date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2020/10/09
| 1,149
| 4,759
|
<issue_start>username_0: Recently I finished my PhD level and I did an interview with a research group for a postdoc position. After my review, they asked me for some references to contact them.
I choose my supervisor and other visiting professors as references.
At this point, should I contact each of the professors that I added in my references list (including my supervisor) and tell them that they might be contacted soon to be asked about me?
I am asking this question as I am not good in "academic protocols". It could be yes (kind of respect as I am asking for his/her "help"), or no (it's something obvious that s/he could be asked by someone about his/her students).<issue_comment>username_1: You should ask anyone who you intend to serve as your reference if they are OK with it, *before* doing so. It’s not an academic thing specifically; the same would apply in other situations.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As [username_1’s answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/156426/1277) says, in general, you should ask permission in advance (for a reference, and generally for anything which is implicitly making a commitment for someone).
But the question asks about a situation where you have *already* given someone’s name as a reference without asking them — partly through inexperience, and partly because of being put on the spot after the interview rather than asked earlier in the application. Given that, I suggest writing to the referees as soon as possible to let them know, apologise for not asking first, and check whether they’re OK with it. The letter could look something like the following:
>
> *Dear XXXX, Following an interview for YYYY, I was asked to provide some names of possible references, and I gave your name as one possibility. I’m sorry I hadn’t asked you about this in advance, so I’d like to check now whether you are happy to act as a reference for me? If not, please let me know, and I can contact YYYY to take your name off the list.*
>
>
>
The given situation isn’t ideal, but it’s not terrible either — it’s quite understandable how it arose, and I don’t think most referees would be particularly upset by it. Just try to avoid it happening again.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Absolutely tell them, but in truth if they said "please don't do that" you would remove their name - so I'm going to state it as I did originally (edited for clarification) - Absolutely ask them.
When you are faced with questions such as this throughout your life, which you will be, it's good to have a foundation or base (I dare to leave morality off of this response but it does feel natural to call it a moral base but I digress) that keeps your actions in line with who you are and who you strive to be as a human being.
In this case, you are concerned about asking for one reason or another. It appears it's not something easy for you to do and as it may never even be noticed or come up beyond this one letter there's a certain logic of "why even do something difficult if it may not matter at all".
You do it because it's the "right thing" to do and your stomach knows it. I did put "right thing" in quotes as it's often phrased as such in colloquialisms but please don't take that as a denigration, it really is the right thing to do and I'm in no way mocking that. The stomach or gut reaction to things in life is actually extremely important and not given it's place in our decision making as the quantification of such feelings isn't established and thus we incorrectly assign it a lower value than what it does in fact represent in terms of importance, use and overall big picture frameworks for building a better society and self.
You wrote this post because it is nagging you. If something is nagging you, address it. It's very simple. If what you are doing to address the nagging isn't negative, hurtful or damaging to yourself or others then the nagging must be a concern that NOT addressing it could be just those things - hurtful, negative or damaging at some point in the future.
Your concerned you may be doing something "wrong", something that goes against who you are and who you want to be in this world as a person and your writing of this post is a perfect example of that concern which isn't necessarily at the top of mind but more subconscious if you will.
Good people ask these questions and seek these answers, so my respect to you for asking and taking responses.
This may read as over assured or single minded in a way, and the single minded part can partially be supported I'm sure, but it is intended to be an open and honest response using the philosophy and method I have come to respect and try to apply in my own life - nothing more.
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/10
| 737
| 3,048
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am 31 years old, materials engineering PhD graduate in Canada. I completed my PhD last year and failed to secure a postdoc or industry position mainly because of my poor publication record. After graduation, I published 2 papers. So now, I have 3 first author and 1 co-authored publications from my PhD in decent journals.
Since May this year, I joined my PhD advisor for my postdoc and I have been working on different projects than my PhD's. I have been collaborating with groups in my department and other universities in Canada. My PhD advisor is great and offered me the position out of pity.
I have submitted two first author papers this year till now. Planning to submit 3 more (1 first and 2 co-authored) by the end of this year.
However, I don't feel good about what I am doing. I feel so incompetent since I did not get a good position last year and now am working with my PhD advisor which is considered a career suicide.
My advisor has ensured that the contract will be extended till the end of the next year. And I am hesitating to apply for postdoc or industry positions elsewhere as mostly I am afraid of getting rejected again and partly from covid situation.
I know I should be applying for positions aggressively. But I am not feeling the motivation to do so. I always wanted to be an academic. But now I feel that I am not cut out for it. I just don't have what it needs to be in research field. I am also not a good teacher.
There's so much I don't know and so much skillset to acquire that many researchers of my age and in my field of study are proficient in. I just feel that I am going to fail again in securing a position.
I just don't know what to do. Should I be applying for positions if not much has changed since then?
Please advise what you think about my situation. Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: You should probably be applying but with a broadened scope. Times are tough, both generally in academia and due to the pandemic. What was true this year may not be true next.
The ease of getting a position in a given academic field varies fairly wildly over time. There are downturns and also good times. But, unless you want to give up and become an Uber driver, you need to keep looking.
But you would be wise to expand your search to other sorts of institutions that rejected you last time. Cast a wide net. In fact, you may need to keep trying for more than a year, given current conditions. And bring other resources to bear to help you. Make sure that you have a strong application, matched to requirements with good letters of support. Get, and take, advice from advisors and others who might be able to help.
