panic, and don't worry if you don't have a representative. There wasn't much the union could do in these cases except act as an official witness during some meetings.
Secondly, in the cases I encountered, the graduate students were always able to have another faculty member step in and take over as primary advisor. I'm pretty sure they all were able to defend on the same thesis topic they were already working on, mostly on-time. Your thesis is about the work **you** have done, so it should all still apply, even if the new advisor isn't necessarily specializing in that field. Some academic departments have faculty committees for student welfare or sometimes a graduate student advisory committee. Those might be helpful resources, if they are available. You could also try reaching to any committee members (assuming you have one), department chair's, or any other faculty you've worked with. I find that most faculty are willing and able to help students in their department succeed.
I'll caveat some of this by saying that I only dealt with cases in the sciences where most students were on some form of assistantship funding (either teaching or research). I know that not all departments work the same.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> Am I right to be upset that no one informed me that my supervisor was leaving/has left?
>
>
>
Yes. University leadership has an obligation to ensure thesis research is adequately supervised. Part of that obligation is to promptly inform students that a supervisor has left the university. This should have happened within 24 hours of departure, if not before departure. The pandemic is not a valid excuse for a mistake this bad.
You ought to be receiving an official apology and a refund of any tuition or fees you paid for the period you were not supervised. However, my guess is the university does not have any money with which to make refunds.
>
> what should I do?
>
>
>
I would recommend continuing your current thesis with a new supervisor. Most academics will be very sympathetic to students in this situation and will want to help you. If your new supervisor is not an expert in the topic, they should attempt to get you help from other universities.
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/09/30
| 1,159
| 5,136
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently got asked by a professor who is also one of my recommenders to apply for a PhD in their department. This professor is also a co-chair of that said department.
Would I be incurring some kind of a conflict of interest by asking the same professor to also write me a recommendation? Or should I look for someone else to replace them as my recommender? The problem is that I met this professor through work and they can really attest (more so than others) to my critical thinking abilities as a prospective grad student.<issue_comment>username_1: You cannot incur a conflict of interest within someone other than yourself. In the situation you describe, the only person in jeopardy of a conflict of interest is the professor.
This professor might have a conflict of interest if the professor were to be both a "recommender" and also someone who "asked" you to apply to the professor's department. That is not your concern, since you obviously are not familiar with the details of your school's rules on ethics—the faculty at your school has seen this same situation hundreds of times, and the institution will have well-demarcated guidelines which tell professors how to handle these things.
(I am puzzled regarding two things
1. how is this professor a "recommender" without also already being committed to writing you a "recommendation"
2. the difference between being a "recommender" and someone who recommends (someone who "asked [you]") that you apply to a certain department's program.
Perhaps you are referring to the professor as having some formal status as a Recommender. If that's the case, it is unclear. *Anyone can be a recommender, but only a few are Recommenders.*)
Do what you will, and if there is any potential conflict of interest for the professor, that is for the professor to resolve. It is not your responsibility.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: No? I straight up got picked for MS and PhD programs through directly talking to some professors who then decided they wanted me.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: You should include a reference from this person in your application, as not doing so will look very odd. However, it won't carry much weight by itself. You should choose your other referees baring that in mind.
Added:
A referee doesn't have an 'interest' in the situation, in the sense of conflict of interest. They do not benefit from either providing or not providing a reference, whether the person does or doesn't get the position, and they do not actually have any direct influence over the decision.
Neither does providing a reference result in any duty to you other than providing a (reasonable) reference. The recruitment panel is looking for the best candidate(s), and the fact that one of them has said a particular person is a good candidate does not prevent them from then choosing someone new who turns out to be better.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: "I recently got asked by a professor who is also one of my recommenders to apply for a PhD in their department. This professor is also a co-chair of that said department."
That means he wants you in, and that he knows you. In general recommendation letters serve the exact purpose of having someone who is minimally verifiable and known to have some minimum competencies to vouch for you. This is often meant to impede a random person who never delivers anything or maybe hasn't even graduated/got a job to apply for a program and be accepted based on faux papers. Sometimes, people will check in with the letters authors to ask further questions, which you should be comfortable with.
A co-char in the department knowing you and vouching for you basically renders the process of recommendation letters useless. If he disapproved of you, no recommendation letter would change his mind, and I've never heard of a recommendation letter smearing someone-'s reputation (they at worst look like some default encrypted message saying the writer doesn't really know the student). Someone who would badmouth you should (and normally would) refuse writing a recommendation letter for you.
However, recommendation letters may still be required as a formality, hence why the co-chair would write one himself, as there must be at least one letter attached to your application. Also, keep in mind that this gentlemen may no longer be in the department by the time your papers are evaluated, who knows, right?
I'd bet that this professor knows the rules of engagement, so he knows if it's okay or not to write a letter himself. If there is a conflict of interest, that should be on himself, not on you, who should not be in disfavor because a member of the committee appreciates you (unless you are family or something related, in which condition he would not be allowed in the commission to judge your case or vote for your acceptance or dismissal).
Finally, I'm only aware of programs that required at least two recommendation letters. I had to deliver 3 to apply for a master's program. So your others letters could and should be written by some independent third parties.
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/09/30
| 980
| 3,949
|
<issue_start>username_0: An essential assumption of this question is that **I own**, without restriction, the copyright of my papers. I am a novice Sci-Hub user. How do I make my papers available to other Sci-Hub users?
Edit: If your answer is to post the paper somewhere other than Sci-Hub, please explain how that leads to the paper being available in Sci-Hub. I want to target people who only look at Sci-Hub for papers.<issue_comment>username_1: "Sci-Hub is a shadow library website that provides free access to millions of research papers and books, without regard to copyright, by bypassing publishers' paywalls," source: [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sci-Hub). "Sci-Hub obtains paywalled articles using leaked credentials." So, it seems, Sci-Hub focuses on papers owned by corporations, rather than individuals.
There's surely less interest in providing access to papers owned by individuals, since those individuals can simply make their papers publicly available. Nonetheless, let us suppose that Sci-Hub takes an interest in making more works available. Then you just need to make papers available where Sci-Hub looks.
Even technical report repositories such as arxiv may forbid Sci-Hub from redistributing papers. So, there isn't much of an incentive for Sci-Hub to move into this space: They create trouble for little reward.
Sci-Hub could start looking at personal websites, but, what's the reward? The material is already accessible. Sci-Hub could also start allowing authors to upload content, but, again, what's the reward?
I don't really see why Sci-Hub would invest in making papers owned by individuals more accessible. Their niche is elsewhere.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: First, congratulations for defending free access to knowledge.
As for the question itself, as @Lighthouse Keeper said, the question should be reformulated. Since what the SCI-HUB proposes is to making accessible the scientific texts closed by paywall. So, at the first glance your text isn't targeted for this tool. However you could upload your work to the initiative libgen (a cousin to SCI-HUB).
However, something that were not said yet is you can publish in Open Access Journals. There are some journals that are really good - just be alert to the predatory ones.
\*\*
In addition, I have seen some researchers that leave their publications linked on their professional pages. Here are trade-offs to do. Get a DOI and recommends the use of sci-hub or publish on your own website (GitHub etc) without DOI.
But in any way, encouraging their colleagues, students and others to use the sci-hub and defending the free access to knowledge you already have an immense contribution.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: [Sci-Hub obtains paywalled articles using leaked credentials](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5832410/). So if you want to get your papers onto Sci-Hub, just follow this procedure:
1. Publish them in journals that your institution subscribes to.
2. Donate your institution credentials to Sci-Hub. If you can't do this legally, "accidentally" fall for one of the phishing emails Sci-Hub regularly sends.
They will do the rest.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Sci-Hub is not like arXiv, bioRxiv, ChemRxiv, viXra, GitHub, FigShare, Mendeley, ResearchGate and Academia.edu, where you upload your own papers.
People do not upload their own papers to Sci-Hub. They publish papers in journals and Sci-Hub then makes the PDF copy of such journal papers, available for free.
If what you want to do is make your own paper available for free, I would suggest to use one of the platforms mentioned in the first sentence of this answer (except for SciHub).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: SH/LG allow users to upload books & papers, although the upload interface can be tricky to find. The paper upload interface is at (currently): <http://librarian.libgen.gs/scimag/librarian/>
Upvotes: 3
|
2020/09/30
| 440
| 1,880
|
<issue_start>username_0: I asked my professor to supervise me. I took several courses with him. He replied to me that he is confused about whether he will have enough time to supervise me. He is extremely busy though! I wanted to ensure that I will take minimum time. Is it okay to reply in the following way?
"My previous collaborative research experiences will help me to work independently. I believe that I will require minimum time from you"<issue_comment>username_1: It is "okay" to say something like that. But words aren't likely to be very effective in such situations. It would be better if your previous collaborators could intervene on your behalf here, assuring the professor that you are capable of carrying on independently.
He is right to be cautious. If he can't give you the help you need when you need it, it is you that will suffer.
While you continue to try to convince him, you should probably also look at other options.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: To me this sounds like a polite rejection. Depending on your culture this may differ.
If you push harder, likely either you will find a stronger rejection (though this isn't necessarily a bad thing, just confirms where you stand), or in a worst case scenario you will convince them to supervise you but you will never receive the supervision you need and find yourself like many of the question askers here who can't get advice from their advisors when they need it and find themselves lost in academia.
An active supervisor is much more useful to you than a "best professor" who never answers your emails.
I would probably respond with something like, "It sounds to me like you think you are too busy to take me on as a student, and that I should find someone else to supervise me. Is this correct, or should we plan to speak again in (several weeks/a couple months) to discuss?"
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/09/30
| 1,362
| 5,939
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a researcher in a STEM field and work at an institute where research staff salaries (including mine) are dependent entirely on third-party grant money. I've already successfully obtained research grants and served as the PI for a few projects.
In my spare time (i.e., after I go home for the day) I very much enjoy reading and writing about topics in the humanities, and I have recently had contributions on these topics published as peer-reviewed articles in humanities journals. In retrospect I wonder whether having published in these venues was a good idea.
The problem has to do with my current and future grant proposals; some funding agencies require proposals to include a CV listing *all* of the applicant's peer-reviewed publications in the past *n* years. (And even for those agencies without such a rule, the reviewers can easily find all my publications online if they care to look.) I am wondering how the presence of my non-STEM publications will be viewed by the STEM proposal reviewers. Are these publications going to be interpreted negatively, as a lack of research focus on my part? Where feasible, should I include an explanation in my proposal CVs that these publications were avocational (and if so, how should I word this)? Should I entirely give up my beloved hobby of writing for humanities venues in order to better secure my funding prospects as a scientist? Or are my fears here entirely misplaced, there being no downside at all (or maybe even some benefit) to having the occasional humanities article in my publications list?
Two further things to note:
1. I realize that there are a couple possible workarounds that I might try, such as using a pseudonym when publishing in the humanities, or simply omitting the humanities publications from the CVs I include with my grant proposals. However, both of these necessarily involve some deception or bending of the rules, and in any case won't take effect for the proposals I've already got under review.
2. There are already a couple of questions here about publishing in foreign fields ([Can I publish in a field completely unrelated to my present field?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/93422/7468), [Is it good reputation for a researcher to publish an article belonging to different research field?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/143191/7468)), though these are from students who haven't yet started their PhD. My question is more about how an unorthodox publication list will affect STEM research grant applications specifically, for an applicant that already has a doctorate and some project lead experience.<issue_comment>username_1: I've served as a referee on grant proposals to large public-sector research funding bodies on a couple of occasions. If a PI had demonstrated the ability to achieve peer-reviewed publications in another discipline as well as in the discipline most directly related to the proposed research, I would be inclined to view that favourably. But that doesn't necessarily mean that every referee feels the same.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I've looked at a lot of CVs of job applicants, for proposal review, and for promotion packages. I've also sat through a lot of review panels for proposals, as well as hiring and promotion committees. I can't think of a reason why publications outside one's field would be looked at negatively by myself, and I've never heard anyone raise any concerns either, even though such publications occasionally show up on people's CVs. So no, I don't think this that there is any disadvantage to it as long as it is the "occasional paper" and not half or a third of your publication list—at which point it would suggest that you are not focused on the thing you're currently applying for.
Is it viewed *advantageously*? Not really either: You're generally evaluated for a job or a proposal, and what matters in this context is how well you're qualified for that one thing. The fact that you've published in other areas might be noted as a curiosity ("darn, this person has managed to have a side-line of humanities research -- that's quite a stretch to be good at both!"), but it's irrelevant to your primary area in which the application is, and so is generally just ignored.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: **It depends**.
As a general rule, if your main discipline is X and you also published in discipline Y, as a researcher in X I would be inclined to be impressed by that (assuming I was satisfied that you were doing good work in X, which is the main thing I would care about, e.g., in the context of evaluating your grant proposal). In fact, it’s quite likely that I would be a little bit jealous of you for doing that, and that it would remind me of my own unfulfilled aspirations to someday publish work in discipline Z.
The relatively narrow exception to this rule is that there are specific areas Y which I might take a dim view of, and by association I might hold a not entirely favorable view of people who publish on Y. I don’t mean something like the humanities in general, but some specific sub-disciplines which for example may strike me as intellectual dead ends or being grounded in some political agenda or ideology that I disapprove of. Unfortunately academia does have such pockets of weirdness where all sorts of things get published that I personally would not want to be associated with. I could give some examples, but... let’s not go there.
In either of these cases the effect would be extremely small in any case. Since I am supposed to be evaluating you for your work on X, I would do my best to keep my focus on that and not get distracted by other essentially irrelevant things. But — speaking of the humanities — I am human, so can’t completely ignore the possibility that my judgement would be tainted in some small way by the extra information, for better or in some cases for worse.
Upvotes: 4
|
2020/10/01
| 1,361
| 5,988
|
<issue_start>username_0: Looking for advice.
My coworkers and I have been working on a project for about two years, and we are right now in the process of writing a paper. About a year ago, we contacted a friend of mine who is also a researcher, told him about our results and asked for his insight. After a couple of zoom calls, he pointed us toward a research direction we had not thought about. After pursuing this direction for some time we found out it did not work, so we ended up doing something different which does not include our colleague’s suggestions at all.
Now, after discussing with the coauthors we have concluded that it is not fair for any of us to include this person as an author, since his contribution has been of no impact for the paper in the end. I agree with this decision. I also believe it would not be nice for our colleague to just find the paper online without any news, and especially since he is my/our friend I feel that I should send him the manuscript via email before sending it for publication. I wonder how I should I deal with the issue of authorship in this email: should I just send him the paper without him as an author? if so, should I explain to him that we do not think his contribution deserves it? or should I ask if he wants to be one? I am not familiar with the authorship etiquette…
Thanks in advance for your advice!<issue_comment>username_1: **TLDR:** Unless explicitly discussed otherwise, your friend does not expect to be a co-author. Just write a friendly email thanking them for the discussions and asking them if it is ok to include them in the acknowledgements.
As pointed out in the comments, this highly depends on which field we're talking about. In some fields, even pointing in a direction **that actually turned out to be right** might only be worth an acknowledgement (probably specific though, "we thank X for point to the results published in "). Since this is clear to most people, based on the information you provided, I would not think that your friend even expects to be co-author at all (unless they explicitly asked to be co-author, which would be border-line in terms of academic integrity but happens when the person urgently needs another co-authorship for formal reasons - in that case, however, one would expect that person to (a) communicate this clearly beforehand and (b) do much of the mindless busy-work, e.g. beautification of images).
That being said, I would assume that your friend knows they're not going to be co-author and thank them by email for the interesting, albeit ultimately fruitless discussions (but hey, maybe we can explore this in the future,...) and ask them if they agree to be mentioned in the acknowledgements. In other words, put a positive spin on it.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: *We made good progress pursuing direction X, but, it didn't work out due to Y, so we pursued Z, as described in the attached. We've included an acknowledgement of your input. Thanks again.*
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Under the circumstances, I doubt your friend expects co-authorship of the paper. Your idea of sending a courtesy email to let him know of your proposed decision (instead of having him read the paper and see he is not on it) sounds like a good idea to me. I recommend you write a courteous email thanking him for his help, letting him know that you and your colleagues discussed the issue, and letting him know your thinking on the matter. Do not frame this as a decision that has already been made --- instead, offer him an opportunity to respond before you and your colleagues make your final decision, in case he disgrees with your views and wishes to make an argument for his inclusion. Do not invite co-authorship unless you intend to follow through on that.
It is also worth noting that you could give your friend an *acknowledgement* in the paper rather than co-authorship. If you decide that this is appropriate then you could offer this as an alternative to co-authorship. If your description of events is accurate, the most likely response is that your friend will be happy to have had a chance to hear about the matter before seeing the published paper, and most likely he will agree that he has not done enough to warrant co-authorship. In the unlikely event that your friend insists that he deserves co-authorship, refer the matter for decision to your Head of Department or some other third-party for an independent decision.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Often the process of discovery can take you down roads which lead to nowhere. It's sometimes useful to point that out, in case others question what was tried in reaching your ultimate destination. Though authorship may not be appropriate, and effort was expended and some kind of recognition for effort and contribution may be appropriate, it can often help others to understand more deeply when you leave signs along the way, "don't go this way, because of this."
Just a thought.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I'm afraid I have to disagree with many of the above answers. It does not matter whether the approach your friend suggested panned out or not. It matters how much *work* your friend did. If it took him 3 years of experiments to invalidate a promising approach, then yes, the contribution was valuable and he deserves a co-authorship even if the approach did not solve the problem. Of course, in the other extreme, a few minutes chat and a suggestion to try running the data through a different filter, may not merit authorship even if it has cracked the case.
Your colleague devoted time an resources to your problem. Consider the next time you consult him. Do you still expect him to devote the same amount of effort? Why?
Specifically in your case, a few zoom calls may not be considered a lot of effort, but the reason for not adding him as an author should not be "it didn't help", but rather "I didn't waste his time".
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/01
| 1,163
| 4,860
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an international student from China and currently pursuing undergraduate degree in Canada, majoring in computer sicence. My academic experience is very tortuous and I want to tell my story and ask my chance to be considered for the phd study.
This is my second undergraduate study. I got my first honor degree in ECE at University of Windsor, Canada with distinction in 2015, standing at the top 15% of graduated students with a GPA of 83/100 (It doesn't look amazing but the university gave low grade to students). Afterwards I worked for 2 years in related industry. During the work, I found what I was more interested about is computer science. However, without a single computer science course taken, I find myself lack appropriate academic training. I planned myself to pursue a master degree in US. After getting a GRE score of 324 with 4.0 in analytical writing, I fortunately got admitted by Columbia University in 2017. This turned out to be a horribly overwhelming experience possibly because I lacked the foundations of computer science, I got academically dismissed 1 year after for not being able to maintain a gpa higher than 3.0. After a thorough retrospection, I made my decision to get a second bachelor degree in computer science in Canada. Right now, I'm 1 year to graduation with a GPA of 89/100 (not sure about the rank but should be close to top 1st or 2nd). I do get involved in some research projects with professors during summer, though I got no publications. However, the experience in Columbia seems to haunt me. So here I have some questions regarding the application:
1. I acknowledge that I have to include the dismissal experience in my application. The question is when calculating GPA, does the grades in Columbia take into account for the overall GPA or the GPA's are seperated for each institution I've attended?
2. How much will admission committee care about the dismissal experience? I did perform poorly in academics during some period of my life, but I think I have recovered from that not only in terms of mentality and maturity but also improvement in my ability of study. Will this experience kill my chance to get considered?
Thanks for any comment<issue_comment>username_1: Can you provide more information about where you would like to apply for a PhD? Is it in Canada you want to apply? Having this information will make it easier to answer more specifically.
A lot will depend on where you are applying. It is unfortunately true that many institutes that receive a high volume of PhD applicants will dismiss applications with rough patches in educational history. However, you might be able to circumvent this in two ways:
1. Add a cover letter explaining 'extenuating circumstances' and explain the rough patch in your history. Then go on to stress the impressive industry and academic track record including a switching of subject.
2. Correspond directly with supervisors. If you can apply for a specific PhD project or a specific research group they will often help with the application process via the university. Start by reaching out to professors and meet with them to discuss your interest in their work/research group and take the time to explain 'face-to-face'/over zoom what happened in your past. This kind of personal interaction tends to lead to less callous responses than CV review procedures. Additionally, talking to a specific supervisor is generally a good idea before applying to a PhD as finding an understanding and supportive advisor is key to a successful and satisfying PhD experience.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> without a single computer science course taken, I ... got admitted by Columbia University
>
>
>
If Columbia admitted someone who had never taken a course in CS to their masters degree in CS, I'd say they probably made a mistake. A surprising one. It's clear to me that the problem was
* You did not know you were enrolling in a degree that is not for CS beginners
* Columbia did not realize you were a CS beginner.
You are not a CS beginner any more, so this whole situation is no longer relevant.
>
> does the grades in Columbia take into account for the overall GPA or the GPA's are seperated for each institution I've attended?
>
>
>
Each institution will compute its own GPA. It would be unreasonable to combine them, as each university has its own grading system.
>
> How much will admission committee care about the dismissal experience?
>
>
>
If you explain the circumstances (not prepared for the degree program) and what you did about them (second bachelors degree with good grades) then I think most admissions committees will consider your more recent grades to be more important.
You should seriously consider if you have any use for more degrees. You might have enough already.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/10/01
| 966
| 3,725
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've read the other questions on active vs passive voice. But my question is slightly different.
Let's say I'm writing in active voice and using "I" as I'm primarily writing a thesis-like document. When I present results, is it okay to say "we" as a way include the audience? For example, consider the following paragraph:
**Option 1:**
"I used algorithm X to perform Y on data Z. [...] In Figure 1, we can see that A is greater than B."
Is that acceptable? Or is it more proper to rewrite as:
**Option 2:**
"I used algorithm X to perform Y on data Z. [...] In Figure 1, I show that A is greater than B."
My intuition tells me option 2 is more correct; however it just sounds slightly awkward to me in certain places. Are there better/other options than the aforementioned options?<issue_comment>username_1: Technically, you can, but I've never seen it used in a paper.
This is borderline to a personal opinion, but based on what the papers I read, the 'pedagogical "we"' is rarely used in a paper or thesis (I have seen it used in summer schools, but never in talks). In such situations, authors tend to use the neutral 'one' (as in 'one sees from figure X, that' or 'plugging equation (a) into relation (b), one obtains'), which is a bit clumsy but apparently the accepted solutions.
My personal opinion is that the 'pedagogical "we"' comes across as somewhat condescending ("How are we doing today?"), but again, that's just a personal opinion. In the end, it is your paper.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: This depends to a very large extend on the field. In my field there is a very strong sense that using "we" in a single authored paper is completely inappropriate. You make the argument, so don't hide behind some annonymous others by using we. If you make a statement, then make that unambigous by using I.
In other disciplines the use of we is more common.
So the best thing you can do is look at your intended audience, and find out what they expect. It is much easier to communicate if your style corresponds to their expectectations. You could try to fight those expectations, but that is a very hard fight, which you will likely loose. So I would recommend against that. After all getting your research across effectively is much more important than opinions about "proper" style.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Apart from issues of singular versus plural first-person in active voice, ... it is often possible to use third-person (active), simultaneously shorten the sentence, and perhaps only refer to the objects, phenomena, and processes in play. E.g "*Application* of procedure X to stuff Y produced whatever-Z..." (Or "Procedure X applied to stuff Y ...")
That is, often, "unwinding" the grammar can show that there are redundant or functionless phrases, which can be dropped, and in fact clarify.
(In my field, mathematics, in English, in the U.S., there certainly is a tradition to use plural first person, but, truly, I've found that often unwinding the grammar allows shortening. And, often, unwinding allows active voice rather than passive, and shortens and simplifies.)
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: You can use:
>
> I used algorithm X to perform Y on data Z. [...] In Figure 1, we can see that A is greater than B.
>
>
>
or
>
> I used algorithm X to perform Y on data Z. [...] In Figure 1, I show that A is greater than B.
>
>
>
I prefer the former, since *you performed the operation* and *we can see the results*. However, I'd opt for:
*We can use algorithm X to perform Y on data Z. [...] In Figure 1, we can see that A is greater than B.*
Because both you and the reader can use the algorithm.
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/01
| 637
| 2,720
|
<issue_start>username_0: Let us suppose that I am following my MSc studies. At the end of my compulsory courses I have an accepted article for being presented in a conference with my advisor. For graduating, I need to prepare a thesis, and I want to include this article as the main part of my thesis (80% of the thesis). So I have the following questions (I believe it is not necessary to open another thread for this):
a) How should I do this thesis? Should it be an extended version of the article that is about to be published?
b) How should I cite the article that will be published in my thesis if most of it is based on my article? I believe it would be somewhat troublesome to cite one's work at every moment in the thesis?
c) What would happen if, after the article is published and my thesis is in the digital library of my university, somebody passes a plagiarism checker (like Turnitin) to it? It would detect my thesis in the university repository. I could be blamed for self-plagiarism or even plagiarism (because my supervisor's name would not appear like an author in the thesis document, but as a supervisor).
Any help would be much appreciated.
Thank you very much.<issue_comment>username_1: Many journals have specific policies that allow the submission of material that has previously appeared in an MS or Ph.D. thesis. This is an exception to the general rule that submitted manuscripts must consist of new, not previously published, research.
Similarly, many academic institutions have policies that allow for the inclusion of text from published papers in MS and Ph.D. theses if the journal publisher also allows this.
Assuming that both your institution and the journal that you're publishing in have such policies, then you can reuse a journal article in your thesis. This is really quite common in many STEM fields. When you do submit your paper, you should make it clear that some or all of the paper has previously appeared in your thesis and refer to the publisher's guidelines on this.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: You could include the article verbatim and not be accused of plagiarising. (Self-plagiarism isn't relevant here.) But, a thesis has different demands to a journal, so changes will be required.
**Explain that your thesis is based upon a published journal article** (or published articles), you can include the explanation in the introduction, a single citation (to each article) will suffice. There's no need to distinguish material that hasn't been published (or has been published elsewhere).
In cases when a journal article appears after a thesis, include a mention, e.g., *a preliminary version of this article appeared in X's thesis [cite]*.
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/02
| 4,667
| 19,958
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've just graduated in STEM in a small but respected university in Europe. I had two supervisors who hold their PhD in my field. The aim of my PhD was to utilize a particular chemical compound in the synthesis of various materials. Very little literature is available about the topic and neither of my supervisors had ever published a single paper about it.
I had a tough time during my PhD because I was left figuring out completely on my own how to do research without having a real expert beside me I could learn from. Moreover, I was prevented from asking for help to anyone. Whenever I asked them for help, my supervisors would just throw out some buzzwords or vague explanations to the data I had produced, which were seldom appropriate. Sometimes, I was also given the silent treatment. Back then, I thought that this was the way a PhD is meant to be done. You know "you have to be independent", "your PhD is only yours"....
However, I eventually realized that my supervisors were not those experts they were supposed to be and came up with the reason behind their "hands-off" attitude. I found out they did not aware of the physical, chemical, and even toxicological (!) properties of the compound I had been working with for the last three years. They were even oblivious to the appropriate scientific terminology and apparatuses relevant to the research topic: one of them was unaware that the term polymerization was also applicable in the context of inorganic compounds, not just organic or biological polymers, while the other did not know a (very) common technique you are supposed to learn during the second year of your bachelor's degree. As an "expert" of the topic, he should have been definitely knowledgeable of. I could continue with other examples, but my thread is not about shaming my supervisors. Their knowledge and expertise are under their responsibility, not mine.
After my graduation, I left both my supervisors as I felt I had been deceived and lured to work with them. I do not trust them anymore. Right now, I continue to feel as if I were used, exploited and tricked. Probably, my PhD served only as a +1 in their CV. I do not think they were so interested in the project or in my growth as a researcher. At the same time, I do not regret my time as a PhD student. It was a stimulating intellectual experience: I learnt a lot of new things and I met many interesting people during my journey.
**My questions are**: how "normal" or common is it for a supervisor to put forward a PhD project without any expertise or even knowing the terminology and techniques relevant to it, especially in the STEM field? Is doing so considered ethical?
**IMPORTANT:** this post is **NOT** a vent or a blame game. I am not interested in discussing about red flags or the specific behaviour of my advisors. I am sharing my story just as an example to kindle a meaningful discussion.
What I am actually interested in is **your** opinion and/or experience regarding this kind of supervision style and its possible impact on the professional life of a freshly graduated PhD.
**Clarifications**:
* They asked me to join them in this project as I was one of the top students of my cohort. I know I should have asked more questions to my supervisors when I first met them. But, you know, I naïvely thought that they were experts. Otherwise, why taking the role as a PhD supervisor?
* Switching supervisors is not an option here, moreover I couldn't walk out (or run away, as JeffE would say) because I unfortunately realized the lack of knowledge of my supervisors at the end of my project. If I had dropped out from my PhD, I should have paid a hefty penalty of several thousands quid.
* I was fully funded by a public institution. Is this the reason why they were not so invested in the project? They would not have lost any of their money.<issue_comment>username_1: I can't really judge whether the OP's treatment was appropriate or not, but there are situations in which it would be and, in those situations the answer to whether this is "acceptable" would be yes. I also think it is somewhat common, but far from universal.
The bottom line is that at some point along the line the student becomes the expert in the research topic and leaves the advisor(s) behind. In some situations that comes earlier than in most. The fresh PhD is the world's foremost expert in whatever the specific topic of the research is.
It is also true that in many fields the *process* of research is distinct from the actual questions asked. In those fields a person can advise another on that process and check that they follow correct process to the end, even without knowing a lot about the specifics. Research questions that rely heavily on statistics fall into such a format, though there are many variations that need to be considered. In mathematics, the validity of a proof can be checked by someone who didn't develop it.
However, for a meaningful and worthwhile advisor-advisee relationship to develop, the advisor(s) needs to be honest about what sorts of help they can and cannot provide. That understanding needs to be reached at the beginning of the relationship and if not satisfactory, then either the student or professor(s) needs to withdraw. Some students (a fair number, but not universal) can excel in situations of minimal *specific* help. Others (almost certainly the majority) need a bit more. Some need a lot more.
Moreover, a lot depends on what the advisor(s) are willing and able to do to advance the career of an independent student after they complete their work. If they are completely supportive, then there is little reason to be alarmed. The fact that you are exhausted at the completion of your degree is not a valid measure here. Nearly everyone (I suspect) feels that way to some degree.
Red flags arise when you aren't told you won't be helped, or if you are told you will be but abandoned. Other red flags appear when the advisor abandons you after you finish. But having to do much of the work of it on your own, isn't, in itself, a red flag, though it doesn't work for everyone. Be glad you finished successfully. Congratulations.
I'd suggest you reevaluate your decision to leave them behind. It may not be the right decision.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I would usually expect that the a supervisor had some connection either to the application domain, or the technical domain of a project.
I'll give examples from biology, because that's what I do: A PhD might be to use a particular technique, say a new type of microscopy, to study a particular biological process, say cell division. I would expect a supervisor to be an expert either in cell division, or in microscopy (but perhaps not both).
The best situation would be to have two supervisors, one who was an expert in microscopy and one who was an expert in cell division, but thats not always possible.
I think if your supervisors were unable to give you any guidance, on any aspect of your project, right from the start, then they probably shouldn't have been supervising you. Or at least, not on that project.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: The existing answers give a good perspective on this situation, but I don't think they directly address OP's question:
>
> How "normal" or common is it for a supervisor to put forward a PhD project without any expertise or even knowing the terminology and techniques relevant to it, especially in STEM?
>
>
>
In short: not common. Some cases when I've seen this happen:
* A project deviates from the initial concept because a student insists on a particular approach
* A colleague leaves the academia, and somebody needs to take over the supervision of a student
* The supervisor might want to branch out to another field out of personal interest
* There is a new hot topic in the supervisor's field, and having some work on that may improve the group's chances to get funding
* There is a "low-hanging fruit" project which is likely to produce easy publications or help secure funding, but it is not scientifically interesting to the supervisor
Generally speaking, working outside one's primary field usually means less immediate returns for the supervisor (in terms of funding and publications), so in my experience groups which are primarily funded through grants tend to specialize quite narrowly to keep the machine running.
On the other hand, taking more students may be incentivized by local institution rules - the number of total active students, or students with external funding, may be a metric used to judge the performance on the department/group. I think this is most likely what happened here, given your description. Either way, good job on persisting, and don't spend too much time trying to guess somebody's reasons for whatever they did.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Summary:
--------
* I don't see anything particularly wrong with the hands-off approach to PhD. This may be a perfectly valid, though maybe old fashioned approach to PhD.
It is not all that common any more to take that point of view, but it is not wrong per se.
* However, the expectations/approach should have been clearly communicted. Unfortunately I have rarely met any such communication, and in consequence have to say this is a common and major source of misunderstandings and conflict. (Not restricted to theses, happens will all kinds of projects)
* It is also not uncommon that a PhD project goes into terrain that was so far compartively unknown in that group.
* It is not uncommon that at the end of the PhD, the PhD student is more expert in the topic of their thesis than their supervisors (the PhD student will not have the breadth of knowledge that the supervisors have, though).
---
TL - DR
-------
I did my PhD in chemistry in Germany (already a while ago), and it shared some of the characteristics that you list.
However, with one maybe vital difference. When I was requested for the first time to do a review and did not yet feel qualified to do that, my professor basically told me to wake up to the fact that I'm a fully qualified professional with all rights and duties a chemist has - already since when I finished my Diplom (Master). The PhD will later on demonstrate that I meanwhile acquired further experience in doing a several-year research project *on my own*.
This is AFAIK how PhDs in Germany used to be.
I also know current professors who say that the PhD thesis is an exam where the student signs that it is their own work. They will judge the work of the student, and whenever they have to intervene that means a negative mark agaist the student because the intervention is not the student's *own* work.
I now contrast this with the "new" way of looking at PhDs, which is bsaically seen as another step in the professional training - implying that without PhD one is not fully trained.
Consequently, a new-style PhD student would typically have an amount of supervision that for the old-style PhD student means they are totally incapable of doing their professional work on their own, i.e. close to failing.
OTOH, this doesn't mean the old-style PhD student is condemned to do lone-wolf research. But it does mean that they are/were expected to pick the experts with whom to discuss things on their own. I.e., *I* may have said: "I really need to get a pathologist's opinion on my samples as reference. Could you please intoduce me." - "Of course" as opposed to "Dear cbeleites, you really need to get a pathologist's opinion as reference, I'll introduce you to XY".
For strangers in the internet it is impossible to judge whether you did not get adequate supervison or whether your supervisors trusted your professional abilities and gave you the opportunity to show the full extent of your capabilities.
---
Personally, I rather think the new style PhD students are abused by denying that they are fully qualified professionals (and also by putting them into a very conflict-prone situation where they are *told* what to do - and are then judged on what they did as if it were their own decision). OTOH, expectations should be clearly pronounced early on (in my experience this unfortunately is rarely done, and it is a major source of conflict, for all kinds of theses, research projects and jobs in research)
Of course, some people do better with closer supervision, while others do better with more loose supervision.
---
As for the supervisor not being an expert: my PhD was in between vibrational spectroscopy (the supervisor's field of experience) to a medical application and developing statistical data analysis (chemometric) methods. He was expert in neither of the latter two fields, but we had collaboration with the university hospital and the was clear that statistical data analysis is important and that he wanted the group to develop expertise there.
The supervisor at my first "post"doc expressed it even more clearly, saying "I won't be able to discuss statistics with you. I hired *you* because we didn't have anyone with any such expertise before."
---
As for the toxicity of the compound mentioned in one of the comments: here I'd totally go with the "old-fashioned" point of view. You were a fully qualified chemist already before you started your PhD. Here in Germany, that includes exams on toxicology and legal aspects of working with hazardous materials. It was your professional duty to check out hazards and make sure appropriate precautions are taken. (Yes, your professor has an organizational duty as well, but it very unlikely that you couldn't have known how to approach chemicals)
---
I was also lucky in that I met other people during my PhD time who told me that due to the pressure of the PhD, they were completely mad at their supervisor when they handed in - and in hindsight (years later) realized that most of that was maybe less due to the supervisor's shortcomings but rather due to their level of stress.
One of them told me that they had seen many PhD students putting everything they had into their PhD - and then afterwards needing a break from chemistry and research (spoke of someone who ran a shop for a few years before returning to chemical research).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: It happened to me and wasn't ethical.
I had my own grant, my MSc advisor suggested a specific group at another uni and I set up an interview by phone. There I went.
So for the prof/group it was basically some free TA ("max 120h/year" said grant) and another face at lunch/seminars, at the cost of workstation and desk. I had total freedom from interference (haha), could travel whatever I wanted within my own budget. Plus I went to some conferences important to the group where I wasted my time but I suppose I learned by observation how to benefit from attending/ how things are run/ ... .
This was a waste of my time, and lasted 18m until another group with their own open position (=their money invested) hired me; yes this other group found by talking with someone at a relevant symposium I went to.
I guess it happened because there were more math PhD grants than the market could logically fulfill late 90s, so many industries were digitizing etc. That combined with a small EU country, what I wanted to do didn't have a suitable group (over the border had, I later realized, but I doubt the grant was portable) though there were some a better fit.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I am going to go against the current and say that this is not so uncommon and also not so unethical.
Research is a moving target. New tools and methods are continually being developed. Professors and PIs might take interest in some of those new methods, either because they look promising, or because funding institutions support research on them, or because the PI simply likes them. It would be very inefficient if PIs had to become experts in every new method before they are allowed to hire PhD students to work on it.
So it will happen sometimes that the PI is an expert in the general field, but not in the particular method to be investigated. The PhD student then has to learn about this method, and usually also explain it to their supervisor. The supervisor will still provide useful input regarding which problems to solve, settings to consider, etc., but the particulars of the method will mostly be left to the PhD student. I actually had this experience during my PhD, and I am happy about how it taught me to be independent and come up with ideas by myself.
Of course, not every PhD student will be happy to have so much independence. I have heard many colleagues express the opposite opinion: they are happy to have close guidance and as many people as possible with whom to discuss the topic. This is why, as other answers have mentioned, it is important that the supervisor sets the right expectations at the beginning.
However, I think that your interpretation of the situation may be too negative. You write:
>
> I felt I had been deceived and lured to work with them. I do not trust them anymore. Right now, I continue to feel as if I were used, exploited and tricked.
>
>
>
I do not think you were used or exploited. You were *paid* to learn about a topic, and maybe help introduce this knowledge into the department. It seems that your supervisor was the one who secured the funding, and they chose you. It is also reasonable to assume that, if you were one of the top students of your cohort, the supervisor relied more on you to be able to work independently and take the "difficult" project, the one in which the department has less expertise.
So I suggest not to take it too personally, and focus on the good things that came out of it. I do not think anyone had the intention of tricking you.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I have started a PhD last year in a topic far from my background. I have been naive and I did very little research on my now ex supervisor.
I started and then discovered that he was "hands off", meaning that the supervision consisted in meeting without any very meaningful advice on research. This, together with the my non expertise on the topic, made the experience terrible. I felt that I was risking too much, also because I tried to collaborate with other people but I found hard to do so (he did not want to share).
I would have preferred to be aware of his style. I think that this situation was unethical, because I did not feel confident enough to pursue a PhD in something way too outside of my comfort zone without any interaction with an expert or so. For me a PhD is a journey to become a good scientist, otherwise why should I need to get a PhD if I am already able to do good quality research? But a colleague of mine actually preferred this style, he said that he wanted to "direct" his own research, to be able "to do what he wants". In the end, in general I think that´s unethical to not discover from the beginning the lack of knowledge and that´s not correct to not admit it, but there are people who did well with this style.
I left to join a different university, but I always think that I really admire who was able to do research without any particular support. I think you should accept them as they are. They are people and people are not perfect, but I understand if you do not want to work with them again. I would not burn bridges. Now you know that there are professionals like that and If you want you can always avoid them.
EDIT: I just started the new PhD somewhere else, I cannot answer you yet. I really wanted a supervisor and meaningful discussion with experts who inspire me. But I think you should be happy with your outcome, your independence that maybe came with a price: the feeling of loneliness during your PhD. You did your best where you were, I think you can be proud of yourself and forget the rest.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2020/10/03
| 1,801
| 7,507
|
<issue_start>username_0: **TL;DR**: Is it possible to pursue applied research in AI and theoretical physics after a PhD degree in CS focusing on applied AI (as a professor at some universities)?
### Long version:
Hello, I'm a 3rd year undergrad at a university in Vietnam.
I've been wondering about the practicality of the above questions for quite some time but I have not yet been able to decide.
For a little bit of background:
I have a fairly good foundation on CS because I have been doing competitive programming since I was 13. Until recently, I feel that research in AI was too applied (I did some research with an advisor on computer vision recently), and then, I discovered theoretical physics and got the feeling that "This is for me, my true self".
However, the problem is, in my country, pursuing theoretical research does not really guarantee a stable future career (with good money). So, I'm thinking about doing a PhD in CS focusing on applied AI and self-study physics. After that, I will probably get a position at a university and conduct research in both direction (more focus is put on only one direction, of course).
Can you kindly provide me some pieces of advice for my future career path, or, is my plan possible?
Thank you for spending time reading and answering my question.<issue_comment>username_1: It is *possible* (even “practically, in real life”) to do all sorts of things that are very difficult to do, like: publish five bestselling novels; climb the highest mountain in every continent; win a gold medal in the Olympics; become a successful movie actor; etc etc.
The point is that questions like yours (which seem to get asked here regularly) are very difficult to give a meaningful answer to. We don’t know you and what you’re capable of. *Some* people can do the thing you’re asking about, others can’t. So just asking “can it be done” is a question that, if interpreted literally, has an easy answer that’s not very interesting or helpful (“yes, it can be done”), and if re-interpreted to mean what I think you really want to know (“can I , the specific person asking this question, do this thing?”), isn’t a question that I or anyone else here have the information to answer.
Perhaps the most helpful way of addressing the question is to look at the *number of people who can do the thing you’re asking about*. Well, I’ll be honest, that number is extremely small. Most people who want a career in academia already find it challenging enough to do one PhD in one discipline and then pursue a position as researchers in that one discipline. And even from among those super talented people who find it a bit easier than the rest and are smart and hardworking enough that they can realistically contemplate specializing in two very distant disciplines, one of which being as notoriously difficult as theoretical physics and being acquired purely through self-study, only a vanishingly small fraction of that already small group will care to invest the time and energy that it would take to broaden their reach in such a way. For those people it’s not really about a lack of ability - more about the fact that it’s an inefficient strategy for becoming successful and maximally realizing one’s potential; but it kind of amounts to the same thing in the end.