Times will change, but it will take time for it to happen. Stay connected to your field as best you can and keep producing as is possible.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes. Things may have changed at their end.
BUT if you could not find a position in industry there is something more than your publication record that needs to be addressed.
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/10
| 1,148
| 4,820
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a professor that has given me some early advice on developing my thesis topic, but I have not yet formally selected a thesis advisor. I was thinking about choosing to work with a different professor whose research seems slightly more aligned with the project, but I'm curious if my professor (the one I already spoke with) will expect me to work with him, and if this would have entailed some sort of financial compensation for him. Not that this would heavily influence my decision, but it's something I'd like to be aware of.<issue_comment>username_1: I think such arrangements are uncommon. I've never come across them personally, though suspect that they do exist.
On the other hand, it is normal for such things to be "counted" as part of the teaching required, so that with "enough" such students the professor might be able to teach less in the classroom. So, some institutions have a rule that for a certain number of thesis advisees you will get a one course reduction in the load.
But in most cases, even if there is some financial incentive it would probably be pretty small. Where would the money come from.
But advising, both formally and informally is just part of the job. And most are willing to spend some time doing it informally as you have seen in your case. I doubt that there is any expectation that you will pick him as your advisor.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I have never heard of a professor being personally financially compensated for supervising a master's student. I'm not saying it never happens, but it would be uncommon, certainly in my country (UK).
However, while a professor is not financially compensated, they may be given funds to cover the costs of research materials - this money would not go to them, but to their lab's research budget. In some cases this can be a not inconsiderable amount of money (master's projects I've supervised have attracted budgets between £1000 and £3000). This money can be important because it is soft-money. That is, it can be spent as the supervisor sees fit (within normal rules of acceptable business use). For many of us, this is the only source of non earmarked money we have. So while our government grants might pay for chemicals and plasticware and reagents etc, this soft money might be useful to pay to repair computers, or send someone on a training course, or buy software subscriptions, etc.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes. It is called a salary. And advising is one of the duties listed when the job is offered.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Not typically, but it can be the case in some places. While in some countries/universities the salary is completely fixed, it is not fixed at all such places. At some places (countries or institutions), the salary depends on the financial situation of the department and this fluid part is distributed by the head of the department, hopefully by some objective criteria. Those would most likely be the productivity based on grants won, publications and teaching (including supervising some theses), because the departments receive their money exactly according to these criteria.
Additionally, the university or the faculty may have some fixed amount of money paid to the adviser of a successfully defended doctoral theses. Like [this](https://cuni.cz/UK-8265.html) regulation by the rector of the Charles University (in Czech, sorry). The bonus depends on the number of years the student needed to complete the PhD and the maximum amount is 50 000 CZK (it is roughly 2000 EUR). For master's theses, one would only pay external advisors (not employed by the faculty) and only very little (say 1000 CZK). But the internal fluid part of the salary may depend on the teaching productivity, as I already stated.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Not directly but as they are more likely to get publications and research grants with graduate students, supervising students helps in promotion, merit pay etc. it does affect the salary of the professor *indirectly*.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: In Czech Republic the master/bachelor theses advisors are professors, usually from the parent faculty, or some specialists from the industry.
The professors are paid for the advising the students - it is one of their duties in their contracts.
The specialists from industry have their ow contracts with the university directly or indirectly through their employer.
In respect to the student - (possible) advisor relation, the advisory is for free (the university through its funding is paying for the students). It's because they are paid for teaching you some skill (how to conduct a research, write thesis, defend your results). Being contracted by you it will be slightly changed to getting you the title.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/10
| 1,262
| 5,652
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am peer-reviewing a postgraduate paper. I reviewed the paper and sent off my recommendations for major corrections. Now the paper has come back and the author has only implemented around half of my suggestions.
They restructured the paper as requested, but failed to add some detail when requested in a couple of places, neither did they change the referencing to fall in line with the house style. The paper also has some spelling and grammar errors.
Should I recommend acceptance to the editor anyway? I am rather disappointed at the fact that some specific detail, as requested, was not included, but at the same time I do not want to deter this author and the paper is quite good in its current format. I feel that the parts left out, though not detrimental, should have been included at least for good practice. I am thinking of recommending acceptance with a note along the lines of what I have written above. Or should I be stricter?<issue_comment>username_1: The author owns the paper. They should consider any suggestions you make but need not implement any specific recommendation. Give up your "personal" feelings. That isn't your job. Re evaluate the paper on its merits and give it a fair assessment.
You are, of course, allowed to repeat your old suggestions, but it is a mistake to judge it solely on whether all of your suggestions were followed.
Some, but not all, authors will state in a "rebuttal" their reasons for ignoring suggestions. It isn't normally required. Judge the paper as it appears before you. Complain to the editor if you must.
Also consider that some really good suggestions are saved for future work by authors rather than included in the present paper. The work may already be in progress.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It is not your job to "let it through" or not - that is the job of the editor. Write a review that points out that the things you asked for have been changed or not, and say how important you believe these things to be. Certainly for referencing style and spelling/grammar, I would just point this out rather than making a judgement on it. Then let the editor make the decision.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: I agree by and large with the two answers already given by username_1 and username_2. However I'd like to say something more on who should do what.
It is true that ultimately it is the author who decides what they want to have in the paper, and you cannot enforce them to do anything. It is also true that as a reviewer you do not have the ultimate responsibility to make a decision, this is up to the editor. In particular, although it is nice and helpful to point out formatting, spelling and grammar mistakes, ultimately the job of enforcing correctness in this respect is up to the editor.