Summary: can it be done? Yes. Is it something that I’d recommend to anyone to have as their career plan? No.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I’d like to offer a complement to [username_1’s answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/156165/1277). Roughly summarising, that answer points out that this is possible, but is a challenging plan, and (for most people) very difficult to succeed with — all of which I agree with.
But I wouldn’t therefore advise abandoning the plan entirely. Ambition is great! The important thing with such an ambitious plan is just to **aim high, but be aware of the difficulty, and make sure you have a good fallback plan if it doesn’t all succeed.** The thing to avoid is just staking *everything* on an ambitious plan, with no fallback.
For instance, if a PhD student told me they wanted to work on a particularly difficult problem, I would make sure they were aware of how difficult it is, and I would strongly advise them to *also* work on some more tractable problem at the same time, so they don’t risk ending up with nothing. But I wouldn’t discourage them from pursuing the difficult problem altogether.
In your case, the plan you outline has a built-in fallback: you can, at any point, give up on the physics ambitions and just continue with the PhD in AI. So if that’s a fallback situation you wouldn’t be unhappy with, **I’d say go for it on your plan** — take the PhD in AI, and self-study in physics on the side as far as your time, energy, and interest allow. (And it may not have to be just self-study: you may be able to take physics courses on the side, if your university allows this.) And be aware that it’s unlikely, though not impossible, that you’ll be able to get into pure theoretical physics research this way; but the physics you learn will almost certainly be useful anyway, as having a knowledge of a wide range topics (and not just the obvious ones) is very valuable for researchers in any field.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I'd like to address what I see as a misconception in the original question. You wrote,
>
> I have a fairly good foundation on CS because I have been doing competitive programming since I was 13.
>
>
>
But computer science is not the same as computer programming. Here is an analogy: Computer programming is to computer science as elementary arithmetic is to university-level mathematics. When you were young, you learned how to do addition, multiplication, and so on. As a third-year undergraduate, you've surely been exposed to calculus, linear algebra, differential equations, and so on. No doubt you appreciate that being able to add and multiply is quite different from being able to integrate!
Computer programming is a skill that can be applied in many different fields and in many different ways. It can be applied to AI, but also to mobile phone applications, accounting software, controlling traffic lights, streaming movies, and lots of other things. It's a very practical skill, like being an electrician. Computer science, on the other hand, is more about what we can compute, how fast we can do it, what quality of results we can expect, and so on. It's more like being a physicist with a deep understanding of quantum electrodynamics. That physicist may know how electricity works, but you probably wouldn't ask him to wire your house. In just the same way, there are computer scientists who are terrible programmers.
Given your interests, you might find yourself interested in scientific computing at some point: Writing code to predict the weather, determine the strength of a bridge, simulate electrical circuits, and so on. Or not. It can be hard to know where you'll end up. The wise thing to do is to put yourself in a position where you have the flexibility to pursue your interests.
I don't know you or your situation, so I'm not qualified to make specific recommendations. Instead I'll leave you with a question. Suppose you pursue just one field for the length of your career; somehow you never get the chance to contribute to the other field. Forty years later, which will you regret more: Not researching physics, or not researching AI?
Upvotes: 4
|
2020/10/03
| 2,351
| 9,864
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a 4th year Ph.D. student majoring in computer science. My advisors don't do anything for me unless saying that my ideas are really simple. I've got so many rejections for my papers, on the other hand, I see people who write more than 20 papers in a year. Can someone guide me on how is it possible? I cannot change my advisors and I should do it on my own.<issue_comment>username_1: Be patient. I wonder why you want to publish a paper when you have a job to do already, which is the job of finishing your doctorate?
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: A few remarks:
1. Those who write 20 papers a year typically write with co-authors. At this level of productivity, the authors often take over a part of the research and writing for the paper. More senior authors often do not conduct the experiments, but rather have a share in designing the overall idea developed in the paper and a part of the writing process. If you are really on your own and cannot join a team (e.g., take over a role in some other project work in your research group), then you can't expect this level of productivity from yourself. And ultimately, it's also not needed.
2. If your advisors dismiss your ideas as too simple, there are four possibilities:
* the idea is actually quite simple, and others have tried it out and published about it
* the idea is so simple that it's non-publishable
* the idea is simple, it has been tried out, and the results were bad
* your advisors are wrong
I've seen cases where the second case held, but later another researcher tried it as well and successfully wrote a paper about it.
3. About paper rejections at conferences: In my experience, the quality of reviews varies greatly between the conferences and the reviewers. Sometimes, reviewers take a lot of time to write precise reviews for why exactly they recommend a paper for rejection. These are very helpful reviews and should be taken very seriously. But then there are others in which for clear rejections the reviewer does not take the time to write up why exactly the paper should be rejected. Quite often, when the answer should be "the paper is overall not written well enough" or "I don't believe that the result is significant", the reviewer singles out something that is easily defensible objectively, such as a missing comparison against something else, missing references, or the like, and bases their rejecting recommendation on that. The problem with these reviews is that while the reviewer is normally correct (but sometimes isn't), it doesn't help the author to address the core problem. Normally, your advisor should spot such reviews and tell you what to focus on, but if you get little help, that's not good.
4. If you see other published papers that are similar to your own ones, read them and then think about *why* they were accepted. What is the core contribution that the paper made? What is so cool about it that the paper was accepted, despite its inefficiencies? It may simply be that for the papers you are submitting, no program committee member has a good reason for why they should make a case for you that exactly your paper should be accepted. And then it is rejected even though it's not actually bad on any scale.
5. Solicit feedback from peers (fellow PhD students) if your advisors won't give it. Don't ask peers about feedback on grammar, spelling, and the like on your papers. Ask if they would be writing an "accept" review for the paper or not. Any why they would do that. Get feedback on the paper story and if the argument and structure is convincing.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Even while I'm writing this, I feel so embarrassed. I cannot publish a paper.
>
>
>
Try not to blame yourself for this. Based on your post, I suspect it's not your fault, but a product of your situation with your advisor. Most PhD students are only able to publish because of good support from their advisors.
>
> My advisors don't do anything for me. I am totally alone.
>
>
>
This situation is a serious problem.
PhD students typically **need** good advising; it's necessary for survival, like the water, food, or oxygen of getting a PhD. If you feel alone, you need to be able to go to someone for help; and if you get stuck, you need good guidance on directions to take.
Are there other PhD students in the program who you can find support in? Are there other professors who you know who might be sympathetic and help you with your research and paper writing?
You also need to be willing to ask for help, and not to feel embarrassed and ashamed. If you aren't willing to ask for help, then no matter what mentors are available to you, you won't be able to succeed. Needing help doesn't indicate a problem with you. It's completely normal.
>
> When I come up with an idea, one of my advisors tells me that "it's an easy idea that comes up to every mind, so I'm sure that it's duplicated".
>
>
>
username_2 has suggested some possible reasons for this. It's possible the idea truly is too simple, but it's also possible it could lead you to a good direction. However, you could reflect on your advisors' behavior here. A good advisor will not just tell you that it's easy, but suggest a better related direction. For example:
"That idea X is interesting, but it's a bit simple. What might be better is to combine idea X with Y. If we want to pursue this direction we might first try to read some papers on Y. If you're interested in that, I recommend also looking at Z."
Are your advisors' answers like this? Or are they just shutting down your ideas without help? If the latter, have you tried asking them, straight to the point, what is wrong with the idea and if they can help refine it into something better?
Be confident on this; you need to know what's wrong with the idea, and they have the ability to explain it.
If they are not willing to be helpful even after being asked, then the problem becomes worse. You would need to look to other mentors for support.
>
> When I wrote a paper and tried to publish it
>
>
>
Did your advisors help with writing the paper at all? If not this is another major red flag for your relationship with your advisors.
>
> I see people who write more than 20 papers in a year.
>
>
>
No one writes more than 20 papers in a year. Some people publish that much, but if so they likely personally wrote none of those papers. The "hard labor" of writing the bulk of the paper is usually done by PhD students.
>
> Can someone guide me on what I should do?
>
>
>
To summarize:
* **Start asking for help.** No one can make it on their own; you need guidance and mentorship, just like everyone else. The hardest part is that you also need to *believe* that it's not a problem with you or you will be too afraid to ask for help.
* **Try to utilize your advisors more effectively.** Find what feedback they are able to give and utilize it. Ask them direct questions. Ask what is wrong with your paper, how to address reviewer feedback, what related work to read, etc.
* **Find other mentors,** including other PhD students or other professors in your program if at all possible.
* **Consider therapy to try to build self-confidence.** It helps in many cases try to deal with the underlying psychological painfulness so that you can focus more on asking for and getting help.
This isn't an easy situation, I'm sorry you have to deal with it. Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Research a particular specific open problem until you are an expert on it and know its state of the art. Then think of a promising solution to it. Write it down. That is a non-simple paper, journal article material.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> Can someone guide me on how is it possible?
>
>
>
There are several ways that some people use to publish more papers per year:
1. Some split their project in several ideas that can be published as separate papers to make as many papers as possible. For example, in CS, they may publish an algorithm in a conference paper, and then an optimized version of that algorithm in a follow up conference paper. Another example: some may publish a paper about an algorithm, another paper about the whole system, and another paper about the application of the system to a given domain.
2. Some choose to work on small projects that requires a small amount of work to make and that are likely to succeed rather than work on long and risky projects. Sometimes, the idea are simple and they just combine two ideas together to make a new paper.
3. Some publish in easy journals and conferences where papers are easy accepted
4. Some participate in projects from other students/researchers. If someone has 20 papers, they are likely participating in many papers from collaborators/friends.
To make this clear, I don't say that you should do all of the above. I just say what some people are doing to increase their paper count.
Also, experience plays an important role. Researchers who have experience writing papers can write/conduct research more quickly. The first paper that you write takes quite a lot of time, the second one is faster, and so on.
Also having several papers is nice. But remember that quality is also important for a student/researcher. Sometimes, having a paper in a very top conference or journal might be viewed as better than having 10 papers in some weak conferences and journals. The reason is that writing many low-quality papers is easy.. but having papers in top journals/conferences is not easy and will show your research ability. Thus, although you want to increase your number of papers, I would recommend you to still make sure that you write some quality papers. I would say that aiming at a balance between the number of papers and the quality is important.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/04
| 4,594
| 18,550
|
<issue_start>username_0: I’m a graduate student in mathematics. One day, there was a discussion between graduate students about how many books a working mathematician has. Then each student would talk about their personal math library and then they would name their preferred book in each area of math.
All the students had a relatively small library. When it was my turn, I simply said the truth that I have around 1,000 ebooks and 100 physical books and that I have bought all of them and have not downloaded any of them illegally. I also explained that I like to learn a lot of math and I’m passionate and enthusiastic about math. I also explained that I have not studied all of these books thoroughly.
Then suddenly a professor stated (when others were also present) that I have more books than the university library. He then said that I should immediately seek professional help.
I was very offended by what this professor said but I never discussed it with him because I thought that I was in an emotional state and I did not want to speak to him when I was not calm. After a while, I thought that it was my own mistake and I should not be so honest about my math library.
So I have now two questions:
1. Is the number of my books unreasonable compared to how many books a graduate student or working mathematician own?
2. If I need professional help because I buy math books regularly?<issue_comment>username_1: tl;dr I think your professor was rude (and your library is underfunded).
I probably accumulated that many serious physical books over a long career, most of which I gave away when I retired. I have a friend with many more.
I still maintain a substantial collection of recreational mathematics, and some classics.
I don't collect ebooks.
I suspect that nowadays you're at the high end of the distribution for the number of physical math books mathematicians own. But that's no reason to need or seek therapy. Some people just like books.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Personally, it seems to me that he was just making a joke. Awkwardly, perhaps, but still, just a joke. Your personal library seemed to him (and me) to be so "over the top" that it was hard to fathom. Had he said something like "Wow, are you ever intense?" it would have had about the same meaning.
It is possible that he had a negative feeling about it, but I really doubt it.
Or maybe a meaning like "Wow, you need to learn to relax a bit."
But if you are so intense that you are ending up hurting your health, then professional help is actually advisable.
Upvotes: 8 <issue_comment>username_3: 1. you probably have bought many more books than most mathematics grad students because 1100 books is prohibitively expensive. I didn't have an extra $1100 lying around when I was a grad student. All the physics grad students I know with substantial collections did download the PDFs illegally, and used their collection more for reference and particular sections of books rather than reading all of them.
2. you definitely don't need professional help just because you own a lot of books.
If you are looking for advice on your mental or emotional state, I think your reaction is a little off. The professor was either wrong or joking, but very likely you shouldn't take his advice so seriously. The fact that you took it to heart enough to write in about it might show that you're a little insecure about your habits (or you're fixated on other people agreeing you're correct or proving the professor wrong or something). If you lived with less of that stress you might be happier. Being stressed about these things is well within the range of normal behavior (though you may see more success if you watch out for overreacting in professional situations). Just something to think about.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: I own at least 4,000 physical books... True, some of my faculty colleagues own nearly none, and some treated me as a lending library. :)
Prior to the existence of any sort of electronic books, at active math departments it was essentially necessary to have one's own copy of a high-demand book, otherwise the endless cycles of recall requests would prevent useful access. In those days, in the Princeton Univ math library, most of the most significant books were eternally checked out.
Nowadays, yes, many things are available on-line without violation of rules. Still, not everything.
Also, the process of access with physical books adds a random element that is occasionally very lucky, in the sense of *accidentally* finding something you didn't know you wanted to find... in the course of looking for what you *thought* you wanted. In contrast, with a too-controlled search (especially if one is missing some keywords) one rarely finds anything one wasn't already aware of to some degree.
It's true that technical books are expensive. I did pay for all my books myself, rationalizing that what I saved on clothes was spent on books...? :)
It is also true that some people pretend that they "know enough" to do whatever their research is. Maybe so, but my own approach seems to require that I learn more and more things. Surely a matter of taste.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_5: One thing that you might want to pay attention to is that this interaction touched on the topic of **money**, which is a sensitive subject for a lot of people and can trigger a wide range of emotions. The fact that you could afford to buy over 1000 math books, in a place where your library may be underfunded and maybe your professor also cannot afford to buy as many books as he would like to, might have aroused negative emotions of jealousy, resentment based on economic or social status, and similar things. The professor’s remark might have been driven by such emotions. When people are upset they are more inclined to say hurtful things that reflect their own personal frustrations.
Moreover, it’s not just that you owned up to having (relatively speaking) a lot of money, but you are making a use of that money that the professor might consider frivolous or inefficient. The truth is, as much as all of us mathematicians love reading math books, it’s not realistically possible for someone to read that many books at a level of depth and over a time duration that makes it sensible to buy them when you are in graduate school. So one may get the feeling that you may be a person who likes *owning* books just for the sake of owning them even beyond the point where it might actually help you learn more mathematics (disclosure: I also went through a period where I also bought more math books than I’m able to read; eventually I realized there wasn’t any point to it so I stopped doing it). The professor’s negative reaction might reflect such a sentiment.
>
> 1. Is the number of my books unreasonable compared to how many books a graduate student or working mathematician own?
>
>
>
This question doesn’t make any sense to me. Different people have different preferences, and one should not decide what or how many books to buy by comparing oneself to other people.
>
> 2. If I need professional help because I buy math books regularly?
>
>
>
First of all, “professional help” is a very silly euphemism. If I were a psychologist I’d take offense that people refuse to name the service I offer but instead resort to such coded language. But if you mean to ask if you need therapy, I’d say you don’t need it any more than the professor you told us about, or any other random, healthy person.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: When I was a grad student (that was a very long time ago - we had no e-books), I loved to buy (mostly graduate-level) math paper books. There used to be more book store in NYC than there are now - we used to raid Book Scientific, Mir books at Viktor Kamkin, Warren Books, the math section at the Strand (still open), barnes & Nobles on 18th st, McGraw Hill, and the Dover books section in the Coliseum. I definitely had over 100 math books when I was a student, and I have even more of them now, as well as file cabinets full of copies of journal articles. I don't think this number of math books is unreasonable, especially if you're working on something obscure.
I further suspect that these days an average math graduate student has even more ebooks and articles than you because they download them for free from sites I don't want to mention. (Your insistence on paying for your ebooks may be a little unusual.)
Unless this causes you problems (like, you spend all your money on books and can't afford food, or you have no place to keep your paper books, or you feel obligated to read all the books that you have and have no time for anything else, etc) - I don't think you need to seek professional help or change anything, except:
Two pieces of advice that I want to give - avoid ostentatious displays of wealth in U.S. academia (it may be OK in other contexts) and avoid judging other people.
>
> I have bought all of them and have not downloaded any of them illegally.
>
>
>
I'm sure some of the people who heard you, resented that you have the money to buy all these books, while others don't; and also resented your unprovoked dig at people who download books.
A better answer would have been to say that you have hundreds of books (without elaborating how you got them) and which ones are you favorites.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: One possible interpretation is that the professor felt uncomfortable because he has far fewer books than you do, despite him having had years more to accumulate them. That implies he's less dedicated to the subject than you, which threatens his status. The only other way he can frame the situation is that you have too many books, and he has the 'normal' number.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: In my opinion you do not need to seek help. It is normal for some to have high amount of interest in their work. Just remember that other things in life are good too. I myself forgot about many things because I was so focused on academics which for me was also math.
It seems to me that two things are important here. Firstly, graduate math and science fields seem to be an extremely cruel, cut throat, rat race today. These fields are highly sought after today and correlated often with power. It is because of this that a wide range of people enter them. And this brings me to my second point. S.T.E.M. today is highly populated with mediocrity at best and more probably what should be called complete incompetence. Often the race for power is more about social dynamics of regular people that otherwise would not have anything to do with the field if it were not for the hope of power and influence. All to often you will hear about relationships and other things, which is an example of how unrelated these things are to competence in S.T.E.M.
So while I don't think you are crazy, the out look is not always good.
On other hand professors have to sometimes deal with witty energetic students, to appear to be outsmarted is often taken poorly, though such behavior on both parties is extremely childish in my opinion and lacking of perspective. The professor is a working person perhaps short on patience, and couldn't entertain such things any longer. So no big deal then.
Also in my opinion the number of books is pointless metric. Only good texts are of value, and any amount of them is always in short supply.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_9: **Movers!**
The most probable professional help you are going to need is when you are moving. 100 physical books look manageable and fit even in a small car along with other items. Well, you probably have other (non-math) books as well.
I have a first-hand experience of moving ~4000 books family library and a ~1000 books personal one, both of them few times. Man, these things are HEAVY ! The last time I just called movers - money well spent, including the tip, I am sure.
Your professor probably did some medicore joke, related to how less-educated people traditionally see the owning any ammount of books.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: I read that the famous computer scienist and mathematician [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Knuth) owns a large personal library. He is notorisouly known for a series of books with the aim of covering a large portion of computer science and having a very detailed bibligraphy.
In my studies I once visited a professor of statistics from the psychology department. As I entered his flat, books where laying, open, on the corridor. He had a personal library, spanning across multiple rooms, guess way more than 300 books. He was a great person!
I, for myself, also collect books. But I limit myself to hard-to-get and out-of-print ones. I have a collection of some old books from my field that are hard to find otherwise, bought over time at ebay and other online-shops. Furthermore, I would also suppose I have an "above-average" math book collection. In terms of physical books maybe not that much as you own, but I also own a big ebook collection.
Beside from that, I also have, permanently, a collection of 40-50 books loaned from the library. That even caused me some trouble recently in the corona crisis, as libraries shut down and I am not that much around the university anymore. So, I totally understand your passion for books.
If you would tell me about your book collection I would see it very positively, and maybe you can be of great help to your colleagues if they search for literature or need access to a particular book.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: I disagree with the prevailing sentiment. You could probably benefit from speaking to a professional.
1. "I spent most of my income on buying books." This is not a smart thing to do with your money. Unless you have a fully funded retirement, you are frittering away your money on something with extremely limited value. Books have almost no resale value, as I discovered when I sold my own academic collection.
2. "My mind was occupied by what this professor said and I could not concentrate for one whole week." This is not a healthy reaction to any kind of social interaction. Learning some coping strategies to escape these obsessive thoughts would certainly help you.
3. A thousand books is not necessary or useful. There are very many working mathematicians who do not accrue this number of books. What would you even do with them? Did you index them so that you can quickly search for information? What fraction of them have you read? Are these really useful tools to you or just tokens to accrue and hoard?
I am not a professional psychologist, but based on your unhealthy response to an offhand remark about what appears to be an obsessive (and certainly financially unsound) habit, I think you could probably benefit from talking to a professional. That's what they exist for: to help people. Think about it.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_12: When I was early in my studies (physics) I had a real hard time with computing integrals. I simply would not "see" how to go from that weird integral to the nice ones and solve the equation.
Our teacher (a prof that was doing both the lecture and the practical exercises) told us that we need to do at least 50 integrals to "get the vibe" (or something like that).
I did I think ~~2000~~ (well no, 2000 is probably the effect of my memory and the trauma, let's say a shitload, which will be probably hundreds) of them (all the books I could find, it was in the very early 90's so no internet) and when the exam came and I was struggling with an integral, he told me in a disappointed tone that he warned us about the 50 to do. I took off my bag the pages and pages of integrals I was training on and he said without smiling
>
> yes, some people should seek medical help to understand when to stop
>
>
>
I think this is close to what was told to you.
I got a great mark, it was his weird way to acknowledge the huge effort I made to try to solve integrals.
You did not mention the country, such wording would not be surprising in a country like France (where what we call "second degree" (in terms of meaning) is part of the interactions between people).
**So just relax - he was probably complimenting you.**
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_13: **Do you need professional help because I buy math books regularly?**
As long as you think your habit of buying math books is useful to you, given what your goals in life are, you don't need to seek professional help. Even if many other people besides your professor say that your habit is out of line, and even if they can motivate why that's the case, that is not necessarily a good reason why you should change your habit or seek professional help in doing so.
This is true in general, whether it's about you buying lots of books or something else. You should take serious any arguments presented and then see if that would impact your assessment on whether or not your habit is useful to you. Changing a habit simply to fit in better with how other people are going about their business, is never a good idea.
Just think about what would have happened had [“<NAME>](https://jrbenjamin.com/2013/07/30/turning-coffee-into-theorems/) sought professional help to become a more "normal" person:
>
> <NAME> was one of the most brilliant and prolific mathematicians of the twentieth century. He was also, as <NAME> documents in his book The Man Who Loved Only Numbers, a true eccentric—a ‘mathematical monk’ who lived out of a pair of suitcases, dressed in tattered suits, and gave away almost all the money he earned, keeping just enough to sustain his meager lifestyle; a hopeless bachelor who was extremely (perhaps abnormally) devoted to his mother and never learned to cook or even boil his own water for tea; and a fanatic workaholic who routinely put in nineteen-hour days, sleeping only a few hours a night.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_14: Simple answer. Anyone who loves a discipline is likely to want to own a part of it. Whether its owning a piece of a '58 Ford, a 2 million year old fossil, or a piece of the coliseum, tangible objects brings us closer to our fascinations.
Your fascination with owning mathematics books, whether or not you've even read them, is just proof that you are a lover of math.
This is something to be proud of. So go buy more, add to your collection, and tell everyone else to go read comics.
Upvotes: -1
|
2020/10/04
| 596
| 2,500
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently close to publishing a paper that I first sent for review 5 years ago. The reasons why the review process was so long are not entirely clear to me, and are beside the point. During that time, I have not done any significant work on the paper, except for editing it for clarity—the vast majority of the time, the paper was with the journal.
I'm unsure what funding information I should put on the paper in this case. I wrote it, and it appeared on arXiv, during my PhD. In the meantime, I had a post-doc, and now I have just started a new post-doc. Should I mention all these sources of funding, or only the ones from during the PhD? A similar question applies to affiliations.
My field is mathematics.<issue_comment>username_1: As I often try to remember, a stable baseline for such things is honesty. So, perhaps something like "the main part of this work was partially funded by X. Revisions were partially funded by Y and Z".
(I'm assuming that "partially" is the correct thing in your situation...)
In the U.S., in math, the funding agencies not only "require" such acknowledgements, but do want to be able to "point to" them to make an impact on higher-ups, including the U.S. Congress. I somehow doubt that Congressional staffers are fact-checking the NSF's claims... but, still. :)
Similarly regarding affiliations, I think, though in that regard the more functionally relevant item is probably "current contact information". At the same time, you could also credit former employers/institutions with "partially funding" the research. Although I don't see this in any U.S. math rule-book, it would certainly be honest and fair.
(Years ago, a senior colleague of mine here in Minnesota, <NAME>, in the intro to his very nice monograph on linear analysis, explicitly thanked "the farmers and workers of Minnesota" for supporting him while he did that work.)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Funding should be that which contributed to the paper and the research that went in to it. Unlikely that anything later than that would be appropriate.
There are two purposes for affiliation. One is to acknowledge any support of the institutions that, again, contributed to making the paper possible. But the other is to make it easy for people to find you if there are questions or suggestions. A footnote in the paper about your affiliation *then* but listing your current affiliation to make it easy to find you might be a good plan.
Upvotes: 3
|
2020/10/05
| 3,110
| 12,733
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been offered a PhD in a European country which I have accepted and I started attending (my first month). However, just few days after starting here, I got another offer (from a different country) with a subject that interests me more (honestly, it's my dream research topic since UG school).
Internally, deep inside me, I want to leave and pursue my dreams and the things I am more passionate about. However, I feel very bad and selfish to do this. The supervisor at the first institution struggled to get me the funding and to get me rolled in without hustle and this kills me morally.
I accepted the first offer because the second one was still too far and I wasn't given enough time from the first institution to wait for an offer from the second one (the subject is also the closest among all others to my interests).
My engagement with the first institution is still on the trial period, in which case I can cancel and leave without any problem.
I don't really know what to do now. I have good relationships with my current supervisor, and he has faith in me. I also have great relationships with the research team. I just don't have enough courage to tell them such a shocking decision.
I want to get some advice, from a career point of view (should I pursue my dream research topic or not?), is it morally acceptable to do such a thing in my case? And what are the possible implications on my current supervisor and the first institution (impact on funding, impact on his reputation, etc.)? What are the possible problems I could face from a legal and administrative point of view?
In case I am advised to leave, what is the best and the least hurting way to tell the first institution and the supervisor? Should I do it face to face or only by email? How will I return back their material without showing my face?
And the last question, what could be the possible reaction of my supervisor?<issue_comment>username_1: To be honest, you will not be spared the moral decision. There will be a number of angry and/or unhappy people if you leave, there is no way around that.
The core question is: do you know the other supervisor? Will you be happy with them? Is the added value of the other topic/institution so much more than your current that this difficult and costly decision is worth it?
Because, yes, you will burn bridges. You have now to evaluate whether it is worth it. Do not look just at the institution, but also at the topic and supervisor. They are your key factors.
Should you find out it's not the right thing for you after all, that first institution is closed to you. I do not expect them to want to take you back; it would be unbelievably magnanimous (and lucky, namely that they would have a position and would re-offer it to you) from them to do it - and risky, too.
That being said, keep in mind that, they may be unhappy, but it is *your* life and your future at stake here.
In the end, nobody can make this decision for you. May your decision be the right one for you.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: If you have *just* started the first PhD, I don't think there will be that much anger towards you. At this point there has not been a substantial financial, advisory or intellectual commitment to you. You are not abandoning a project midway through its completion.
Of course, it depends on the PI of lab you are leaving. Maybe they had another student that they could have taken instead of you and your leaving will cost them a spot. If they are a senior person with a big group, your departure will have minimal impact on them. If they are a junior person building up their group they may have more invested in you and feel more animosity. I personally would not begrudge you. If your current advisor is a good person you can just ask them for their advice.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: From a career perspective, it doesn’t matter if one is your dream and the other is not. What matters is:
* What is the future of each individual field?
* How many publications does a PhD student in each group churn out during his/her PhD, what is the quality? There can be orders of magnitude in differences in quality
* How is the general funding? If you need expensive equipment, can you get it?
* To how many conferences do students typically go?
* And if you are not staying in academia (most likely) what are the job prospects in each field?
That is all from a career point of view (which your question asks). From a work perspective, the 'mood' culture of a group is more important. I also think is it a good idea to follow one's dreams (if you did enough due diligence to see if the reality in the field matches approximately what your dream is; example: like I find biophysics extremely interesting, but the daily work would be standing in a lab, which I can only bear for like once a week, it is too dull for me).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: **Go to the Dream University**
This quote from your question says it all.
>
> Internally, deep inside me, I want to leave and pursue my dreams and
> the things I am more passionate about. However, I feel very bad and
> selfish to do this.
>
>
>
In this case your dream is achievable. Follow it. Everyone else will be OK. Your supervisor will probably get another student and even if he doesn't he'll have forgotten all about you in a year or so.
In contrast if you don't go then passing up this opportunity will eat at you. Whenever things are hard at OK University you'll be imagining "What if I went to Dream University?". You will also start to resent your OK University supervisor. You've given up a dream to avoid inconveniencing him. How can anyone be grateful enough for that? You only make this level of sacrifice for your immediate dependant family (wife and kids.)
Accept the offer in writing with Dream University, get conformation in writing, make sure that you are in. Then tell everyone at OK university what's happening. Use email for the administrators, and tell your OK university supervisor face to face. They'll all be disappointed, but they'll be OK. They'll probably understand.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: I was in a very similar position as a PhD student (although I hadn't actually started a PhD when I made my choice.) I chose not to go to the dream university. I went for the one with the better quality supervision.
Who knows, I might never even have achieved a PhD if I had gone to my dream university? I will never know because I didn't choose to go there.
This was 17 years ago already. I have always regretted my choice and I will regret it for the rest of my life. I advise you to quit and go to the dream university. Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Remember, the education is about YOU and the product of the education is your abilities and your knowledge.
The educational institutions getting money, professors and other staff being employed, etc, etc... are all secondary effects.
Do whatever is better for you. You are the only one to decide what is better for you. It is you holding the greatest stake.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: Reading through comments and answers I think I have a different opinion. First I have to say I commend your moral values and your consideration.
Now, in response to your question, I think leaving the current position is in gray area in terms of morality. After all you wrote a **motivation letter** and had an interview before getting the position, in which typically people express desire and commitment to the team and project. If situation is horrible in your current position, the answer would be easy but if it is good enough, after getting into the new place you might not be happy(er). I mean, if the supervisor is good, if the team is good and if the university is good enough, I say the outcome mostly rests on your effort. As they say, the grass isn't greener on the other side. It's green where you water it ;)
Now, basically research is driven by enthusiasm and your current supervisor knows that. So, if you discuss with them that your level enthusiasm and endurance is affected simply because you got into this dilemma, they probably find it good for their research team that you leave.
Now my suggestion are in two scenarios:
1. You decide to stay
You can keep connection with the other (with more prestige) university by:
* A. Trying to shift the research so that you can find a overlap
between you research and theirs (if possible, idk)
* Getting a research visit position to that university under
supervision of the other prof.
* Making your PhD a double-degree (if the rules of both universities
allow, that is totally doable and usually both university will be
happy)
* Making publications together with the other professor
* Doing post-doc or second PhD after this one in that university
2. You decide to leave
Lets be honest, your leave will incur and inevitable damage (though small luckily because you are leaving early). Now, I have a few suggestion:
* Discuss with your current supervisor that you know if you choose to stay you will not be resilient in research and motivate as before simply because the thought of other position will eat away you moral, so this is good choice for them as well
* Offer small compensation for the money they have spend on you (for example you can say give back saving from your salary so far, the money is not important here, this serves as token of gratitude)
* Offer (and seriously follow-up after you left) a collaboration with the current team. If your work load is manageable you can still contribute slightly to the work of previous institute (e.g. reviewing the works, brainstorming, etc.)
* After you've left, contact and ask if there is something in their research that you could involve and even better ask if they accept your research visit there.
I think if you do those at least you do not end up burning the bridge completely and also you have taken part of damage and responsibility of your decisions.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: 'My engagement with the first institution is still on the trial period, in which case I can cancel and leave without any problem.'
That answers your question. There's a trial period. Use it.
Now, man up. Talk to your supervisor. Just possibly he'll surprise you with 'Oh, THAT'S what you wanted to work on? You can do that here!' OK, probably not :-) But anyway, be honest. A reputation for making hard-headed decisions won't hurt your career. A reputation for unexplained unreliability might.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: I picked some quotes about decision-making from a [huge list](https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/decision?page=1). Here are some that I think might apply to you.
“If you do not change direction, you may end up where you are heading”
― <NAME>
“People will always have opinions about your decision because they're not courageous enough to take action on their opinion.”
― <NAME>
“Sometimes you make the right decision, sometimes you make the decision right.”
― <NAME>
“The decision is your own voice. An opinion is the echo of someone else's voice.”
― <NAME>, Wealth of Words
“If you have to choose between any two, first choose time to think.”
― <NAME>
“When you decide who you want to be you'll know what to do.”
― <NAME>
“A wise man makes his own decisions. An ignorant man follows public opinion.”
― <NAME>
“Those who refused to create the kind of life they want for themselves will
end up living their lives for others, and such can only earn them little
joy or many sorrow.”
― <NAME>
“Those who believe in their brainpower and find a way to utilize it fully often end up making valuable contributions to the world.”
― Dr <NAME>
**My answer**
Toss a coin. If you like the answer, go for it! If you don't like the answer, continue tossing the coin until you get an answer you like.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: I would take some time to carefully think about it if you can. A good supervision is also important and it can make you really enjoy what you are doing. It depends also on what kind of person you are. I am the one who needs and wishes to be inspired and the topic is really important, but not the only thing to consider. You will interact with people and you have to enjoy the working style of that department. But if you conclude that the other option is a better choice for yourself, than go for it. That´s your career.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_11: Unless you are going to seriously hurt someone in the process, go follow your dream. You will be dead for ever in a few decades.
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/05
| 521
| 2,249
|
<issue_start>username_0: Forgive me if this is a stupid question, but I just want to make sure that I’m taking the appropriate steps; I’m a student in University, and I write a lot of essays/reviews throughout the year. I like taking breaks and reading fictional stories to relax, but of course my brain sort of travels a lot to various different places, which includes school related tasks. I wanted to take a break from trying to understand one particular article that I was reviewing, and I only fully realized how the article’s thesis related to its conclusion while I was in the middle of reading one story (I had stopped to process it and I was about to go back into it again). However, it wouldn’t make sense to reference the story in my review, since I didn’t take any information from it, correct?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I only fully realized how the article’s thesis related to its conclusion while I was in the middle of reading one story...However, it wouldn’t make sense to reference the story in my
> review, since I didn’t take any information from it, correct?
>
>
>
You needn't cite the story, but you could mention it in the acknowledgements, especially if the story hinted at the relation (in some way). Such acknowledgements should probably be included sparingly. For instance, acknowledging your soap manufacturer, because the idea came to you in the shower, doesn't seem particularly noteworthy.\* Whilst acknowledging an author for opening a new perspective seems more noteworthy. Ask yourself whether your readers will be intrigued.
\*Unless, perhaps, you had just changed soaps and the change in viscosity inspired you to adapt your experiment (in a similar fashion) leading to success.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Definitely **no.** I think you know this, but for the benefit of future readers of this post: The purpose of a citation is not to provide a diary of the author's thought process, but rather to acknowledge the prior work done before yours and trace the *logic and evidence* from which your work follows. It helps no one to know what story you were reading, or whether you had a particularly nice breakfast that stimulated your thoughts. Save it for your blog or your memoirs.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/05
| 1,282
| 5,506
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm applying to PhD programs this year. How common is it to email potential supervisors before submitting my application, asking if they have a spot available? Could this improve my chances of admission? I've heard that this is the norm in European countries. What about in the US?
I have a masters degree (Mathematics) and know roughly the area of research I'm interested in.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, this is very common in the U.S. If you play your cards right, you will already have a *pretty good idea* which institution(s) will accept your application when you apply. In some cases you may get an informal offer before applying if you go this route. This has been my experience.
Contacting potential advisors / program chairs before applying for a doctoral program in the US tends to be more popular for PhDs and other research-based degrees. This is far less common for practice-based or professional doctoral degrees (especially for those degree programs in which the relationship with one's advisor isn't important). It helps to explain your research interests and to find someone whose interests align with yours...but flexibility will also serve you.
If funding comes into play (it should for a PhD program), getting to know a department and potential advisors becomes even more important. Departments want to know who they're investing in. Will you likely "stick it out" and finish the program? Do your interests align closely enough with theirs? Is funding available for your tuition AND living stipend AND research costs? Can the department trust you to teach a few undergraduate courses (or labs). Will you be pleasant enough to work with for several years?
I've gone multiple routes. In round #1 (2008) I never received interest from the PhD programs to which I blindly applied. Several programs that I contacted in 2010-2011 ("interesting" economic times) were quick to tell me that no funding was available for the following year (or probably the next). That, of course, saved time and lots of application fees. As I researched my options, I spoke with several potential advisors by email, phone, and in person (via campus visits that I set up). This ultimately led to two "informal" offers with funding. I formally applied *after* that point to those two universities and only those two. (Even with an informal offer...you still need the formal offer in writing before making a decision.) I'm glad I did so many phone calls and in-person visits. I eliminated several possibilities just based on these conversations. Faculty websites aren't always accurate and up-to-date. :-)
On the other hand, a few years ago when I applied for my EdD program (dissertation-based program but no funding offered) I sent a short email to the program director expressing my interest. She set up a Zoom interview with me and we discussed my research interests and professional goals. I was accepted and then assigned to a dissertation advisor. This process was much more streamlined, but the department was also much larger than my previous PhD program. And, with no funding offered, the department wasn't taking on the level of risk that a traditional PhD program would.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, as @username_1 has described, this can be a good tactic -- but only if done properly. That answer describes some examples of proper form.
However, please don't just blindly send email to every professor you can find. You need to show that your interests have applicability to the professor, to show you've "done your homework" and chosen your targets well, and that there is a real reason for the professor to keep reading (and, hopefully, respond).
I'm a professor at a well-known US university, and I get dozens of emails every month that are obviously sent without any indication that the sender has even looked at my website to see if my research interests align with their stated capabilities and goals.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: As @Buffy comments, the other answers do not seem so accurate about R1 and R2 grad math departments in the U.S. That is, funding is mostly as Teaching Assistants, administered through the department, not by individuals, *and* funding-and-admission decisions are also made at a department level, by a committee.
Yes, having a faculty person ardently promoting your case to the admissions committee is definitely a good thing, but is not necessarily decisive, depending on that faculty person's record of following through (or not), mentoring, etc.
Yes, asking faculty ... not whether they "have a spot", but... whether they are currently taking PhD students can be a relevant question. Both people with lots of students already, or who aim to retire very soon, might say that they are not currently taking more PhD/research students. It would obviously be useful to know that, rather than show up and be negatively surprised.
In any case, as other people have commented, do *NOT* write generic emails with a huge bcc list. Take the trouble to address people by name (!!!), at the very least! And if you describe your own interest as X, which is not much connected to what the faculty person does, don't email them at all.
True, people seem to often "reckon" that sending inaccurate emails to people is harmless, because they can just delete them. It's not that I myself keep a grudge list of people who've sent me spammish emails... but it is fairly antisocial to spam people, in my opinion.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/05
| 1,015
| 3,510
|
<issue_start>username_0: Imagine you want to apply for a stipend. Only the top 10% of ones class are eligible. The final grade distribution (German grades) is like this
* 1.0 - 3%
* 1.1 - 2.5%
* 1.2 - 7%
...
The complete table comes as an official addendum to your transcript of records, which shows your own final grade.
Obviously the university screwed up the grading in the past years and gave out way too good grades, which led to a kind of inflation. In other fields at the same university it's more like
* 1.0 - 0.1%
* 1.1 - 0.3%
* 1.2 - 2 % ...
Imagine now one has a 1.2. Can he just say he is top 10% based on this table? IMO one has to be opportunistic here and not think much about it: Less than 10% have a better grade than you -> you are top 10%. People will probably not even check the table, as 1.2 is usually much better than top 10%.
But my friend in question has a bad feeling about it and is "scared" it will be conceived as cheating. What's your opinion on this? Is there any authoritative legal information on this?<issue_comment>username_1: From the distribution given at the start of the question, 12.5% of the class got a score of 1.2 or better. Therefore, a score of 1.2 is not in the top 10% of the class. The score may be in the top 10% of scores nationally, but it is not in the top 10% of the class. The scholarship may purposefully use the "within class" measure in order to eliminate this school-specific effect - simply attending a school that inflates grades is not sufficient to be eligible, a student must outperform 90% of their peers in the same academic setting.
I'll also note that the notion that "if less than 10% of people have a better grade than you, you are in the top 10%" is not correct - if less than 10% of people have *the same or better* score than you, you are in the top 10%. Imagine a test with only 2 scores, 1 and 2, which are evenly split among the class. If you score a 1, there is nobody with a better score than you, but you are not in the top 0% of the class, you are in the top 50% of the class.
It would be disingenuous to describe this score as being in the top 10% of the class, even though it might have been in other years. While it's quite possible that no one will ever notice, the misrepresentation could be fairly easily spotted if the class' grade distribution is shown alongside an individual's score.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Is there any authoritative legal information on this?
>
>
>
I am not aware of any jurisdiction in which applying for a stipend for which you are not eligible is illegal. For obvious reasons, eligibility is bindingly determined by the stipend giver, not by the applicants.
The rule "top 10%" does not seem to be stated clearly. If the students that got 1.2 in your class are included, then the statement
* 12.5% of the students in the class are in the top 10%
would be true, which seems to be a contradiction. If, [as Nuclear Wang proposes](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/156232/112007), the students with 1.2 are not included in the 10%, then the statement
* Only 5.5% of the students in the class are in the top 10%
would be true, which also seems a contradiction. As both plausible interpretations lead to apparent contradictions, it is reasonable to have doubts about the actual meaning of the rule. So if the rule is not stated more clearly, just apply and let the stipend givers decide. That is their job, not yours (or your friend's).
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2020/10/05
| 3,490
| 15,318
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a Computer Science freshman. The instructor of one of my programming classes, where they're teaching Python, is absolutely incompetent. I have been programming since high school and I can tell.
After giving a very bad introduction to Python in the online classes, all they do now is give a list of questions to solve and sit back. The first day this happened, I solved every question and was told to explain everything to the whole class. I did and that was the end of the class. No contribution from their side, whatsoever. Basically, they are finding ways to somehow get by, and seem to have years of experience at it too.
I feel something needs to be done. My first thought was to complain to the authorities, but if nothing is done and they stay, I may have a hard time when I go to college (I was talking about the online classes, remember?).
So, what should I do?