It is your job however to decide whether you think that the paper should be published as is, or with further correction, so on the scientific side you have to assess how serious you think the omissions of the author actually are. If you think that the paper should in principle be published because it has something good and original and is by and large correct, however you think that your ignored suggestions are quite important to improve the paper, obviously if the journal has the possibility to run through another cycle, you can state your objections again and say that in your opinion the authors at the very least should reply to them.
As editor I have been in in such situations, I have to make up my mind about this, and it has happened both that I told authors that I think this is really important and they need to address the issues next time, or I occasionally decided that these are side issues in my view or maybe not even justified, and then I wrote to the authors that this is what the reviewer still wants to see and it would be nice if it could be addressed (unless I think it should not), but I wouldn't insist on it.
If of course at this point a final decision of "yes" or "no" is required, you ultimately have to make your mind up about whether you think that this is valuable and should be published in the first place, or whether you think your remaining points are really essential and you recommend to reject if they are not addressed. This may also depend on the level of the journal, you could also think that a paper with these omissions shouldn't be published in a high impact journal, but it could be acceptable elsewhere.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I do second the other answers given in this post.
I wish to make a point about the communication channels in the peer-reviewing process:
* the authors **always** address the editor;
* the reviewers **always** address the editor;
* the authors and reviewers **never** address each other
regardless of whether matters of contention arise on the manuscript ("the authors are idiots") or on the commentaries ("the reviewers are idiots"). 'Idiot' is here a one-size-fits-all placeholder for any attitude of confrontation.
In this game the only one who may start a piece of correspondence with 'Dear Author' or 'Dear Reviewer' is the editor.
This **editor-in-the-middle arrangement** is a great opportunity for authors and reviewers to let go of their behavioural biases, whether emotions or unconscious expectations.
So, for anything you disliked in the authors' response, please bring a sound argument to the editor on why this weakens the case for publication.
You may well be right, but it is the editor's responsibility to guarantee a publication standard for the journal. See other posts indeed.
My two cents.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/11
| 646
| 2,942
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am taking an online class that requires a textbook to be purchased. I have found the book through my first simple search using the Google search engine. The website where I found the book seems to be foreign and not related to the original authors. Is it ethical for me to use the free version that I have easily found online and not purchase the book?
Edit: I think there is a valid distinction between resources found on controversial websites like SciHub and the Google search engine. Furthermore, my intentions were to purchase the book before I stumbled upon it in the first few search results.<issue_comment>username_1: If you're asking whether this will be seen as ethical by a university administration, the answer is no. The law probably lines up with the ethics that fall into the professional norms of the university admin.
However.
The money that the public pays for textbooks does not flow into the pockets of the people that generated or summarized that knowledge, so the system is far from fair.
I had a professor who actually told us to download his book illegally if we could get it, and when we pointed out he was the author, he said he made negligible returns on the sale.
Which gets us to the professional norms of your field. Some fields are big supporters of free access to knowledge. In these fields, the arxiv and scihub are popular. Downloading anything illegally if it's academic knowledge would generally be accepted as ethical within the professional norms of those fields.
Personally, I believe academic knowledge should be much freer than it is, and everyone should have access to the work we do. I'm not studying physics because I want to get rich. I study this because it's beautiful and it's important, and because these are fundamental questions for humanity, and answers should be shared with humanity. We all benefit from living in a society that's informed about itself and the world around it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Rather than asking if it is ethical, I recommend that you be open and honest and listen to your conscience. You can help yourself to clarify your conscience by consulting with the people who are directly concerned with this question. So, in this case, **I recommend that you email the authors of the textbook and the publisher of the textbook and then ask them how they feel about you downloading their book instead of purchasing it** (you could probably find their contact information by searching online). If they reply that they have no problem with that, then your conscience should be perfectly clear to download the book without paying for it. But if they reply that they are not happy about that, then you should do what your conscience tells you, even if that means paying for a book that most other students are downloading at no charge. Your conscience is priceless and is worth much more than the cost of a textbook.
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/11
| 4,073
| 17,410
|
<issue_start>username_0: One of my close relatives went to Australia to get a Ph.D. in computer science. PhDs in Australia are 3 years long. She couldn't complete her Ph.D. in 3 years. Then she applied for an extension and got 1 year more. However, ultimately she failed. I asked her about the issue and she preferred to stay silent.
As far as I guess, she chose a topic that was destined for failure. I.e. her hypothesis was incorrect.
How should someone choose a Ph.D. topic so that they don't fail?<issue_comment>username_1: Make sure your advisor has a good track record of graduating students in time.
Anyone just entering or outside the field won't be able to assess PhD topics with good judgement, so it's unfair when advisors fail their students by giving them bad projects. Your best bet at avoiding this is finding an advisor who is unlikely to fail students in this way.
If you find yourself in this position, a good bet is to reach out to other professors and tell them what's going on. It can feel shameful, but I've seen many success stories of people getting a new project and spinning it into enough for a PhD when things aren't working out with their initial advisor.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: A PhD is awarded following submission of a thesis. It is extremely rare for a student who submits a thesis to fail. It is quite common for a student to never submit a thesis.
If the goal is simply to pass, then the key questions should be:
* What are the expectations for a thesis in my discipline? Expectations vary, but usually originality is expected.
* Will this thesis topic allow me to meet those expectations?