---
I chose the word "*incompetent*" because it is an apt description of the said instructor. That is what you call a programming instructor who doesn't know what a return statement does or how to iterate over elements of a sequence (programmers will understand how basic this is).
I wonder how they even lasted this long.
---
~~At last, I figured I should just mind my own business.~~ I talked to my classmates. Turns out everyone was having the same problem. We complained to the department head. The course is being restarted, but the instructor is the same. I don't know if it was even worth the effort.<issue_comment>username_1: Teaching problem solving is more challenging than simply explaining solutions to a class. There are methods of instruction that involve giving the class a set of problems to work on, then calling on students to explain the answers to each other. The instructor must choose level-appropriate problems and moderate the discussion of the answers.
It is usually the instructor's privilege to decide how to present the course material. Usually, their teaching is rated by students and occasionally other faculty. If they have "years of experience," their methods may be effective for the majority of students.
What is your goal here? If your goal is to learn the material, you seem to be succeeding since you could solve all the problems. It sounds like you're saying you could teach the class better than the instructor. If you want to be that better teacher, you could work towards becoming a TA or faculty in the future.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: First, talk to your classmates and find out if they feel the same. It could be that you are simply ahead of them and that the others actually appreciate the class.
If many fellow students have the same impression, you can try to do something about it. First, you can talk to the teacher and indicate that many of you think that the level of the class is too low. If that doesn't help, you (as a group) can go to the head of department, study coordinator, or whomever is in a position to change something. It may help to approach a person you know well (who may refer you to someone else if necessary).
If your university is any good, they are probably very much interested in critical (and constructive) feedback from the students. But it may be hard for them to make those changes instantly.
I have been in a similar situation as a student and the entire course was changed after the feedback we gave with (almost) the entire class. But it only helped the students of the following years. They could not do much to fix our class while it was already running unfortunately.
Of course, nothing stops you to learn more advanced subjects on your own (useful for later) and ace the exam.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Your question implies the instructor is not new. It is most likely that the authorities at this university are totally aware of what the instructor is doing and how competent they are. It is quite likely they are employing the best person they can get for the amount the university is able to pay. Furthermore, the instructor's performance might be reduced by the pandemic, which cannot be fixed.
My advice is that complaining is useless. However, you could approach the department chair and tell them factually what you are experiencing. Ask them what *you* can do to improve your learning experience. They might have good advice for you.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: As a freshman, what authority do you have to judge your teacher incompetent?
University classes are different from HS in terms of what pedagogical methods are applied. It is absolutely within reason to expect university students to learn by themselves, help each other, and the teacher to facilitate this interaction.
Switching from an HS model where teachers are responsible for students learning to a university model where students are responsible for themselves may come as a shock to some. Complaining about this is fruitless.
Also, at the university level, it is completely normal if a student shows more knowledge on a topic than the teacher. The teachers are there to facilitate your learning, not to spoon-feed you with their infinite knowledge.
As others suggested, talk to your peers about how they see the class and how much they are getting out of it. If there are shared concerns, bring them to the teacher first.
If you want to get the most out of the course, ask questions to the teacher. If you are the first to solve a problem, ask the teacher on how to improve it in terms of complexity, speed, memory use, extendability, understandability, maintenance etc etc. Create multiple solutions and bring up a discussion on which one is better. Others will also learn from these discussions.
One thing you could do next time is the following: Pass the invite to explain your solution to someone you know is struggling. The struggling student should explain their thought process and, by that, realize their mistakes and give the teacher an opportunity to reemphasize difficult parts.
A sign of incompetence would be if your teacher does not engage in any discussions and are not receptive to any constructive feedback.
UPDATE: If you choose to bring this to higher authorities, your complaints should be that the classes are not helpful to attain the course objectives. Make sure you read them beforehand.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Not sure where you are located, but it is not uncommon at many places to see totally incompetent instructors.
I myself had many such courses. I'd suggest you to focus on your learning and leave university handle. If they do not ask you for anonymous feedback, chances are they don't really care and this is not your problem... until you try to resolve it.
Funnily one of those courses, I was happy to have an instructor that didn't care a lot. Books were good enough to learn from and instructor let us do whatever we wanted with the equipment so experience was better than anything else.
Now this is not your current experience. Still, just figure out what you need to know by the end of the course and learn by yourself.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: This is more of an extended comment, placing some guesses as to what's actually happened here. As an *answer to the question* it is the advice to consider which parts of the following applies to your situation, and adjusting any actions you may take accordingly.
---
Keep in mind that *computer science is not programming*. This instructor likely doesn't code much Python in their main job (CS research presumably), nor did they necessarily ask to teach Python. Rather, the departement decided to teach Python as a beginner language, and somebody needs to do that teaching – somebody who knows enough about programming to help actual *beginners*, which *will* be helpful to the course's intended audience, but not necessarily an actual Python expert.
*You*, apparently, *are* a Python expert, which is great – relax, this course is going to be easy for you, and if you can even contribute to making it better for your fellow students, awesome.
But don't let your superiority in Python fool you into thinking the instructor is inferior as a teacher of a beginner's programming course. *You* think their introduction to the language was bad... why?
* Was it hard to understand? Well, that *could* mean they explained stuff badly, but surely you as an already-expert wouldn't have had problems regardless?
Maybe they actually explained some aspects that really are more tricky than you ever considered.
* Was it too shallow? Well, that may be exactly what's right for your fellows without earlier Python background.
* Did it use outdated or unidiomatic code? This happens a lot in university courses, but it's not necessarily such a bad thing. Keep in mind that anyway today's up-to-date is just tomorrows outdated and one language's unidiomatic is another's bread&butter. General concepts are more important in a beginner's course than language-specific details.
Regarding your concrete statements,
>
> doesn't know what a return statement does
>
>
>
I plainly refuse to believe that. I mean, if it's really that bad then forget all I wrote above... but almost sure there has just been a misunderstanding here.
>
> or how to iterate over elements of a sequence
>
>
>
That too should certainly not be a problem to anybody teaching anything programming-related, however I would still remark that Python's iterators are somewhat idiosyncratic. It's true that for a Python course, they should have read up on this properly, but again make sure you're actually interpreting this properly. First teaching loops with indices before going to range- / iteratee based ones *is* a valid pedagogic decision, even if it doesn't make much sense as far as Python programming in particular is concerned.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_7: Having been a teaching assistant in an "Introduction to Python" (which is quite popular now, seems only a few years ago everyone had to learn Java...) for 1st year students some years ago, I hope I can offer you a few perspectives. This is not to try and convince you that your opinion is *wrong*, only that there may be reasons for you to find this course incompetent, which are outside both your and the teachers' control.
First consider the wildly different starting point beginning students come to this course with. You have been programming in Python since high school. But you certainly also have fellow students who have never written a line of code in their life before. This course is most likely meant to bring everyone to a certain minimum level of proficiency, such that they can understand future course material. For someone with little experience, the best way to get to that point, is through practice. For someone with lots of experience, this means going back to basics.
Secondly, most university courses will not teach you to write code using elaborate techniques or sophisticated libraries, even though this is something that self-taught programmers entering university are used to. They will rather teach you *why* things are done the way they are, but very much starting from scratch. This is because the skills learned in these courses, should hopefully be transferable from, say, one programming language to another. Iterating over elements in a sequence is a good example. I have had students with reasonable Python proficiency who completely stumbled on that task when changing language to C, simply because they had not understood that the way they did loops in Python is an abstraction.
But all that aside, it is of course very possible that your instructor is, in fact, wildly incompetent. As a general rule of thumb, before making a complaint, ask yourself a) What good will it do me?, and b) What good may it do to others?
Yourself: If you can anyway pass the course without too many efforts, freeing up time to read up on other subjects perhaps, the only thing you will gain from complaining is extra work on your part + perhaps getting a reputation as a person who complains a lot. Given that the course is meant to bring everyone "up to speed", the syllabus itself will likely not change, only the presentation.
Others: In a perfect world, a complaint would do good to future students, who will get more competent teaching. Gauge whether your fellow students - also those with no prior experience - actually get something out of the course or not, and remember that introductions to Python is also something you can do by yourself, mostly online, if everything else fails. So in a realistic world, a complaint might not really improve matters a lot.
So my direct answer to your question is: probably not. If I guess roughly correct, your best strategy will be to keep following the course, get a top grade, and wait for your next course which will be more advanced.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_8: Been there, done that. Almost 40 years ago. (Yes, that makes me old.)
Only real difference is that it was Pascal rather than Python. I had plenty of programming experience from High School (and before, on my own). Class was a waste of time. Teacher wasn't very good. etc.
Let me tell you what **not** to do: Social media.
In today's environment, anything you say publicly online can be assumed to be there "forever". Anything anonymous (good choice here on SE!) is meaningless to the University - you are just, literally, a faceless complainer with no clout. Anything **not** anonymous will follow you "forever". And yet anything **not** anonymous won't actually help because to the University you are "just a freshman".
I almost made that mistake - except that there was no Facebook, Twitter, etc. at the time. There was email and (long story short) I emailed the whole class to commiserate/complain as a group. Fortunately, the TA was quite sympathetic (saw my initial emails, gave me a 2nd email address so I could separate my complaining from my real student tasks) and **far more fortunately**, the teacher, as far as I know, never saw any of the emails. If the teacher had seen my emails and then checked with the TA to find out who was behind them, I would have been in a **lot** of trouble.
So I got lucky. But hindsight being 20/20, I was a really stupid freshman and should have never done what I did. **Breeze through the course, get your A and move on.**
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: Talk to the student's association. I hope your university/department/subject has one. They should be able to have a more experienced student check out the class, know the correct channels and might even have some political clout at the university.
(just complementing other answers because this wasn't mentioned yet even though it seems so obvious to me)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: Your question was: "So, what should I do?"
If you decide to make a complaint you should have enough information... enough FACTUAL information to prove a point. Your opinion will not matter unless you have incidents which point to incompetency. This means that you will have to document your experiences in this class. You should keep a log with the basic answers to what, why, who, when, where and how.
Ultimately your decision will be based on your conscience.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/10/05
| 583
| 2,463
|
<issue_start>username_0: For some research software I have written, I needed some atomic data from NIST. I wanted to put that software onto GitHub (MIT license) but I am not sure if I am allowed to simply also upload the NIST dataset which I need. The [NIST copyright page](https://www.nist.gov/open/copyright-fair-use-and-licensing-statements-srd-data-and-software) is not too helpful here, it only tells me how to cite the NIST dataset in a paper.
The source code has some comments in it clearly stating the origin of the data, same for a readme file. Would you consider that as enough?<issue_comment>username_1: Their copyright page seems fairly clear to me. It even goes into what to do if you create derivative works based on it. That said, best practice would be to include the download as part of the code. Most platforms have the ability to retrieve a url, for example, if the data is available that way. Also, note that Github is not really intended to store datasets, though it will work for that if the dataset is relatively small. It can greatly slow down other work on the rep though.
If you're unable to include the download as part of the code, perhaps include a set of "data download instructions" in the readme.md file. That alone would be more than I'm used to seeing - many times when I've seen the code from published research, it's provided as if you already know how to get all the data yourself.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: **You can have work under multiple licenses on a single repository**
Typically each file would have its own copyright heading, and on your `LICENSE` or `COPYRIGHT` file you would state "Project Foobar. All files under src are copyright 2020 by Alf, available under MIT license (see file MIT-License.txt). Contents of dataset folder are made by NIST, published at [https://www.nist.gov/alf's-dataset](https://www.nist.gov/alf%27s-dataset), and available under XYZ terms.".
Do note that in order to combine works under different licenses, they must be *compatible*. You would not be able to (legally) use, copy or distribute a work which is © by someone else that has all rights reserved, unless you get their permission to do so.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Have you ever looked at NIST Refprop? I think they offer options to incorporate this purchase package into other software. I am not sure the specific properties you are looking for would be included though.
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/05
| 912
| 3,942
|
<issue_start>username_0: The mainstream academic publishing model assumes that authors are somehow paid by third parties (typically universities or industry) for the time spent on research. With increasing casualisation of the academic workforce (particularly in the humanities) this is arguably less appropriate than it once was, and many authors are no longer paid for the time spent on research. Amongst other things, this has strong negative consequences for diversity, as it biases the system towards those who can afford to work 'for free'.
An alternative model could involve authors being paid directly by journals for their submissions (as is common for, say, freelance journalists). Has this ever been tried in academia? Is it a realistic possibility?<issue_comment>username_1: I am not aware of any journals in my field (physical sciences) that would pay cash to authors for research papers. There are some obvious edge-cases:
* Some major journals such as Science/Nature contain a certain amount of non-research content, e.g. 'science news' and commentary on policy matters. I presume that the authors of this material get paid fairly directly for their efforts to produce it. However, one might argue these individuals are acting as 'journalists' rather than 'academics' when they do so.
* Some journals carry book reviews. I think it is fairly common that the author of the review gets to keep their review copy of the book. For a major textbook, this may have non-negligible financial value.
* Some grants/awards, especially those from professional societies, may come with some obligation to contribute a report to one of the society's journals. However, the award is not (in any case that I know) expressly claimed to be payment for the journal contribution.
Researchers in certain areas have opportunities to profit from private consultancy arrangements with industry/commercial enterprises. In some cases, this may entail conducting and publishing studies with a particular focus (typically, to prove that the company's products are safe/effective/better than the competition). Anecdotally, this is particularly prevalent in medical fields. Of course, there are many potential ethical issues here.
Otherwise, the general assumption in the physical sciences is that authors do so in the course of their employment at a university/research institute/company, or as students working towards a degree (for which they may receive some scholarship/grant). Of course, there is a big difference with the humanities here, due to the relative abundance of research funding for the sciences.
That said, it is interesting to note that publications are (largely) required only to *get* or *improve* a job, rather than to keep it. An academic who habitually failed to show up to teach their assigned classes would likely find themselves facing disciplinary action. However, an academic who fails to publish rarely sees any personal consequences until the next time their employment falls to be reviewed (either as a tenure/promotion/contract renewal case, or because they've applied for a new job).
I presume the premise of your question is that many academics have teaching-only contracts, and therefore any research they do is 'in their own time'. The issue here, as I see it, is that people who want one career path (academic research) are being encouraged to take a different one (academic teaching) and view it as a 'stepping stone' to research. This is a huge problem, but I'm not sure that either the blame or the solution lies with the publishing process.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Academics are no longer tenure-track, nor tenured
>
>
>
Then they get paid for teaching, not for research. But even so they do still get fringe benefits like library access.
Some few academics make a living from royalties if their textbook happens to be widely used in large-enrollment undergraduate courses.
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/06
| 1,214
| 5,250
|
<issue_start>username_0: It is common that students may experience monotony if the instructor continuously teaches. And there are many ways to grab attention.
I am particularly interested in knowing whether it is a proper step from the instructor side to moderate short debates (5 mins, 10 mins, etc.,), especially on (probably ongoing) politics, movies, religion.
The question is about the domains that are aliens to either of the three topics.
If no, what is the reason for it?<issue_comment>username_1: No. Distracting the students with other subjects than the one being taught is not a solution to the problem but a way around it. Of course it is different if the discussions are on the topic being taught: that is a great way to teach!
The problem of "boring classes" is not the subject or the students. The problem is the teacher, who should learn (often by experience) how to keep the students interested. It is possible to interest students in any and all subjects, as long as the teacher is engaging, explains why the subject is useful, provides interesting real-world examples (if appropriate), explains the subject at a level appropriate for the group, is able to answer questions, etcetera.
Secondly, many students will be annoyed by the constant interruptions and irrelevant off-topic discussions, and they will also notice that the teacher is trying to hide his lack of teaching skills behind "entertainment", alienating them further and possibly even leading to them complaining about ineffectiveness of their classes.
Thirdly, an important part of studying is learning to learn and to concentrate. You would not be doing the students a favour by distracting them. (But do not misunderstand this: a light-hearted remark or funny joke is perfectly fine and even helpful to relieve some tension and stress, but that was not what you were asking about)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In some galaxy far away, in a time long ago, some clown correctly observed people fall asleep rather than pay attention if lectured to for a long time. And other clowns, with pedagogical expertise of sorts, observed that human beings generally learn better by being engaged rather than by being passive. And those clowns resolved to *Fix The Problem.*
Unfortunately, especially in the business/private sector, and amplified by sensitivity to not put students (oops, learners...) on the spot by demonstrating their incomplete understanding if forced to engage in actual subject matter discussion, the horrendous concept of "energizers" and "icebreakers" emerged. This is the practice of interrupting boring lecturing by making people do something completely unrelated, generally dumb, interactively. I guess it is preferable to just droning on altogether, but it is a weak subsitute for actually teaching well, interactively and engagingly. It's principal advantage is that it needs minimal preparation, and minimal thought by the instructor to include, since it's generally off the shelf.
Since no clueless idea goes unimproved, this idea of "energizers" is now being recycled in other settings, including academia, by sometimes deliberately planning inane, off-topic interactive interruptions to the flow. It reminds me of tales of concert pianists making markings in their music where exactly they plan to make a dramatic flourish with their hands.
Removing tongue from cheek, of course there is value in a) allowing breaks, b) building relationships though idle, possibly unrelated *unforced* banter, c) breaking up the monotony of one person speaking, d) humanizing the instructor and students with occasional breaks from the script and deviations off-topic, e) looking for partially on-topic and partially-off-topic analogs and examples "from real life". But all that's another story.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: I suggest that if you want to bring up other subjects than the subject matter of the course, then you, in particular, avoid religion and politics. People can be too involved with their own beliefs to consider the beliefs of others as having any validity whatever. It is a minefield that, once you step in, is very dangerous.
But if you want to break the ice or change the mood a bit, you could bring up other professional level topics that the students should be aware of if they want to become practitioners. In a math course, discuss the importance of developing skill in writing, say. Or the need to develop enough interpersonal skills that they can work in collaborative environments.
Of course, in a political science class it might be worth dealing with current events, but I don't think that is what you intend with this question.
And, don't let any side topics distract from the main thread. Things can be "interesting" and useful but not controversial or lead to confrontation. Do the main job and only use distraction when the need is really there.
And, for something topic related, though mostly in face-to-face situations, asking students to work in pairs for five minutes to formulate a question for you can be a useful way to take a break. Some students hesitate to ask a question, not realizing that others have the same question. Pairing for a few moments can help resolve that.
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/06
| 2,041
| 8,434
|
<issue_start>username_0: If a professor is teaching a course with a significant number of students.
My university randomly assigns teaching assistants (TAs) to courses. For example, I was given the assistantship of an advanced hardware course when I was only a freshman.
The TA assigned to the mentioned course has no knowledge about the course topic.
Thus, he is making a lot of mistakes here and there.
What happens if a student complains to the professor about the TA doing a poor job?<issue_comment>username_1: My answer is going to be cynical but it is from a lot of experience. I went to grad school at an R1 public university.
Often the professor will do nothing. The department will continue to assign the terrible TA to the same class, or reward the bad TA by given them an easier (and more desirable/competitive) assignment next quarter. In fact it got so bad that some people were bad on purpose so they could get easier assignments, spend less time teaching and more time on research. If your university doesn't care about teaching, everyone will take the path of least resistance around your complaint.
The one time we got a TA reassigned (he was grading a grad class and deliberately lowering grades of people he saw as competition without being able to explain why) we all pushed back as a group and signed a letter, with some faculty on our side guiding us. He never TAd for us again, but the next year he graded the same class for the younger cohort. The faculty chalked it up to personality differences rather than personal and systemic incompetence.
So your best chance (if an initial complaint is ignored) is to organize, but don't get your hopes up.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: *What do professors do about TA complaints?*
In your scenario, **get exasperated by the university**. You've explained that TAs with limited or no experience are assigned to courses by the university (rather than the professor or their department). This will frustrate professors, but a system change is necessary to fix, which is likely beyond the professor's ability to influence, especially in the short-term. Longer-term professors can petition their department to push universities for change.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: A somewhat less cynical, but hopefully still realistic take.
First, there is a certain "activation energy" for the professor (and even more so, the department/faculty) to pay attention. The reality is that there is a certain baseline of largely-unwarranted complaints about all TAs, professors, etc., since there is a certain baseline of students who complain about everything, or fundamentally don't get (yet?) that at University, they are responsible for their own learning, and won't get spoon-fed. Of course not every situation/complaint fits that mold, but it has to break out of that noise to get acted upon. Complaints that come from articulate students, with generally good performance in the course and in their academic careers to date, that provide concrete evidence, and avoid name-calling, are less likely to be ignored. And multiple such complaints, not necessarily coordinated, help.
Second, immediate remedial action in the current course depends on the professor. And professors vary widely in their interest in teaching and in their willingness to expend additional time. When I used to teach courses, I would try to attend my TAs' tutorial sessions once in a while, but there were certainly trimesters I never got around to it. However, even then, I think if potential issues had bubbled up to me, I would have made the time. I have subbed in and been "acting TA" for my own course when a TA fell ill during the term, and I'd like to think I would have done the same thing if a TA were hopelessly bad.
Professors generally have office hours. If TAs are good, very often the professor's office hours are poorly attended. A student or group of students could exert pressure, deliberately or not, on a middle-of-distribution-in-terms-of-caring professor by showing up regularly at office hours with questions, and being factual (rather than just complaining) about useful help not being received from the TA. If a professor is regularly being asked "elementary" questions, and hearing the TA could not or would not answer them, it doesn't take a *rara avis* teaching-prioritizing professor to realize they need to do Something.
In all the above, the unfortunate reality is that it is very difficult for a department to replace a TA during a course. So immediate remedial action is essentially limited to the professor or some other teaching coordinator coaching the TA, and/or the professor doing more of the work themselves.
As to consequences for future courses, again it depends. I wish it were better, but the number of universities/departments that have meaningful performance management and professional development for TAs, in the way I have gotten used to in the industry part of my life, is pretty darn small. The reality therefore is just hope that some coaching helps, and/or there is enough of a clear situation that the TA is not assigned to that course next time.
As to removing bad TAs from the future pool altogether, it depends on the supply/demand balance of TAs in that department. I've taught in applied science-type departments where TA-ship is a building block of financial support for all grad students and it would take someone really bad to be taken off teaching--there's a perpetual hope they'll do better next time around. I've been in a math department where teaching was core, but there were more students than teaching spots and poor quality did have consequences. And I've seen language departments where TA/lector spots were highly competitive and a poorly-student-rated lector was just not going to get hired again.
Finally, decades ago it was pretty awful, but Universities are getting better at policing misconduct. So all the above applies to poor quality teaching by TAs. If the issue is blatantly unfair grading, unresolved material grading errors, or--even worse--misconduct towards students (or others), there are usually now independent processes to take care of that. There may well be challenges whether those processes move swiftly enough and are impartial enough, but it's a whole different ball game.
*This answer has a North American, science/math/STEM bias.*
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> My university randomly assigns TAs to courses.
>
>
>
Then it’s not the TAs who are incompetent, it’s the person or people in charge of making the assignments.
Treat the core of the problem, not the symptom. If the system is rotten at its core, complaining about what happens at the end of a broken process won’t result in any meaningful change.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: When I was a TA, the professor in charge set up an email filter to automatically forward all course related emails to me.
Someone thought I was incompetent and emailed the professor to complain. The email was auto-forwarded to me. I forwarded it back to the professor because he should deal with it. He pushed it back to me because he did not want to do any work. I met with the student and resolved the complaint.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: In some countries, TA are dispatched after the Professors made their choice on which course to give.
As some PhD grants/contracts imply to teach, even in another speciality than what the thesis is on : you might have a TA that never had the chance to choose the course he/she is teaching.
In my case, I was "sure" to be able to teach a course... and when I saw the content of the course : no, I was not ready at all/I had another point of view on the course.
And I had to call another TA to correct me at the end of nearly each course (or at least half of the semester). Hopefully, I can teach it now as I learned in parallel with my students.
So, there are tons of good or bad reasons for a TA to not be ready to teach a course.
The best things to do, from a student point of view, is to ask questions to the main Professor in charge and stay kind with the TA as long as he/she is not doing wrong things (bad grades, misconduct, ... as stated by username_3).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I have had professors not care, I once TAed a course and gave everyone As so nobody complained about me. Rubber stamp that shit and get on with your day.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/06
| 3,672
| 15,947
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am teaching a 3rd year undergraduate algebra course, and I have told my students that I would not be giving out solutions to the weekly exercises that I set. Instead,
* one question per week will be graded and detailed written feedback will be given by way of continuous assessment, and
* there are weekly tutorials where they can ask questions if they struggled to solve something or if they are unsure if their solution is correct.
Many students are extremely unhappy about it, so I would like to get 2nd/3rd/etc opinions from other experienced educators here. I will provide my reasoning below, but first the question:
>
> Do you give out model solutions to your exercises, say one or two weeks after they were set? This is primarily aimed at educators in science subjects, where there is a correct solution to each exercise.
>
>
>
---
**My reason for not giving out solutions**
My main purpose in teaching a mathematics course is to teach students to solve problems; to be stuck and to persevere; to seek creative approaches. I am pretty sure that if the model solution is one click away, or even if they just know that it will arrive in a few days' time, they will, on average, spend less time on the exercises, and some of them will just give up when they cannot solve something within 10 minutes. One student explicitly told me that they like to use model solutions to "work backwards" to complete their understanding of the course material. This is simply not the intended use of the exercises.
**A little more background**
* I was student at Oxford UK, I taught at Cambridge UK, Warwick UK, and Postech Korea. At none of these institutions did students expect to be handed out model solutions. Now I am at Glasgow, where students' expectations are wildly different. However, due to a research grant I have not taught for a few years, and I do not know how much of this difference is not just due to geographical variation, but also to a temporal gap. I can certainly see infantilisation and bureaucratisation of university education on a wide spectrum of issues, I just don't know whether this is one of them, so one answer could be "wake up, you are stuck in 2015 with your ideas about university mathematics education; these days we are all expected to give out model solutions".
* I did check what the School policy is on solutions to exercises. There is no need to go into details, but suffice it to say that both decisions, to give out full solutions and not to give out almost any, would be compatible with the official policy.
**Frequent arguments for giving out solutions and my response to them**
* These are responsible adults, don't treat them like kids. They know that they are supposed to first attempt the exercises themselves. The solutions are there for when they get truly stuck or to check the correctness of their solution at the end.
Contrary to popular opinion and superficial appearance, this is not really an argument, but a rhetorical device dressed up as an irrefutable argument. The fact that they are of legal age is irrelevant here. Firstly, they simply have little experience at independent learning. We do not say about a patient "They are an adult, they can choose their therapy themselves", but leave that choice to experts; the age or legal status of the patient is irrelevant, only their experience in that particular domain is. Secondly, even adults can have a hard time overcoming temptation. I am sure I do not need to elaborate on this last point.
* Everybody studies differently. It is unfair to impose your personal choices on others.
Actually, this is precisely what a pedagogue is paid to do: to impose certain choices on their students. We do that through selection of the material, of the order in which to present it, of the exercises that we set and don't set to our students, and yes, through the mode of delivery and the resources that we make available or choose not to make available. Of course what distinguishes a good pedagogue from a bad one is how good those choices are, hence this question.
* How can the students know if they have solved an exercise correctly?
I have to confess that I underestimated this one. I always thought that in mathematics one knows when one has proven something, but many students obviously don't. However, that is what the tutorials are for. It might be relevant to add here that the tutorials are happening via zoom, and the engagement, so far, has been pretty lacklustre. Many students don't switch on their mic or camera, and about 1/3 of them show no signs of life through the entire tutorial. Certainly, the percentage of students that say "I would like to see how this question is done" is much lower than of those complaining about the lack of model solutions.
Anyway, I could say more on this, but I would like to hear your experiences and thoughts!<issue_comment>username_1: >
> How can the students know if they have solved an exercise correctly?
>
>
>
Eventually your students are going to leave university and apply what they have learned in your class in their new jobs. When that happens, there will be no solution manual. Better to learn now how to convince themselves that the solution is correct. They are being trained to become the experts, to become the ones that write the solution manual.
Now, your course should give them the tools they need to convince themselves that the solution is correct. You should also clearly communicate that practicing these tools and learning how to deal with uncertainty is an important learning goal of these exercises.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Perhaps what you have discovered is that different institutions, and different professors within them have different practices around this. I was an undergraduate more than 50 years ago and some professors at the time posted (in a locked display cabinet outside their office) the solutions to the latest assignments. This made it harder for them to propagate to future classes, of course, but some fraternities would copy them down and file them away for future use by members.
However, this question relies mostly on opinion, I think. My own opinion, which doesn't scale very well, is to give minimal hints on assignments to those who request them after they explain to me their thinking. This is fine in a class of 30, but not so much in a class of 300.
But the idea is that I want to focus on learning, not grading. So, sending a student back to the "drawing board" on an assignment is a good thing. I may need to re-steer them a bit, but when they come to the office (actual or virtual) with a question, I sometimes need to dispel them of some misconception that is blocking their understanding and progress. Posting answers on my door (actual or virtual) may give some students insight, but it is *much* less certain to do so, especially for those who need a bit of guidance.
So, my preference is *not* to publish solutions, especially for *meaningful* questions, but might have to do something like that if the scale was impossible.
But, you might also consider an intermediate case, if you are clever enough to figure out how to do it. You might publish, instead of the solution, a set of "hints" or "things to think about when doing this exercise".
Like many other things, mathematics is learned through practice and feedback. The practice leads to insight (we hope) and the feedback helps suppress misconceptions. But the feedback needs to be individualized to accomplish this.
It is one reason that (in computer science, though), I let students resubmit work after getting personal feedback on earlier attempts. They could "earn back" a portion of the points lost earlier, but not achieve full marks except on the first version. This re-doing of work was, again, an attempt to guide the student to "reinforcement" of good ideas based on the feedback. Alas, it doesn't scale very well and too many institutions are forcing impossible scale on courses.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
>
> >
> > How can the students know if they have solved an exercise correctly?
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> I have to confess that I underestimated this one. I always thought that in mathematics one knows when one has proven something, but many students obviously don't. However, that is what the tutorials are for. It might be relevant to add here that the tutorials are happening via zoom, and the engagement, so far, has been pretty lacklustre. Many students don't switch on their mic or camera, and about 1/3 of them show no signs of life through the entire tutorial. Certainly, the percentage of students that say "I would like to see how this question is done" is much lower than of those complaining about the lack of model solutions.
>
>
>
I am currently a Master student in mathematics and have a slightly different take on it. I do agree that students have to learn how to deal with a scenario where there is no solution given to you, especially if they want to go into academia. However not everyone wants to do so. A lot of them will end up in industry in insurances, banks, whatsoever. These approaches are not as necessary there.
Further, it depends strongly on how advanced they are. I remember that it took me quite a long time to get a good intuition on whether my argumentation/proof is right or whether it lacks precision. This can be learned far more efficiently if you have model solutions at hand. If this is the case also the tutorials will be only of little help because students barely know where their problem is.
Last but not least, a lot of teachers expect their students to spend a lot of time on trying to solve exercises. The students on the other hand have several subjects and therefore only limited time and energy resources which sometimes cannot be spend this way - at least not by everyone. Unfortunately not everyone is on the level of Oxford students, nevertheless one should have the opportunity to learn something. Just imagine, some people have to work besides going to university in order to finance the latter. Their life gets much harder.
You said you consider yourself a pedagogue. However one could also consider you a service provider - this identity heavily depends on the question whether students pay fees for the university. If they pay a lot of money, I think they are right to expect a certain service, no matter whether you think this is pedagogically irresponsible.
After all, why don't you find a compromise? Give out model solutions for some basic tasks, and let some advanced exercises open. Or provide the model solutions only every second week. I think a black/white solution is certainly not the best and a good compromise could be the best way for all interests.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: If you don't provide model solutions, it is fairly likely that one of the more advanced students will end up providing their answers to the other students. It doesn't count toward the grade, so it wouldn't be helping someone to cheat. And most of these students will be friends from being in the same courses many times. So a different way to frame it would be, would you prefer: (1) your solutions - that you know are correct and you can highlight the key conceptual steps or (2) whatever the student writes.
Can you provide a skeleton of the steps? This may also help with the tutorial engagement because you could ask the group which steps they were able to complete, for example.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: This is from the perspective of a graduate student:
I understand that you want students to persevere, resilience is a valuable character trait that takes time and a bit of pain to develop. However, by not giving students solutions to problems, you might do your objective a disservice because students will be discouraged. But also, providing all of the solutions creates an incentives for students to convince themselves that they now understand what they're doing. One must remember that policies with the best intentions do not often produce the best results. So I think what you need is a compromise, and this is what I suggest.
Instead of giving out full and complete solutions for *every* problem, give your students incomplete solutions that allow them to fill in the steps. This way, you are guiding your students through the solutions and helping them to develop the intuition that they need to tackle problems on their own. You could, for example, provide a prompting question to engage the student in the solution, such as, "*What is the definition of {some concept}?"* and then without going through the motions, provide the solution to that particular step.
The students can then still struggle to make that connection themselves, but you are being far more constructive in guiding their thinking than just offering the solutions or throwing them to the sharks. Perhaps you give one complete solution, 3 semi-complete solutions, and then for a problem you think is the most important, you give them no solution (maybe give it to them a bit later on, your call) so that they can tackle it fresh after going through the exercise of getting themselves in the right mode of thought.
The incomplete solutions takes work on your part, but I think it's a fair compromise for your students and the objectives you have in the success of students.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: You need to give solutions to some (a few) of the questions. You can not expect students to rediscover in a semester every technique which took (the greatest minds) many years to discover.
I like to tackle the problems and learn how to solve as much as I can by myself. Fortunately I often can and I know I got it right. But sometimes I get stuck, and I can not spend a whole month with a single problem.
(image from the wonderful SMBC: <https://www.smbc-comics.com/?id=3947>)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/VR8bA.png)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: From what I understand, you
(1) don't write model solutions, and
(2) only grade a small part of their homework.
In my book, either of (1) and (2) is well defensible, but (1)+(2) together hurt your pedagogy. Teaching (particularly at the undergraduate level) is not just about conveying concepts but also about destroying misconceptions. If your students are getting something wrong, how are they going to realize it? Normally, this is done either by them getting their homework back graded, or by them double-checking it against the model solutions (of course, they may be too lazy for that -- but that's their own problem). If both of these feedback channels are reduced to a minimum, misconceptions will grow and fester. If time constraints are making this feedback impossible, there is a third option: give students access to a pool of "training" exercises with solutions available. (The internet nowadays isn't bad at this.) This should work if you can reasonably expect the possible misconceptions to be resolved by those training exercises; still it will hardly beat the personalized feedback of actual grading.
In my experience teaching higher-level undergraduate mathematics classes, misconceptions are commonplace. Wrong ideas about what an induction proof is tend to stick around until one gets into advanced territory. Commutativity is used (through muscle memory) far beyond its legitimate domain. Polynomials and polynomial functions are merrily lumped together until one is set straight by absurd conclusions in finite field theory. "It's all proofs, so you should be able to check it yourself" doesn't work in practice when the students' familiarity with proofs goes back 1-2 years only (no one learns proofs in school any more) and when undergrad degrees have become grab bags of random classes chosen by accident or bureaucratic requirements.
Upvotes: 3
|
2020/10/06
| 941
| 4,159
|
<issue_start>username_0: Judging by posts and comments by graduate students in math.stackexchange.com and mathoverflow.net, I have come to the conclusion that a large part of their knowledge comes from SE sites and the Wikipedia, as opposed to traditional publications such as books and papers.
I was deeply shocked the first time I heard of a student researching the literature through Google, which spits out at least as many SE and Wikipedia answers as references to books and journals. But, of course, nowadays I do the same, certainly more often than going to the library!
Are traditional publication forms becoming obsolete, in the face of purely electronic forms? Or, contrariwise, do younger people who ignore traditional forms miss out on essential information?<issue_comment>username_1: I think wikipedia is good for mathematics topics that are fairly settled. There are few errors and the ones that do appear (I've found some) tend to disappear quickly. You can get a good overview and if you follow up on the sources provided you can get a more complete view. So, I hope students use this for background on things they need to study.
But, by its nature, it is less useful to bring you to the state of the art: stuff that isn't yet "settled".
I think SE is the opposite, in some ways. You might find answers to contemporary questions, but the sources may be less reliable. Wikipedia has many editors (formal and informal) keeping things right, SE, less so and not everyone commenting really has a good answer. So, again, I hope that grad students use it when necessary, but with caution.
If the alternative is to set for ten hours at a time in a library, pulling older and older books from the shelves, it is no contest.
But reading things and being given answers isn't the best way to gaining insight into a mathematics problem. Not *deep* insight, anyway. For that you need to do some work yourself.
And, as you say yourself, it is a professional approach to use such resources. You do it yourself. And, I would say "to the detriment", actually. It is a supplement and/or a place to start.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't have any empirical evidence to contribute relating to use of SE and Wikipedia versus traditional literature searches. However, they all have a reasonable place in academic work when used properly (i.e., in conjunction and with care). The advantage of SE and Wikipedia is that it often allows you to rapidly find details on the problem you are looking at, without necessarily knowing the name of that problem in advance. In the latter case there is also usually citation to some basic literature on the problem that can act as a starting point for a more traditional literature search. In largely non-politicised fields (e.g., mathematics, physics, chemistry, etc.) the answers on Wikipedia are usually quite reliable and well-crafted, and there is usually good referencing to some basic peer-reviewed literature.
Of course, if grad-students rely *solely* on SE and Wikipedia, and fail to follow this up with adequate searches of scholarly databases then this will very likely miss out on important information and references. I would think that this would be easy to spot in their research work --- e.g., by a paucity of references on a topic or failure to understand the full context of their work. This is something that good supervisors can provide guidance on, to assist the student to rapidly find material when needed, but also follow this up with in-depth research on a topic.
Traditional academic publications are all moving online/have moved online, so you would usually just search and download papers from your office now (through online subscription services with academic publishers) rather than "going to the library". Occasionally you will have to go to the university library for books, etc., that are not available online, but often you can do most of the literature search from your computer. Consequently, while the journals themselves are not becoming obsolete, printed copies of the journals are becoming rarer and foot-traffic in the library is probably also reduced.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/10/06
| 316
| 1,337
|
<issue_start>username_0: Freshers sometimes speak almost inaudibly, even after asking them to speak loudly. Now, with facemasks, it's even worse, I am not allowed to approach them too much, and it demands a lot of energy to be able to hear them sometimes. What strategies do you suggest?<issue_comment>username_1: Program your laptop computer or smartphone to continuously plot over the last few minutes the loudness (in decibels) of the sound heard by its microphone. If a student says something you can't make out - bring the app to the foreground, show that the sound wasn't loud enough, and ask them to repeat so as to reach the desired level on the plot.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: If students do not speak loudly when directly asked to speak loudly, it probably means they do not know how to speak loudly. This is not intuitive because most people think everyone knows how to speak loudly naturally, but I suspect many people misunderstand the mechanics of speaking loudly. In particular, people think they speak loudly by moving their ribs, when actually the need to move their abdominal muscles. Show your students where those muscles are and have them practice moving them to make a loud sound. This will help students control their volume.
You might also ask the music or theater department for advice.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/10/07
| 1,265
| 5,314
|
<issue_start>username_0: 1. Is it necessary to publish in a journal after writing paper in arXiv?
2. Is arXiv peer reviewed journal? If yes, then will the editor
consider and send to other experts in that field?
3. Can a high school student publish paper in arXiv? If not is there any other way a high school student can share scientific knowledge (only if they have discovered something new)?<issue_comment>username_1: (1) There's no requirement that you have to publish in a journal after putting a paper on arXiv. However, in my experience, most people who put something on arXiv do also submit it to a journal, although this depends on which field of science you are talking about.
(2) Arxiv is not a peer-reviewed journal, there are no editors or referees. This is why a lot of people submit to both arXiv and a journal.
(3) Probably not by themselves, but they could if they can convince an established researcher to endorse them.
Unless the student was already affiliated with a known university or research institute, they would usually have to get an "endorsement" to be able to submit. An "endorsement" means that an established researcher confirms that the paper being submitted is appropriate for an arXiv submission and that the authors have some idea what they are talking about.
If the student knows any researchers in the field they want to publish a paper in, they could ask them to have a look at their paper and give some feedback. If they agree that the paper is above a minimum standard they might agree to endorse.
If the student does not know any researchers, it is more difficult. They could find out who the experts in the field are and email them directly, in a polite manner, but should be aware that out-of-the-blue requests from someone unheard of are likely to be ignored.
There's more information about how endorsements work here: <https://arxiv.org/help/endorsement>
There may not be any shortcut to this. The best option might be for the student to wait, apply to study the field that interests them at university, and after learning more about the subject and getting to know some professors there, ask them if they'd be willing to look at their research. If they thought it was good, they would be able to endorse the student for submission to arXiv and give advice about the publication process in general.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: A high school student (with an endorsement as username_1 laid out nicely) can publish on the arxiv, but very likely a high school student should not do this.
In my field, the arxiv is read daily by everyone in the field. There is no peer-review process, but we do self censor quite a bit. We usually circulate our research through our networks and get feedback before posting. Putting something on the arxiv that is low quality has serious impacts on your career. Your name is attached to that forever, and afaik you can't take it down and erase its history. Plus you can't undo anything to the wide audience that will see it the first day it gets posted.
In some sense, posting on the arxiv is more dangerous than going through peer-reviewed channels. If you submit something embarrassing to a journal, they won't publish it. The arxiv has no such safeguard.
Unless you know someone who you think can serve the purpose of a peer reviewer, and who can give an informed approval that your work won't be rejected by the community and reflect poorly on you, I strongly suggest you do NOT post to the arxiv. It could hurt you professionally if you end up in an arxiv-popular field. If you end up in an arxiv-unpopular field, then posting wouldn't really benefit you much either (as it's not a real journal). It's just not a good gamble.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: It is not too hard to submit to the arxiv. It won't be difficult to get "endorsement" if that is still a requirement. I actually thought that was gotten rid of.
Once you are done your PhD, if you do decide to do that, the arxiv preprint will be so old that it certainly will not have much impact one way or another. If some idea in it still interests you then, you will have the option to reference the arxiv preprint (wording like "as we showed in [3].") If you don't do that, I highly doubt that anyone will notice this old preprint. Certainly, for example, a hiring committee is not likely to dig up an old preprint, and check that is is really the same person.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: 1. Publication on ArXiv is not considered as a formal publication, as it has not been peer reviewed. A few journals ask you to submit to ArXiv first before submitting to the journal, although this isn't very common.