The one situation where a choice of topic would be likely to directly cause failure would be if the topic is blatantly not original. For example, it is found in well-known textbooks. It is much more common for a student to stop working on their thesis because they do not like the topic.
Financial and health factors are common causes of PhD non-completion.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: It is an empirical fact that the percentage of graduate students who fail to complete their PhDs is quite high.
It follows that there does not exist a simple algorithm for choosing your PhD topic that guarantees success - certainly not one that fits in the space of an academia.se answer. If it did exist, everyone would know it, and we wouldn’t see the numbers of people who start a PhD and don’t finish it that we do end up seeing.
Finishing a PhD is a matter of talent, a lot of hard work, and in some cases a bit of luck. It’s good to do some advance research on best practices for choosing an advisor and a topic, but no amount of preparation can save you the need to have some combination of those three things.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Speaking as someone currently in the trenches, I’d advise the following general strategies for a doctoral student to maximize their chance for completion. At the very least, all these points should be considered. Also, as others have said, you won't fail a dissertation for having a hypothesis that yields a negative result – a dissertation is very much about the *process* not the scientific result per se.
* **Develop your dissertation to play largely to your strengths, not address your weaknesses.** For example, if you’re really strong at biological research but have only just learnt to code, it might not be a good idea to have a dissertation that is centered on building a software platform – even if it does target biological research as its domain.
* **Choose a topic for which you’ll have expert guidance.** That means your advisor and members of your committee can understand the concepts, methodology, and novelty of your work. Their advice will also be that much more helpful; they’ll be better equipped to help you navigate the roadblocks that’ll inevitably crop up.
* **Do the background to make sure you’re addressing a real gap in the current literature.** It pays to be a bit future thinking and aspirational; as a PhD student, one of the advantages you have is a multi-year timeframe where you can largely focus on one thing. Don't be afraid to think big and then narrow down your focus – doing so can help give you a larger sense of purpose; it can help you remember how the little thing you're working on in the moment factors into your larger vision.
* **Discretize and make independent the goals of your project.** This can be tough to do but is well worth it. Having each goal build on the other can amplify the risk that your entire project fails. For example, this could happen if you hit an insurmountable roadblock well past the timeframe where you can reasonably pivot your research direction. As a bonus, this strategy can also improve the odds that one of your research projects will have a meaningful impact.
* **Be wary of situations and research designs that will precipitate bureaucratic delays.** IRBs, data access committees, awaiting approval from distant stakeholders (timezone delays can add up!), and long duration data generation are examples of this. If at all possible, design your project to at least have a primary endpoint that won’t require more than one of these. Note that not all of these potential roadblocks are created equal. In my experience, the order of the above delays looks something like this: Long duration data generation > IRB > data access committees > distant stakeholders.
* **Document communications and decisions with your committee and administration in writing.** For example, when seeking input on a larger project decision from your committee members via email, be sure to state (in a friendly way) when you need a response by and the *default action that will occur if no response is received* by that date. Send a friendly reminder 48 hours before the date if you haven't received a response. For big decisions and reviews, allow your committee 2 weeks of lead time.
* **Have an insurance policy.** This is something I often setup before making a big career decision – ultimately, failure is *always* a possibility. What I mean by this is to have something to fallback on if your primary focus (i.e. your doctorate) ends in failure. As an example, I completed an MS prior to pursuing a doctorate and have a software side project and associated business plan that I believe are together legitimately valuable and actionable – at the very least, both would help me land a job that I would enjoy and keep me stable. Having 'insurance' can help give you peace of mind and sustained focus when pursuing something that might be inherently risky, and in some respects doctoral degrees are.
This isn't an exhaustive list; there are other considerations as discussed in other answers. That said, in my personal experience (and observing others at my institution) I’d recommend being mindful and discussing all of these aspects of your dissertation, possibly throughout your doctoral research, with your advisor and/or committee, though the latter may be best discussed with your peers.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I want to reassure you that don't fail a PhD dissertation because your hypothesis was incorrect. If you are stressed about this on your own behalf- **don't be**. Your result is outside of your control.
To reassure you, null results are published *all the time*. For example, "The Ineffectiveness of using Generic Deep Learning approaches on Problems of Type XYZ" can be published in a great journal, so long as your readers still learn something important from your article. Here's what reviewers look for, in general:
1. The methodology was sound.
2. The argument that one could have expected your approach to work was clear and agreeable to your audience.
3. The paper was well written and clearly outlays the conclusions and implications for the field that practitioners care about.
Having an interesting and successful thesis helps, no doubt, but it is not the sole issue here. The demands of 1,2,3 are very high.
That said, if your friend doesn't want to discuss why they did not complete their PhD, I would avoid poking at them. There are innumerable reasons why they might not have finished it, and it's **best not to speculate**. You may easily arrive at an incorrect conclusion. Heck, perhaps they dropped out because they got a great job offer as ABD.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: When one fails or is about to fail a Ph.D., it is worth understanding what requirements are not fulfilled.
This may vary from a field to field but generally, there are four sets of requirements:
1. Formal criteria required by law. These are usually vague and the easiest to fulfill. They dictate the number of course points, seminars, and some generic requirements like "contribution to knowledge" etc. you have to fulfill to get a Ph.D.
2. Requirements by the university. These may specify the thesis format, specific courses to attend, teaching work, funding, etc.
3. Requirements by the community determine the level of quality that is considered good and worthy of publication by other researchers in the field.
4. Requirements by your supervisor. These are tricky because they are implicit. Inadvertently, you may get a very demanding or difficult supervisor, or, alternatively, you can have a very supportive one.
The exact thesis topic is largely irrelevant. As long as it broadly falls within CS (or any other study area) you are fine.
What matters is that a student knows the formal criteria. There should be quarterly/yearly evaluations and the supervisor/university should facilitate the student in attaining them.
Having publications of thesis work is a good sign that the work is of reasonable quality. Maintaining a good relationship with the supervisor help with understanding his/her expectations.
From my anecdotal and very limited experience, students fail PhDs for two reasons:
1. Difficult relationship with the supervisor due to misunderstood expectations, mismatch of personalities, inability to receive critical feedback, unwillingness to put in hard work, leading to..
2. Difficulties in publishing their results either due to preparing manuscripts taking forever or being repeatedly rejected from peer-reviewed venues. Lack of progress exacerbates #1
To conclude, the advice to anyone starting a PhD is to pick the supervisor carefully.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: >
> As far as I guess, she chose a topic that was destined for failure.
> I.e. her hypothesis was incorrect.
> How should someone choose a Ph.D. topic so that she doesn't fail?
>
>
>
I think **your** hypothesis here might be incorrect.
You could in theory write an entire PhD thesis based on an incorrect hypothesis. The entire point of the thesis would become *disproving* the hypothesis.
It's obviously not as satisfying as proving something is true, but it's valid science. If the original hypothesis was reasonably plausible, it means others won't have to repeat your mistakes.
And in any case, the point of a PhD is not so much to produce *useful* new science, as to produce a **new scientist**. I.e. someone who can demonstrate, through their thesis, that they understand the scientific process well enough to produce original results.
It doesn't really matter, that most of the time, these original results are pretty useless! The originality is just a way to prove that the science came from them, and not someone else. It's only purpose is to demonstrate the following hypothesis: "Dr X is, indeed, a scientist"
Possible reasons for failure:
* lack of support from the advisor (a good advisor would advise how to turn that failing hypothesis into a successful thesis)
* mental breakdown of the student (it can be soul-crushing to spend so much time trying to get something to work, and failing)
* lack of time (if the people involved realise too late that "this isn't working", and lack the "narrative" skills to quickly turn that apparent failure into a success)
Note: people doing research in computer science can get a bit confused about what they are actually doing.
Science is about asking questions, finding answers, and writing about them. So it can't really "not work". A negative result is still a result (unless you entire experimental set up got destroyed and your data corrupted, as long as you follow proper methods, you can't really fail)
However, *engineering* would be about using science to produce a workable solution to a problem. Now this can very much fail. This is not what a PhD is about. But people can get misguided. Computer scientists ("I must write about computer science") who think that what they're doing is software engineering ("I must deliver working software"), are very much at risk of failing. And sometimes the way a PhD thesis is funded (e.g. industry grant) can fuel that misconception.
Note 2: re "originality", a very plausible cause of failure, is if you start your PhD on a valid original topic, but then someone else basically writes your thesis before you've finished it. This happens all the time... And is incredibly stressful/frustrating! Same problem with publishing papers. Some topics are popular, and great minds think alike... So it's really not that unusual for different people to be unknowingly working on the same hypothesis in parallel!
And I honestly don't know what's the best way to avoid that situation, and to salvage your hard work, when someone else beats you to the finish line... (I guess try and publish anyway, even if originality takes a hit... E.g. introduce a small variation, etc. But all the extra testing and writing can really screw things up in term of timing, when grants are running out)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: I am a professor, I have been on more than 20 doctoral committees.
Most of the answers here are focused on, or call attention to picking a topic. IMHO - by itself this is not a good strategy.
In my experience, all dissertation decisions hang on one thing: the candidate's ability to understand how gatekeeping works. That is to say the classic error is the doc candidate who thinks they want their work to be great so they find the smartest people on campus to be on their committee. Translation: the four biggest egos in that discipline on campus are now on your committee. Good luck with that. Applying such a belief system (get the best and brightest) has the potential to inspire Intra-committee disagreements. That's risky. The worse-case output is the dissertation never gets done and it's not the candidate's fault.
IMHO if you want to create the most favorable conditions for graduating, research your potential committee chairs. 1) are they well-liked, respected? 2) research potential chair's doctoral committee history and records of how many successful/not successful dissertations 3) information interview your potential chair. 4) once chosen, ask your committee chair who should be on the committee.
The chair will likely recommend people who are agreeable with their ideas. Your committee meetings will be friendly. Don't get me wrong, you still have to find a good topic, be clever, and write well. A good advisor will steer you away from rough seas, heal weaknesses in your work, or advise strategies to keep your work relevant. IF you don't have that in your corner, you can still finish, it's just a lot more work to figure that stuff out on your own.
IMHO when it comes to topic and writing, buy or otherwise acquire a doctoral candidate or 'dissertation' handbook. Most universities have them in some form, usually found at the department level. Get one, read it, follow the guidelines laid out by your department -- and keep a journal of your committee meetings. Where you can, use the rules (and your notes) to your advantage.
The bottom line is that earning a phd requires you to pass through an institutionalized system. Such systems have rules and structures that can be learned and used to create pathways to success.
My experience on doctoral committees -- 20% of the dissertation ideas are not (and never will be) well conceived, 20% are exciting and interesting, The middle 60% are well-written -- or technically well-executed (and not so well-written), but otherwise good. Prolly 10% of candidates are rejected, and we always attempt to counsel our candidates to bail out early if we think they won't make it.