2. Arxiv is not peer reviewed, there is a barrier which a submission has to surpass in order to be accepted as an Arxiv submission but I'm not sure how high it is. Bear in mind that once you submit something to Arxiv you need a reason to withdraw it and you can only withdraw the PDF file, everything else will remain on Arxiv.
3. I don't know, perhaps you could submit to Arxiv as an independent researcher. Otherwise, the easiest thing would probably be to somehow convince a researcher at a university that you have something publishable, then polish it together and submit it as a joint publication.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/10/07
| 945
| 4,045
|
<issue_start>username_0: I got a position as an associate professor at new university. I observe my colleagues that they do not work in the lab normally which is quite strange for me. In my previous job as assistant professor I needed to work hard myself in the lab to produce the results, then describe them and publish. Here I am generally ''forced'' to sit in front of computer but without going to the lab and work physically I do not produce any results and no publications... How it looks at your university? Life science field.<issue_comment>username_1: I hope this makes sense to you. It isn't my field. I'm just thinking about what I would do if I found myself in a completely foreign environment. I think you have some freedom to do what you want as an associate professor, even if that doesn't imply tenure in your place as it would in the US, though you don't say where you are.
I would spend some time wandering around and talking to people about what they do. Some of that time would be spent in the lab talking to whoever is there, whether post-docs, grad students, technicians, etc. Ask about how what they do relates to the research they are involved in.
But spend some time, also, talking to other faculty members about their own research process. Explain, probably, that your previous experience seems more "hands-on" that what you see here.
Hopefully it will click. I'm guessing that your colleagues spend more time on supervision and on planning for future experiments than on carrying them out themselves. I don't know, but they will. Maybe you can enter into a collaboration with one or more of them to help you get into the local culture and how it operates.
You just landed on the moon. How do moon-lings operate? They know, ask and watch. Then try it out.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In my experience in (neuro)biology this is largely a function of the size of the lab, particularly the number of students.
The tasks of writing papers and enough grant applications to support the lab (along with all the other tasks professors do: on administrative committees, reviewing grants and papers written by others, teaching responsibilities) take up a lot of a professor's research time, at any level.
The larger the lab, the more time moves from "bench time" to "supervising time". This is the delegation of responsibilities problem experienced by managers of all types, and also applies to professors.
It is more common for early-career professors to spend more time on the bench because they will have few students/postdocs and those students will be new students as well. As a lab matures, not only are more of the bench tasks done by students, but there are more senior students and postdocs that are familiar with work in the lab and can begin to mentor others on their bench skills.
I've also seen a lot of senior professors, who may be wary of taking on students as they approach retirement and have less career pressure, migrate back to their labs.
If your lab isn't productive without you in it, then you need to get back to the lab, regardless of how your colleagues' time is allocated. Probably more importantly, if you don't have students and postdocs in your lab that you are supervising, you're missing out on a big chunk of your job which is to train the next generation of scientists.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: To answer this question one needs more context. Overall, it depends on the field, the higher education landscape in your country, the university, and the lab.
From experience I'd say the more senior (not biological age but hierarchy) you get the less time you will spend in a lab. Over time, you will have more and more administrative duties that take away from your time to do research. At the same time, you may hav more grants and projects and thus PhD students and postdocs to work together with you. So while you may spend less time in the lab you should still be able to have the same if not a higher research output but simply in a different role.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/10/07
| 1,913
| 7,947
|
<issue_start>username_0: I did download some articles from libgen and by then I didn't know it wasn't right to do so, well some people say that there's no problem but honestly I think it is and I'm scared for what this articles where used for without me knowing about it.
Short story
I downloaded articles. I started writing my protocol thesis with advisor/professor supervision, based on parts of these articles. Advisor then asked me to do a summary of some of them, I did it and then sent it to his mail. We then stopped working due to him "I'm very busy, lot of work at uni, COVID-19" (I then realize he was lying, he was indeed working on my topic preparing to show it as his *own* work) and I said "don't worry, I understand". For some time I kept studying on my own until I felt lost with no direction and it was during this time also that I knew that the articles and content from libgen is, in general, illegal to use. I didn't scare, I just thought that I had nothing on my protocol since it's based on libgen content. I just thought on commenting this to advisor next time I saw him (personally, didn't want to say this through mail) and ask permission or purchase if needed, the articles that I was going to use. About 3 months later (end of august) since the last message of advisor, he said "Sorry for speaking until now, I've been working on the topic, I've structured how your thesis would be, are you still interested on working?" I said "I understand, don't worry. How the structure of my thesis is (perhaps here was the time to say: stop working on it there's something I need to tell you, but I didn't, I didn't think things would go further whiout telling me previously)? Yes, although right now I'm taking a summer course" (course that started at beginning of august). A month passed and I never got a reply. A few days ago, I realized that advisor is going to give a talk (within days) about my thesis topic.
So say we planned to work on article X, which contained methods w,x about topic AB, BC, CD using Y.
He plans to give a talk about topic "x applied on AB, BC, CD" and on his summary, he mentioned parts contained on my protocol that I proposed, i.e. my original ideas, and also he plans to use Y aswell, not sure if the same Y as mine, wouldn't surprise me if it's the same Y.
Why did he steal my work? Because it is new, this kind of works have been done in other parts of the world but not on ours. But there's a major problem that really worries me, as I said this -work on my protocol (which was never completed nor registered)- it's based of articles that I downloaded from libgen, fortunatelly only 5 of them are in the case of "need to purchase, free to *reuse* on thesis/dissertation but need to comply some terms", the rest of them, afaiu, are free to use, they are on ResearchGate and you can download them.
Notice that **I** am not the one publishing anything, I'm not giving a talk, I would never use work taken without permisson or withouth purchasing when authors are requiring this actions for their works. The thing that I did was to take part of some from these restricted articles for my protocol and a summary, and sent to advisor. And it's highly likely that these content is going to be used to give a talk and to publish a paper. Am I in trouble? Am I in legal troubles?
Please help me, I don't know what to do. I don't want to comment this to advisor, not even personally if I could, I don't trust at all in this person.<issue_comment>username_1: I really don't think you should worry about the fact that you downloaded articles from libgen or similar websites. Nobody is going to come arrest you because of that... I doubt anyone will know the articles were illegally downloaded and I highly doubt anyone will be enforcing copyright laws to the point where you will see any consequences. If you think it's wrong, then just don't do it in the future, but I am pretty sure that most academics get "illegal" articles from the internet or their peers every once in a while, cite them in their work, and don't think twice about it and most people will not even judge you for it.
I wouldn't mention it to your advisor, or anyone else for that matter because it really isn't a big enough deal to feel any stress over.
I think the real problem is your advisor stealing your work, as you say. But that is a different question.
To add to the potential consequences: The worst thing that will happen to you is your internet company might send you an email threatening to fine you or something. If you stop the illegal downloads, (or get a VPN/other ways of making your traffic anonymous), they will not pursue the issue any further. At least that has been my experience with pirating things in the past.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Besides everything that has already been said, the biggest problem is stealing someone's finished work without referring to the original author. However, you did not do this. The moral deviant here isn't you - and no legal consequences are going to will to you.
Let me try to explain why.
The open-access or on libgen books are more downloaded and cited than others behind the paywalls. A lot of studies are finding this (e.g. see <https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2017/11/22/open-access-books-are-downloaded-cited-and-mentioned-more-than-non-oa-books>). And considering that the scientists will do their jobs aiming large range of readers as well they are already paid for the development of their studies by private or public institutions, seems like ok if you read books from libgen and do the reference. Imagine that you could borrow the book from one friend or the library school.
Besides that, assuming you are not making any harm to nobody as well as helping to amplify the reach of those studies, in fact, you are helping people to access knowledge. (And knowledge must be free for all!!)
Nevertheless, if you not confident yet and have the conditions to reimburse, so you could just send the money directly to the author. Because, in the end, she/he receives a little part of the price!!! If you take into account that the big publishers are who retaining the money and not the authors, using libgen and sci-hub is a big favor for the authors.
It is especially true outside of renamed US and EU universities, where we don't have money to access knowledge and don't have a choice. Is very common to ask for the authors for their work if isn't present on the web for free.
Resuming:
* The money from the sales goes almost all to the editors.
* Science needs been free to disseminate and contribute to the progress of knowledge.
* As the first goal, authors want more to amplify their reach than get rich.
* Ok, that's necessary some kind of retribution to the scientists work, but the books are a very little part of their budget.
* And there is no possibility for many young or/and poor researchers to buy books.
* by the end, you could read them at the library or even borrowing.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I am not entirely sure what the problem is or what you are enquiring about. As pointed out by others there seem to be two different issues:
1. You downloading articles from libgen (or scihub for that matter)
2. Your relation with your supervisor and how to get credit for work you've done.
The first point is fairly simple. It may be illegal to download articles from libgen and the likes (depending on the jurisdiction). But using this content in other scientific papers and projects is perfectly fine **as long as it is properly referenced**.
As for the second point, you may want to talk with your supervisor as to how he thinks to share credit for the work. If you have indeed contributed to the research or project your contribution should be acknowledged. If a paper gets published with significant input from you but without you being mentioned could be a violation of ethics codes.
Upvotes: 3
|
2020/10/07
| 462
| 1,951
|
<issue_start>username_0: I submitted a paper to a reputable and high IF journal, which is declaring an expedited review and publication process.
Papers are usually published in about 30 days (45 at most, but it is pretty unfrequent).
My paper has been ‘with editor’ for two weeks, meaning that it has not been sent to the reviewers yet. With this timeframe I’m doubting that the process is going to be expedited as declared on the journal website.
If the paper is still with editor in the next one/two weeks, would it be ethical to withdraw it?
It’s not really important that other journals can be slower, the matter is that my paper is being late compared to the journal standards.
I do not believe the editor is considering a bench-rejection as the paper of this project have always been published smoothly and often appraised by the referees. And the paper is clearly not out of scope.<issue_comment>username_1: It is ethical to withdraw it until your agreement with them is finalized. But it seems unwise to me and a (very) hasty decision if you do. Two weeks in the publishing industry is just about a nanosecond. There are a lot of reasons for delay.
You won't get the two weeks back if you withdraw and will need to start the process over at another, likely even slower, journal. Why? Calm down. Take several deep breaths.
And you can ask for an update before you make any final decision.
Withdrawing won't make the editors happy with you but the paper is yours.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If you discovered a critical error in your paper, it's ethical to withdraw at any stage of the peer review process.
Otherwise if you are simply choosing to submit your paper elsewhere, it's ethical to do so before the journal commits serious resources to getting your paper reviewed. Since your paper apparently has no reviewers yet, it's fine to withdraw.
That said, you might want to ask them for a status update first.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/10/07
| 864
| 3,560
|
<issue_start>username_0: Our class seems very disorganized. I am a graduate student in four courses this quarter. At our school this is week 3. In 3 of my courses, we received the syllabus on day 1. In one of my classes, we haven't received a syllabus yet and I am worried it will become a problem for us. We don't know what subjects we will be covering this quarter, when our midterm will be or what form it will take (our courses are remote), what we will be graded on other than the homeworks which have been assigned, or really any of the other small things which a syllabus would contain.
Every lecture we ask our professor when he will give us a syllabus. And every lecture he gives us a vague "in a couple of days" answer. Well, today we found out we will have a midterm in about 2 weeks, but he wouldn't commit to a date. I am worried that this will interfere with my other classes which are already taking up a good deal of my time, and I have no idea how to prioritize this or deal with it. I have worked in the private sector for several years and never dealt with this kind of disorganization or chaos.
I personally wrote him an email indirectly asking for a syllabus before. That didn't work. We ask him directly in every class when he will write a syllabus. That doesn't work. Several students have asked on our class discussion forum (which he is supposed to respond to). Those questions have gone unanswered.
This is tough because 1) I believe I will have at least one other class with this professor so I want to be very careful and 2) I feel like we have exhausted all of our polite options. I am considering going up the hierarchy, but I don't want to burn any bridges. What should I do?
For the record, I am attending an accredited university. Our program is listed as one of the better ones in the country for my degree, and it's not cheap either. I have high expectations, and suffice it to say, they are not being met.<issue_comment>username_1: Speak with someone who is sympathetic to you and knows the university well. This could be your student union or student representative. In some countries, there are academic advisors. Maybe your school has even a different system. Ask those people what they do: maybe they know this professor and know he will never change, maybe they know if there is someone to complain to, or maybe this is even normal at your school.
Those people should also know if it is useful to complain (i.e. if there is really someone who is willing to do something) or if it could potentially backfire.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Talk to academic advising, or someone higher up in the department.
I applaud your efforts at being understanding, but keep in mind that teaching this class is his job. Students not knowing what material will be covered, or how they will be evaluated on it, is him not doing his job.
It's certainly possible this professor has other things going on in his life that are preventing him from getting these things done, but they're very fundamental pieces of the job itself, and you're already three weeks in. If he's incapable of doing this basic part, then the department should be involved, at a minimum to provide the professor with the support he needs. And unlike in the spring, when the COVID crisis and at-home learning was suddenly thrust upon us all, we have had many months to prepare for it this time. The same things that might have been excusable in April, such as scrambling to figure out how a class will work in week 3, are not excusable now.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/10/08
| 613
| 2,609
|
<issue_start>username_0: How do you manage (workflow) writing the literature review for a paper or a dissertation?
Unfortunately my current method of going on binge reading stretches while scribbling notes on random bits of paper inevitably lead to a situation where I dread trying to write a coherent literature review because everything is disorganized.
The one time I did try to be more organized by using a template to capture and summarize info for each paper such as sampling, methodology, results, papers I want to read, etc., I ended up with so much information I became overwhelmed trying to synthesize it all.
I also developed this nasty habit of trawling through the citations of every paper I read and downloading like 80% of them. I then soon end up in a situation where I have hundreds upon hundreds of pdf's, most of which I literally don't have time to read. I'm basically a paper hoarder.
Any tips on how I can streamline my search, processing and writing up of literature?<issue_comment>username_1: Speak with someone who is sympathetic to you and knows the university well. This could be your student union or student representative. In some countries, there are academic advisors. Maybe your school has even a different system. Ask those people what they do: maybe they know this professor and know he will never change, maybe they know if there is someone to complain to, or maybe this is even normal at your school.
Those people should also know if it is useful to complain (i.e. if there is really someone who is willing to do something) or if it could potentially backfire.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Talk to academic advising, or someone higher up in the department.
I applaud your efforts at being understanding, but keep in mind that teaching this class is his job. Students not knowing what material will be covered, or how they will be evaluated on it, is him not doing his job.
It's certainly possible this professor has other things going on in his life that are preventing him from getting these things done, but they're very fundamental pieces of the job itself, and you're already three weeks in. If he's incapable of doing this basic part, then the department should be involved, at a minimum to provide the professor with the support he needs. And unlike in the spring, when the COVID crisis and at-home learning was suddenly thrust upon us all, we have had many months to prepare for it this time. The same things that might have been excusable in April, such as scrambling to figure out how a class will work in week 3, are not excusable now.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/10/08
| 1,640
| 6,895
|
<issue_start>username_0: I graduated 2 years ago. I am now seeking to apply to a Master’s degree in Finance. I am currently applying to 6 universities.
My letters of recommendation are from renowned professors who are really putting time and effort to ensure i get approved in a top program.
The thing is I currently have a very good job. I love what I do, compensation is great and the company’s culture is great.
I am sure I would attend 3 of those 6 schools I am applying, but I am a bit unsure about the other 3, as my opportunity cost is high.
The most common advice is to apply for all programs and reject them afterwards if that is the case. However, I fear the scenario in which I get approved only to the schools I am not sure I would attend and decide not to do a master’s at all.
I think that this would hurt the professors who wrote letters for me. What should I do? Is this really as bad as it sounds? Should I only apply to schools I am sure ( as of today) i would attend?<issue_comment>username_1: Apply.
If you don't, and the "top" schools all reject you, then you have no options at all. If you have options you can decide at the point that it becomes necessary which path you should take.
The alternative is certainly sub-optimal.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The reason this is the “most common advice” is that it is the correct, logical, and ethical thing to do. You’re overthinking things. Asking for letters of recommendation does not imply any commitment on your part to attend a specific school, or to pursue a degree at all. The assumption the professors are making is that you are considering doing such a thing, among the various opportunities that may be available to you - nothing more.
Good luck with your applications!
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: You should apply to schools that you are not sure you would attend.
You should not apply to schools that you are sure you would not attend.
It may save you (and your professors) some time and effort to consider now which of these two your final 3 schools are, although as others said it is something that can be decided later.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: You phrase your question as a rational consideration. But the real issue here, I suspect, is an emotional one.
1. It feels deceitful and opportunistic to apply for a college you are not keen to attend, just to have options. That's probably because applying for it somewhat implicates pretending that you do.
2. It feels ungrateful and egoistic to ask for recommendation letters for some applications and then not accepting any of the offers they have helped you get.
Also, and maybe most importantly, there is a feeling of selling yourself short in applying for colleges “you don’t really want to end up in, but maybe would be better than nothing”. You are essentially leaving open the option for an act of desperation. And in preparing for despair, you are acknowledging that you would actually maybe act on it, which might feel undignified.
Hence I suspect this question has more dimensions than the purely strategic ones, which have already been handled well in the other answers. So I will give my considerations on these other dimensions:
If I am correct, I recommend you should come to terms now whether attending a college of second choice would indeed be an act of desperation for you and whether you would – in principle – be willing to act on desperation for your current goals or rather be willing to pursue a different path in your life. Only if you here realize that it would be an act of desperation that you actually are not willing to make, I recommend that you do not apply for these colleges.
If you feel just a bit unsure about your answers, you should also consider that you may be in a different emotional state when you are actually receiving offers. In this case, you should assume that you would want to have the option, that it will not seem like an act of desperation and, even if so, that you would be willing to do it anyway. Everything else may lead you to great regret.
Finally, you should realize that applying for colleges just to have options (as long as you don't go overboard) is an acceptable thing to do. You can be absolutely be forthright about your reasons for applying to them. If anyone else involved feels like these reasons are not good enough – well let them feel this way and let them act on it too. You will not feel deceitful or ungrateful. Worst thing that will happen is that you won’t get accepted to one of your second choice colleges, which is your alternative now anyhow.
So anyway: You write that you apply for three colleges you are unsure about. I think this is a very reasonable number for options. Hence I concur with everyone else in my recommendation, just with a minor reservation: Just apply to every one of the colleges you consider which to attend you would not consider an act of desperation you are not willing to make.
(Well, that’s basically what username_3 already said, just fleshed out.)
Come to think of it, my main advice would be that you don’t put off an inner confrontation you might face in the hope of avoiding it by being accepted to a first choice college. Confront yourself now.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: OK. First reply was deleted. So let me adjust.
If there are schools you absolutely would not go to, then you might ask yourself whether it is the degree you are looking at trying to get or whether it is the school you are trying to get.
More to the point, having sat on admissions committees: schools admit you if they want you, but they have little emotional or rational investment in you until you come. If you say no—which is likely, given that we know students apply to other places—that's part of the game. So you are not burning bridges because bridges are not built at this point.
If there are places you are SURE you would not go to, do not apply there, because you are wasting your own time. And frankly, again, having read apps, it often shows through that you are not interested in the "lesser" program, and they may reject you simply because they can tell that you don't want to go.
Finally, for the sake of your professors, just subscribe to a service (there are a few out there) that collect and send your letters for you in a confidential manner. Faculty have enough to do without having to submit to several different systems for each university. Such services take one letter from each faculty member and send it to all the programs you designate. And to be honest, faculty are almost all just sending the same letter over and over, changing only the address. So if you'd like to be nice to the professors writing your letters and to burn *those* bridges, do this to lighten their burden. Especially now when they are teaching online and lots of other stuff because of the pandemic.
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/08
| 550
| 2,592
|
<issue_start>username_0: I graduated with PhD in a STEM field from a good university in the US with only one "good" journal paper published currently. I am working on another one but it won't appear in my CV since I am sending out applications for postdoc jobs starting this month. I would like to have a reality check on whether I stand anywhere near to getting a postdoc position? or it will only be a futile activity on my part. I am considering applying in both US and EU. Your insights much appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: In my opinion, publications should not affect if you have sufficient experience and skills in the research project you are applying to and research field of the group you wish to join. Hiring postdoc researchers usually involves discussions with the professor who is hiring the postdoc researcher and probably a hiring committee at the institution. Therefore I think you may have the chance to describe your research activities and skills. You can also talk about your papers which are under preparation and those submitted and under review.
Therefore, as far as you can discuss your background and experience with your future mentor, I do not see any reason to be worried about part of your research publication which still need time to be published. People being responsible in hiring you, will see a package of your skills, experience, quality of your studies and many other factors and these can help increase your chances of finding a good postdoc position.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: In my field (computer science with AI/ML), I would say that in most cases, having no publications after graduation is a very bad sign - most researchers would not allow a student to graduate without at least one good publication, let alone hire a postdoc with no publications.
However, I think that the answer strongly depends on your specific field. What is the accepted number of publications that young researchers in your field have? The variance is massive - it's not unusual for AI/ML PhD students to have upwards of 5 publications at top venues upon graduation; in some fields one can have only preprints and zero peer-reviewed published works.
If your publication record is way lower than your peers', then you could still get a reasonable postdoc, assuming that you have additional proof of your greatness. This can be in the form of really promising work in progress, reference letters from prominent people in your community (not just your advisor, whose strong support is a given), achievements in teaching/community service etc.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/09
| 544
| 2,200
|
<issue_start>username_0: I received the following rejection email today :
>
> Dear Prof. XXX,
>
>
> This message concerns the manuscript
>
>
> XXXX by XXX
>
>
> submitted to XXXXX journal.