Good luck with your ambition. It's worth the effort. I was 20 years owner of a software company, now 20 years as professor.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: My answer is basically for US as that's where I am from, and also where I got my Ph.D.
Advisor is key. Work with your advisor to pick an approved topic. The advisor will typically know what will work.
It is important that the PhD candidate's research have original research, but it also needs to be related to and compared to past research, so extending past research is important. For example, creating a new algorithm would obviously be original research. Finding statistical equations for existing algorithms would be extending past research.
It also helps to finish the work in a timely manner. Most PhD candidates have done enough reading, so it cannot be emphasized enough to write up the research. If it is possible to publish it or present it in a conference (these days, likely to be a virtual conference), this will also help.
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/11
| 759
| 3,314
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am doing an integrated Masters course as part of my undergraduate degree, and we have been asked to select the top 6 projects from a list of ~40 projects. We will then be allocated projects (and supervisors) based on these 6, and our previous academic performance.
Is it appropriate to ask project supervisors for the email-addresses of some of their current students? I would then contact their current students and ask what their supervisor is like to work with.
Would most supervisors take this poorly? Would I jeopardise my relationship with them before even starting my Project?<issue_comment>username_1: In many places it would likely be viewed as improper. I suggest that you don't do that. Instead, ask the supervisors to pass on a note from yourself to their advisees/students/whoever in which you describe what you want to do and providing contact information for yourself. Make a plea for participation, if you like.
But giving your contact information indirectly to others is vastly different from "harvesting" contact information indirectly.
I would treat your request as stated as improper and wouldn't comply. But I'd be happy to let people know of your project.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In part to make a counter-point to the (good from a different angle) accepted answer, I would argue it is not only desirable, but in fact smart from the point of view of the OP. Emails might not be the ideal communication tool (e.g. legally), but finding out how a given teacher performs from their former students is a very good idea. I have personally strongly advised potential PhD candidates to speak to former students, and it has been very profitable IMHO, at the very least to me (in as much as it has convinced applicants to carry out a PhD under my supervision), but hopefully to them as well! Choosing a prospective PhD supervisor is the most important and (more often than not) random decision that a student takes, so any access to prior information is useful.
Indeed, you should get from a former student information which
might not be accessible elsewhere, such as "is their style supervision
appropriate for me?"
I am aware it is not exactly the context of the OPs' question, but believe it could still apply at the level of a M2 course?
>
> So in short I would personally regard a request for such information as
> positive, I would ask my former students if they are happy to speak to the applicant, and proceed accordingly.
>
>
>
PS: Since others have mentioned variability with countries, my experience is European.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: A better strategy is to search through the professor's websites, publications, department website, and thesis databases (such as Proquest Disstertations) and look up past students' contact information yourself. Then email the former students directly. Former students are likely to be more informed that current students. There's also no need to ask the professor's help if the information is already online.
I strongly disagree with username_1's suggestion that it is improper to ask a professor for students' contact information. It may be improper for a supervisor to give out contact information without permission, but it is not improper to ask for it.
Upvotes: 3
|
2020/10/11
| 533
| 2,148
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently a graduate student (hopefully) in my final year. I am applying to the NSF postdoc program in mathematics. As part of this application, I need to fill out an application form and a biographical sketches form.
On my Biographical sketches, I listed that I am expecting to receive my Ph.D. in 2021. As of right now I only have a masters in mathematics. The problem is that I do not know how to indicate this in the application form, and right now I have it listing me as having a masters as my highest degree earned.
From the copies of proposals that people have made public, it seems like graduate students tend to put a Ph.D. as the highest degree earned. I do not know if this is appropriate/expected from people in my situation, but it seems strange to put Ph.D. when I do not have one yet. I tried looking in the PAPPG, but there was nothing in there about this. Does anyone know what I should put in these forms?<issue_comment>username_1: Your highest degree is a masters. You don't have a PhD until it is awarded. And that is only after you pass all requirements, which has not yet happened.
Of course, you can also say (if the opportunity exists) that you expect to be awarded a doctorate in 2021, but it isn't certain, and that will be understood.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I agree with username_1, except that the position you are applying for (postdoc) requires a PhD. It is common for last-year PhD students to apply for postdocs or faculty positions (which require the PhD) before they have officially graduated, or sometimes even before they have defended their dissertation. When applying for such jobs, it is customary to list the PhD degree on your application with an expected graduation date in the future. If you are hired, it is often contingent on finishing the degree before the job start date.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Normally when applying to NSF grants you want to downplay your education as the standards move up the longer you're in academics. But since it's for a position which requires a PhD obviously you need to list PhD.
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/11
| 3,190
| 12,989
|
<issue_start>username_0: In academia, there are sometimes sort of "feuds" between different researchers. For example, one such situation is described here: <https://www.quora.com/Mathematicians-What-is-the-story-behind-the-feud-between-Shing-Tung-Yau-and-Gang-Tian?share=1>
Lately, something like this has affected me. People I work with will bad-mouth other researchers in our field, or other researchers will bad-mouth people I work with. Sometimes, they will say that so-and-so's results are trivial or that they stole the results from someone else, or that they got a lot of help from a different mathematician and aren't actually very talented. The bad-mouthing seems to happen on both sides and seems to be born out of a kind of vicious competitiveness. Here are some of the ways this has disrupted my PhD:
1. I am really paranoid about people's intentions and even though it seems like, from the outside, that my PhD is going very well (going into my third year I have one publication already and am making good progress on other projects), I am certain some people in my own university even, have the impression I am not a very good mathematician because they think my advisor is a fraud.
2. I have recently had the opportunity to work with someone from the "other side" of this conflict and have not yet told my advisor about that. I am afraid she will be very angry with me if/when I do. To complicate things, my advisor has told me some of her research ideas in the past and is extremely secretive about them. I just don't have the same sense of secrecy about my own research ideas. Luckily I don't work on what my advisor works on but she still might be quite upset that I've been "talking to the enemy" so to speak.
3. Although no one has directly been "mean" to me the ways in which I have seen people try to tear each other down has contributed to my total disillusionment with academia and made my field seem like a place where people compete for reputation rather than trying to do real work motivated by curiosity rather than ambition. It's just very depressing and stressful to imagine having to deal with this kind of thing.
As a young PhD student, I am shocked by the way the "adults" in my academic life behave. My instinct is to pretend this doesn't exist and focus on my math. I do not make any judgments about who is right and generally shut my ears whenever these topics come up. To some extent, it seems very inappropriate to me that my professors and collaborators discuss these kinds of things with me at all. Furthermore, I think one reason I have been successful as a PhD student is because I am very friendly and open to people. This has allowed me to learn a lot and collaborate with a lot of people despite having little to no contact with my advisor most of the time (we are on good terms, she just doesn't really make time for me).
These conflicts seem to have been started long before I was even in college so from my perspective, it has nothing to do with me, it's not really my business, and I don't even pretend to know all the details of who did what and why. And yet people I respect *a lot* gossip to me like school girls as if they are trying to convince me of a particular position.
**Question:** Has any of you had to deal with this kind of mean-spirited competitive research environment? How did you handle it? Should I avoid working with people "across the aisle" in order to stay out of conflict with them? Am I being naive to try to be friends with everyone and not hide what I'm working on like it's a secret recipe?<issue_comment>username_1: I'll guess that this is pretty common, actually. It was certainly true in the place I earned my doctorate. There were a couple of factions. They might be research based or some other division, such as politics or religion.
Usually the feud is fundamentally based on some topic or idea, I'd guess, though it may not be universal. If you have to deal with people from different factions, just avoid all discussion around that topic, whatever it is.
One of the reasons for this in academia is that most people who make it to senior faculty positions are smart. Being smart they think a lot of their own ideas and, to often, might think less of other's ideas. This can spill over. And extreme levels of competition just adds to the problem.
Just deal with these sorts of people transactionally on the things and ideas you need and not on the hot-button topics that set them off. Don't agree or disagree with them. Just step away as needed. Since the *are* smart, they may have something to offer you as long as you stay in the safe zone.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: If you're in mathematics, then these kinds of feuds are unusual enough that the best strategy is simply to move to a different subsubfield that doesn't have them. (If you're a PhD student just starting research, just do something else; if you're more established, it's fine to gradually move into a neighboring area.) Even if you manage to succeed despite the feuds, other capable mathematician will avoid the area, and hence the area will become less popular over time.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Full disclosure: I recently obtained my PhD and have no experience whatsoever in similar situations within academia. My answer below is an approach based on what I've observed in other social groups where similar things take place.
**Edit / Warning:** Please read Captain Emac's words of caution in the comments regarding the advice given here.
I think there are two stages to this problem. First one is as a student and the other one once you graduate **and** get a postdoc.
As a graduate student I would avoid interacting with the other group. If any person you're working with found this out you would be considered a traitor and so on. So for now just continue doing what you're doing and focus on graduating.
Once you graduate there's no single person who has as much power over your career as your adviser did during your PhD. I believe at this point you can openly communicate with your own group that you don't want to take part in these antics. Request to keep the badmouthing to meetings where you are not present and so on. Establish clear limits when it starts happening. You will have to do this with both groups. It might even be a good idea to have a face-to-face conversation with your adviser at this point.
This will solve one of your issues, however, it will complicate your life in other ways. The people most involved in the conflict will probably try to shun you out. However, as long as your contributions keep being valuable this hopefully won't be a bigger problem(\*).
It's likely that the older and more established members of each group will distrust you. However, I'd bet the younger folks will be more open to follow your steps; or at least don't try to punish you for what you're doing. They must be as uncomfortable with the situation as you are.
(\*) It sounds like you're doing great so far, so I don't see why this shouldn't be the case moving forward!
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: What you are describing is a situation where by analogy you are stuck at home and mommy and daddy (the ‘adults’) are arguing a lot. You are afraid that mommy will be angry with you and you describe yourself as being paranoid about other people’s intentions. In other words there are, as you perceive the situation, at least two causes for your getting anxious, upset, even depressed.
Some contributors have recommended experiential avoidance which is not ideal but if you choose to do this you still have to confront why this situation is making you feel so anxious. According to much traditional philosophy and modern knowledge of psychology (Cognitive Behavioural Therapy in particular) it is easier to change your perspective on things than the things themselves. When you do this you find the problem is not in the situation or in what other people are doing and saying but in your distorted way of looking at what they say and do. What are you telling yourself that is making you so anxious?