>
>
> Informal consultations with possible reviewers have persuaded me that
> your article is too specialized for our journal, and therefore I am
> sorry to say we cannot accept it for publication. We have elected not
> to review it fully so as not to cause undue delays in its eventual
> publication.
>
>
> I advise you to submit it to a journal more narrowly focused on number
> theory, and I do wish you success in publishing it elsewhere.
>
>
>
Now, my question is:
Are there any positives/negatives that can be taken from this email ? or, it is just a desk rejection ?
Note that I received this email 20 days after the submission.<issue_comment>username_1: This is a desk rejection. There's not much more to say about it - I suppose you could say that they haven't outright said your paper is incorrect, which is a positive; on the other hand they did also say that they are not considering your paper and you should submit elsewhere, which is effectively the same as rejection and certainly a negative thing.
There's nothing to do but submit elsewhere.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: There is a great positive in this letter: they are telling you that your work is too specialized. Being specialized is good in science and in academia, and, as <NAME> indicated, is the common tendency in the sciences. You usually need to be specialized in any higher education field. Just look for a more specific journal. They even tell you which kind you should look for.
The negative aspect is obviously that it was desk rejected.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: From the letter, it simply seems that you did not submit to the right journal, which can happen to anybody and can be usually known only afterwards. They did not do a classical review process with reports so nothing can be deduced about the quality of the paper.
The good new is that they replied rather quickly so that you can start the submission in an other journal without having to wait for months.
Upvotes: 3
|
2020/10/09
| 969
| 4,128
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a phd student and I am writing a paper with my advisor, which is also part of my thesis. When we were going to submit it for publication, he asked me out of the blue to include in the paper the name of another phd student, who had just started a phd with him. This person had not done any work for my paper in any way. Once I refused, he threated me that he won't let me graduate, but I didn't cave in. Then, he started saying that this paper was no good and had to be removed from my thesis, otherwise I won't be able to graduate. If I comply and I exclude this from my thesis, can he steal it and publish it without my name? On the other hand, if this paper remains in my thesis, and my thesis is officially submitted, would he be able to steal it?
**Update:** Thank you all very much for your answers! The paper is completed, there isn't anything the new PhD can do to contribute. What I would like to know is if my advisor can take my paper and publish it without my name. Can he do that if my paper is included in my thesis?<issue_comment>username_1: I appreciate that you did not cave. But, I would consider, just saying consider, including some useful work done by the new PhD student so you can both enrich your own work and give them co-authorship legitimately. You could do that by using just a few of their paragraphs.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Removing an author from a paper is a very sensitive topic. If that is done without the consent of the author, then this is a serious violation of research regulations. In your case, it does not matter if the paper is included in your thesis or not. Authorship of a paper does not depend on the thesis inclusion. As far as I know, these are standard research regulations. If there are specific regulations in your country or university, that can provide further insights to your situation.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: It would be serious ethical misconduct for your advisor to try to publish your work under his own name. If you find that it has been done, a note to the journal editor or conference chair would have serious repercussions for his career. You could also, then, file a claim with the university, perhaps resulting in his getting reprimanded or fired. It is serious enough that few would be willing to risk the harm it would cause themselves.
However, that doesn't help you a lot at this moment. I've written in answer to many other questions here that it is very seldom profitable to fight with your advisor, even when they are clearly wrong, as here. In the end, you might have to yield on this in order to graduate and get on with your career. He holds an inordinate amount of power over you at the moment.
Let me suggest, however, that you might be able to defuse the situation if you can find allies among the students or other faculty to intervene in this on your behalf. It is hard to fight against powerful people alone. Even if someone else knows of your situation, a faculty member, it would, perhaps, make retaliation against you more dangerous for the advisor. In reality, they should let you publish with proper authorship and graduate based on qualifications. If they do anything else, then it would be appropriate to bring an action against them.
But, I suggest that you don't make a formal complaint based only on threats of bad action. Choose as you think best about the advisor's demand, and if he then takes action against you in any way, complain to whatever authorities are open to you.
You might be able, also, to find some middle ground, such as offering to help this other student in some other way than giving them authorship that isn't proper.
No one can promise that anything but submission will result in a successful outcome for you. Having a paper with a phony author is still having a paper, which is a good thing. It won't be your last paper. It likely, over your career, won't be your best paper. Don't let the short term considerations negatively affect your long term career goals, even if you have to submit to an unethical advisor. Get done. Get gone.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/09
| 512
| 2,236
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently an undergraduate student, in the 3rd year of my 4-year computer science degree and I want to email a professor to do a research internship with them. I went to some of their research papers, I liked the topics to which they are related as well as I enjoyed reading most part of it but there are some portions which I cannot understand fully.
While applying what is the best way to describe that I read their research paper and I am interested to work with them in this case?
Important note : I am from Theoretical Computer Science background<issue_comment>username_1: Professors are, or at least tend to be, busy people. So my primary advice is to keep it short and to the point. Tell them which year you are in, that you are looking for a research internship, add a very high level topic you are interested in (the more specialized a topic you insist on, the less likely a match can be found), and that you went through their papers (add names if it’s not too many), and that you enjoyed reading them. They will write back to get into any details if interested, or maybe even refer you after talking to you if they aren’t.
I do not agree with what was said here too that understanding every step of a paper is needed or even helpful. You are an undergrad seeking to learn from them by working with them, not a peer-level collaborator. Obsessing about getting every word when some will be standard tricks or conventions obvious to researchers in the field but not outside is both frustrating and wasting time you could have used more productively. What you ideally need is a good grasp of the paper’s intuition and internal logic. The professor should realize in a follow-up discussion if they feel you are prepared enough.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: From the perspective of an academic, I expect a prof to look at the motivation of the student and their background: Why are they interested in this research? What are the tools and skills they bring to the table?
If they do not understand the paper yet, that can be amended when they come to intern. After all, the academic is the world expert on the topic, the intern does not have to be topic-savvy.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/10/09
| 652
| 2,873
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am applying for a faculty position. I am very familiar with the works of two professors in that department and we share similar research interests; Also, I have them cited in my articles. As I'm writing the supporting statement, do you think is it okay to mention how my interests align with those of these professors (mentioning their names)? stating something along the line of : my research interests are in alignment with those of Professor A and B.<issue_comment>username_1: Don't be too quick to assume that those other professors are doing great, as you may be interviewing for their positions and as a replacement. Stand for your own research and views. Show them what lead you to those concolusions so you can share how you think and that you can solve com
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: There's nothing wrong with mentioning that.
However, you should be careful in which way you mention it, and how much weight you assign to it.
First and foremost, you should make clear that your research aligns with the advertisement, in case it is specific about the profile sought for.
Then, you should take into account that there are two competing interests when hiring people: First, the department might want to strengthen a certain research area, which maybe is, or should become, a focus area of the department. Second, the department likely wants to complement existing expertise in the field.
So it really depends both on what the profile of the position is, and whether the idea is that the position should strengthen or complement existing expertise in the field - likely, a mixture of both. Part of this might become more clear from the advertisement.
So I'd say, make clear where you see synergies with people in the department, but also make clear how your expertise differs from theirs (complements it). Saying "my research interests are in alignment with" certainly does not convey the latter.
Keep in mind: Why should they hire someone who does exactly the same as the people they already have (unless that person retires soon, or they really want to strengthen some very specific area)? Even if they want to strenghten the field (in which case your alignment with their research already follows from the fact that you are a fit for the advertisement), it will be important that you bring in new aspects.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I think writing that is fairly common. I would also recommend separately emailing the professors, saying something like, “Dear X, I wanted to let you know I applied for position Y, and would very much enjoy the opportunity to work with you.” You never know if one of them may end up being on the hiring committee, and even if not, they may have a vote in the end, or they may feel inclined to mention to the committee they’d be interested in working with you too.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/10/09
| 840
| 3,612
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have read a lot of suggestions on mailing professors beforehand when applying for PhD. I, however wanted to know if the same strategy applies to a **Master**'s program too?
I have been a professional for a few years, and I am applying for Masters in some top universities in Europe (Germany, Netherlands, Sweden) and Asia (South Korea, Singapore, HK) in CS (specializing in Data Science or Machine Learning).
However, I don't have any research based credentials and I became interested in research as part of my job and I want to maximize my chances of being accepted into a program because I have a **poor CGPA** (also failed in some core courses but managed to graduate in time) and **NO academic recommendations** (I have only professional recommendations). Also, I don't have any specific research idea - I would probably just work on what the professor is working on.
I had tried last year for Masters programs in the USA but got rejected everywhere. I don't want to repeat the same again.
**Does it help at all mailing particular professors asking them if they are taking Masters students in the coming year?**
**Edit**: I am applying for **Research** based masters because over the years I think I have more than made up for my poor grades by taking lots of MOOCs.
**EDIT 2**
What it eventfully boils down to is given that I HAD a slightly poor record, NO academic recommendations, BUT a great PROFESSIONAL record and a drive for learning...how do I MAXIMIZE my chances in for a RESEARCH based MASTERS program?<issue_comment>username_1: You have nothing to lose by emailing professors, provided that you go about it in the right way.
Professors get a lot of email, and anything that looks vaguely spammy is highly likely to be ignored. So don't email every professor in every department you want to apply to with the same cut-and-paste email. Find out which professors are doing research that you're interested in (perhaps by looking at their website or a couple of their recent papers) and write a short, polite email explaining who you are and why you would be interested in studying with them in particular. Possibly also attach your CV.
Don't simply ask them if they are taking students in the coming year, as you will only get a "yes" or "no" answer, with no opportunity to start a conversation about research, which is what you want.
You may not get a reply, or you may get the standard "Thanks for your email, I encourage you to apply to the programme" reply. You may have to wait for a long time to get a response (perhaps after two weeks, send one short follow-up and then leave that person alone). It also depends on the typical procedures of the specific field, country or university. Some will expect you to have the support of a potential supervisor (and possibly to have even drafted the research proposal with that supervisor) before sending the formal application. Check what is expected before sending your first email, and write it accordingly.
Finally, since you say you have been working in industry for a few years, I don't think having no academic recommendations will harm you overmuch, but it could be worth getting in touch with your tutor or Bachelor's dissertation supervisor (if you had one) to explain your plan to do a research-based Master's and ask if they would be able to write you a strong reference letter.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: In Germany individual professors are not involved in the admission of Master students. So if you're hoping that it will positively influence your chances, there's no point.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/09
| 684
| 2,762
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am applying to some PhD programs this year. If I just ask my advisors to choose the school for me, they might think I am lazy and have done no research. However if I do that on my own, I am afraid that maybe the advisors think I am arrogant for aiming for schools out of my reach. The problem is I don't know how strong my profile is and I think that my advisors should be better informed than I am. What should I do?<issue_comment>username_1: Fortunately, this isn't an either-or proposition! I agree with your assessment that you shouldn't come to your advisors empty-handed and ask for some schools to apply to. However, it would be perfectly reasonable for you come to them with a couple schools you like - probably spread out by competitiveness and such - and maybe some guidelines for what you want to focus on and where you would be willing to move to.
Ask their opinions on the schools you picked, and ask them if they have some others they would recommend, based on what they know about you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: As @username_1 says, you should follow *both* of the paths you suggest: develop your own ideas, and then talk to your advisor. (And don't be offended if their perception of your potential versus those programs is not the same as yours. They still may be wrong...)
An important aspect both for you yourself to think about and for discussion with your advisor, is what your *ambitions/goals* are, and how much *risk* you are willing to accept, and also *stress*. That is, there is a genuine and large issue about what your measure of "best" is. It is important also to realize this.
Added: I forgot to mention the practical point that you should contemplate whether you'd prefer (for example) being one of the weaker students at a top place, or one of the strongest students at a less-than-the-absolute-top place. This can have a psychological effect on you while in the program, and can affect your prospects afterward: the second-best student of a famous person in a given year will take a back seat to the best student of that famous person in many (not all) job application situations. (No, this is not sensible, but, in my observation, things tend to work this way mostly. It is harder to justify a job offer that might be accepted, but to the *second\_best*, than to make an offer, that will almost surely be declined, to "the best". The huge point is that the way hiring works (in the U.S., in math at least, at R1's...) is that "the second best" *in\_a\_given\_field* will never get a chance, because hiring ops rotate through subfields...
But, I think, the hiring game outside of R1's is less nutty... but/and that is a fact that should play a role in your career planning.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/09
| 2,993
| 13,179
|
<issue_start>username_0: In commercial companies you will mostly only have a handful people per manager. For example in a law firm it might be four or five and rarely that I know of more than a dozen. But in (university) academia, a department can have 60 academics in it and only one department head. How does line management (i.e., the chain of command) work with such a huge ratio of staff to heads of department? Are there a lot of middle managers below the head of department that professors report to?<issue_comment>username_1: Generally speaking "management" in a university takes a different role and faculty are generally expected to know what to do and to do it to a high standard. In a certain sense, every faculty member is an independent entity and they only need to coordinate on a few things. Those things, such as curriculum and grading policy, are normally handled by committees of faculty, not handed down from above.
Typically a department will have monthly faculty meetings in which things are communicated and new opportunities and directions are discussed. Solutions are normally by consensus. The meetings may be mandatory or not, but the mandate can be pretty loose.
There are few situations in which a tenured professor is told what to do by "management". And some of the layers of management, such as department heads and even deans may actually be chosen by vote of the faculty.
So, in a forty year career, I seldom "reported" to anyone in the traditional sense and no one "managed" me and my work. True, I submitted an annual report of my activities and said there how I worked toward the three traditional goals of the university: teaching, research, and service. The department head or dean would respond to that report, perhaps making suggestions, usually minor, on things I might do in the coming year.
Even it times of conflict, such as when a student complains, the complaint often is handled by faculty rather than by "management."
Faculty normally self organize into seminars and such, and normally worry about their funding. There may be some pressure about that in top universities.
In the traditional (Medieval) university, the faculty IS the university and it would hire "managers" to do those tasks that they found unsatisfying. It is still somewhat similar in many places, but less so in large R1 and State Universities.
There is a story about Rockefeller Columbia University (if I remember correctly) that when ex-president <NAME> became the university president, he held a meeting and told the faculty all the "wonderful things the university would do for the faculty." The head of the faculty (an elected position) stood up and said something to the effect that the university couldn't do anything FOR the faculty. The university WAS the faculty.
There are, however, many support offices in a university that are managed in a traditional sense. There is often a funding support office, an enrollment office, a counseling office, etc. It can be very extensive. But they don't manage *faculty*. Instead, they provide support services to faculty and others, though internally they may be traditionally managed. A "student recruiter" would probably answer to a "boss".
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: As username_1 mentioned, many universities do not use a line management model. But some do. There are several strategies used to deal with the ratio of "managers" (department chairs/heads of school/deans) to "workers" (professors/lecturers/adjuncts...)
* Disfunction is a popular option.
* Adjusting the scope of the work unit. For example, a department/school might have as scope of "optical physics" or "physics" or "physical sciences" or even "arts and sciences" depending on its size.
* The department chair may have managers below them. These managers are not responsible for a subset of people, but for a subset of duties. There might be assistant chairs for research, undergraduate education, and graduate education, for example. These assistant managers manage all faculty in the department, but not all of their duties.
* Nonacademic staff (administrators, technicians, etc.) may have their own management which could be exactly like what is done in a corporation.
* The number of levels of management varies a great deal.
* In some cases all professors are managers who have direct control over other staff.
Usually each university takes its own approach to management structures and it is common to change the structure.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: An answer from a Dutch perspective. **Short answer: there are no traditional managers for academics.**
At the top level, the university has an executive board. These are normally (ex-)academics, and each has different responsibilities. There is a *rector magnificus*, who is responsible for all academic and educational affairs, and a president, who is responsible for basically everything else (finances, housing, etc). Usually there are a few more people who are delegated some of the responsibilities. There is also a supervisory board, consisting of people appointed by the minister of education for a fixed term. As they are more political, this usually causes some friction with the academics.
The university is organised into faculties, headed by a dean, who is a (possibly elected) member of the faculty of one of the departments. They usually are the head of faculty meetings, and represent the faculty in meetings with the board.
Each faculty is organised into departments, lead by a department chair. They are just one of the full professors of the department who have taken on some extra tasks. Similarly, there are typically heads of education, research, program chairs (for the various educational tracks), etc, all members of the faculty. Most decisions are made by committees consisting of these people, and they are usually advised by elected groups of faculty and students representing those interests. Sometimes a member of these advisory groups also gets a vote in the decisionmaking process.
Each department is split into groups/divisions. These are typically headed by a professor, and consist of members of faculty doing research and teaching in a specific subfield. For instance, my CS deparment has divisions called Interaction, Algorithms and Intelligent Software Systems. Each division may be further split into smaller groups, usually of a few full/associate/assistant professors, post-docs and PhD candidates.
Each of these groups generally has complete freedom to do what they want, provided they have found a source of funding for their research. This source of funding may provide some specific targets the recipient needs to meet, but these are usually quite vague. Each individual member of staff does have a "work leader", with whom they have a yearly meeting to discuss their progress and plans for the future, and who is typically their first point of contact for any work-related or personal issues.
However, **there are essentially no "managers"** in the traditional sense. These exist **only at the top level**, where the executive board makes decisions about finances, housing, and long-term strategic plans to attract more researchers/students/funding, and (as mentioned by username_1) **in the supporting departments** like accounting, student affairs and the research support office.
As an academic, almost nobody ever tells you what you should spend your time on, other than some generally agreed split between research and teaching. This is something almost all academics I know enjoy, but it also means that if you can't handle that level of freedom and responsibility, academia is likely not for you. One small exception is usually PhD candidates, for whom their promotor is usually quite involved in decisions about directions for research. This is of course quite natural, as the PhD candidate is still in the process of learning how to do independent research.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Self-organization on a high level
---------------------------------
One aspect (at least in many countries) is self-organization and self-elected "managers". For example, in my research institute the leadership (both "mid-managment" of various research labs and the whole organization) differs from a research department in a commercial company in three substantial aspects:
1. The chairs are scientists - they are selected from the scientific staff, bringing in an outside manager is impossible/prohibited, so they are "one of us" in some way even if they specialize (and they can't permanently specialize, due to term limits etc they'll have to step down and continue scientific work).
2. The chairs are elected by the staff, and they answer primarily to the other scientists and not to some external stakeholders;
3. The administrators don't have hiring and firing power for scientific employees (they do hire/fire administrative staff, finance people, etc), the scientific staff has to approve all that by voting.
So in some aspect they're the opposite of a regular manager, my "boss" can't fire me but I (together with my colleagues) can fire him from that position. They are essentially representatives of the staff chosen to handle internal coordination and external representation. Perhaps the appropriate non-academic analogy is a workers' cooperative?
Project-based teams on low level
--------------------------------
For the daily research work (teaching is different), however, most of the coordination happens on the project level, partly because that's how funding is assigned and managed. It doesn't matter as much where you are on the "organizational chart" in general, the thing that matters is on whose grant you're working. Once a principal investigator has obtained long-term funding for some research goal, they are personally responsible for achieving the goals and managing the researchers and students working in the project. The management of those teams is much closer to how the industry works. Those are smal (equivalent to a "two pizza" team popularized by some non-academic management approaches?), functional teams with a clear goal.
One aspect of those teams is that they are inherently not permanent - they have an end date; some people may be explicitly hired for the duration of the project (e.g. post-doc contracts) and while it's common to have much of the team continue in a future project with a similar topic, IMHO it has more staff rotation to different teams than in a business environment - also partly because both the "individual contributors" and "project managers" have a quite free choice on their work; if I don't want to work on a particular project or with a particular PI, there's literally no way how "the management" could order me to do that; as long as there are any other projects/PI's with funding willing to take me on, I can go work on them; and PI's can pretty much arbitrarily choose what research projects they will pursue (though they do need to win grants to fund them).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Old ideas of academic freedom, and the academic as a self-organizing unit are getting rarer than they used to be.
In my university a faculty member's line manager is definitely the Head of Department (HoD), and conversely postdoctoral researchers, technicians, and research assistants report to the faculty member. The number of staff members a faculty manages differs, but in life-sciences an average group might be a couple of postdocs, a technician and 2 or 3 PhD students.
The HoD might manage between 30 and 100 academics depending on the size of the department. There are teaching and research directors and committees, but they are advisory bodies/working groups, and don't really hold any power. There is also a chief administrator who is line manager for professional services and other non-academic staff in the department.
Once upon a time, HoDs were elected from within their department, and served as the department's champion within the university. Now they are appointed by their superiors and are responsible for enacting the Faculty and university's goals and priorities within the department.
The KPIs for research are the number and quality of papers, and research income. As long as you make your targets here, how you go about your research is pretty much left to the academic.
However, teaching and service roles are more actively managed. While volunteers for given roles are generally welcomed, and the HoD is guided by the teaching, administration and research committees, the HoD has the final say on who does what. The HoD is responsible for balancing staff member's workload under the Workload Allocation Model. The HoD leads the annual appraisal of each academic and is responsible for initiating performance management (and ultimately dismissal) if KPIs aren't met. Interestingly promotion isn't within the power of the HoD, but rather the promotions committee of the Faculty.
I've often heard this complex structure referred to as a pastiche of a commercial corporate structure, with many of the down sides, but not really any of the actual efficiencies.
Upvotes: 3
|