It is likely you are engaged in mind-reading (other people’s intentions) which is not evidence-based or that you are catastrophizing which is a kind of fortune telling and again not based on evidence. You have to put some of your assumptions about yourself to the test and you also might want to get your feet wet by talking to your supervisor and geting that relationship on to an honest footing instead of second guessing what each other is thinking. Phd research is both an outer and an inner journey of discovery and I do not believe many young researchers realise this until later on in life. I recommend ‘The Feeling Good [about Yourself] Handbook’ by Dr <NAME> Phd which requires some more homework on your part including completing Mood Logs on a daily basis until you have thrashed out your own ‘invisible’ contribution to the problem. This will put you back in the control seat and enable you to sit with the adults in the room as another respected adult, possibly also as a friend to some.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> Has any of you had to deal with this kind of mean-spirited competitive research environment?
>
>
>
Yes. It's REALLY not that unusual, and it's very unpleasant. Some academics are very unpleasant human beings. There is sometimes a tendency to put academics on a pedestal, because they are intelligent, but that doesn't stop them from being, sometimes, remarkably flawed individuals from a human/ethical/emotional perspective.
(It's not you, it's them)
>
> How did you handle it?
>
>
>
Don't bite the hand that feeds you (your main allegiance should ALWAYS remain to whoever is funding you)
Keep your friends close, and your enemy closer (you want to know what the lab next door is up to, so they don't publish something you want to publish just before you publish it... Or at least you can change your angle early so that your contribution remains original)
And if you can't beat them, join them... (collaboration is a safer choice in the long run than bitter competition)
Building collaborations is very useful, and making friends is good (and these are two separate things, even if there can be an overlap!), but be wary of *politics*, it NEVER goes away. You may think everyone is good friends, up until discussions on who should be "first author" turn up, and then it's WAR (except in Maths, where thankfully, the order is alphabetical... Can't understand why that's not universal!)
>
> Should I avoid working with people "across the aisle" in order to stay out of conflict with them?
>
>
>
Depends. Maybe for your own mental health, if interactions are really unpleasant.
But I don't think that's necessarily wise in the long run. Even from a selfish "self-preservation" perspective, it's good to know what the competition is doing...
>
> Am I being naive to try to be friends with everyone
>
>
>
Being friends never hurts. Just remember friends can also be competitors. And friends don't tell each others everything.
>
> and not hide what I'm working on like it's a secret recipe?
>
>
>
I don't know if you're being naive. Collaboration and dissemination is very much in the spirit of Science. But from a pragmatic perspective, scientists are competing for scarse resources (grant money...), so be careful who you share information with, and don't disclose more information than you need to (until you've established whether the person can be trusted)
Maybe think of it as a Prisoner's Dilemma. Honest mutual sharing is mutually beneficial, not sharing at all is harmful (and everyone loses in the long run)... But sharing assymetrically (giving without receiving) will mean you get screwed, and other benefit unduly.
The best strategy, IMO, is to start with *cautious* good will (share harmless bits, see if other reciprocates) and build from that. You will soon discover who is worth interacting with, and who isn't.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: The same happened to me. I stayed friendly towards everybody and participated in both groups. I think it worked for me. It leaves all doors open. I think a key point is never agreeing with any bad-mouthing, ever. Sometimes this is socially difficult. I would play dumb and say "Oh" or "I understand", but never "You're right" or "Yes, totally".
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: Sometimes it's reputation, others *legitimate disagreements*; if latter, you may gain a lot by sticking around. For example, I wish there was a professor in my University who disputed existence of "voltage" in a circuit, or complained about explaining convolution only from the output-side. It takes plenty of work to disagree in an educated manner, and you'll be reaping their fruits in much less time.
Naturally if they expect anything of *you* in their disputes (except asking politely whether you agree), I defer to the other answers.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/10/11
| 613
| 2,407
|
<issue_start>username_0: So I am a single individual and do not have access to any university schemes related to my issue.
I would like to be able to use my wacom device (an pen that allows me to write down on the computer) so that I am able to handwrite equations etc to my students.
I also need to be able to conference with more than one student, but typically less than five.
Last but not least while video conferencing I want to be able to handwrite (like in a blackboard) so that all the students will be able to see in real time what I am handwriting on the "blackboard"
If possible (but not necessary in case it excludes solutions you may have in mind) I would like that black board to be interactive so that students can draw on it as well.
Also since I am a single individual the software or service has either to be free or at a "consumer service" price I am not able to spent e.g 300$ a month for such a service.<issue_comment>username_1: For the video conferencing software, I recommend [Discord](https://discord.com/). It was started in the gaming community. When we all went online in March, several of the students in one of my classes suggested it, and I went with it.
It's very good for low-bandwidth voice channels, and also allows screen-sharing. The only downside is that it only allows 25 people to see the screen share at once.
To get around that, a colleague of mine streams his video feed to Twitch (another gaming site).
As far as drawing, I use Microsoft's OneNote software. Its drawing allows my to use my Wacom tablet to write on top of PDFs that I upload into it.
Below is a still from one of my video lectures, showing my (awful) handwriting on top of a PDF in OneNote. This was streamed to YouTube for recording purposes, but most of the students were watching live.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/QXvPl.png)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree with <NAME> and also have used Discord in a teaching situation, but also MS Teams which my institution uses.
I use the video and screen sharing capabilities of these in conjunction with [OpenBoard](https://openboard.ch/download.en.html) which is free and designed for online teaching and should work well with the tablet.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/1Gwzs.jpg)
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/11
| 886
| 3,494
|
<issue_start>username_0: I help organize a workshop in a conference on machine learning where the conference doesn't publish proceedings for the workshops: the workshops have to do it themselves if they want to.
What are the steps to find a publisher and strike a deal to publish the proceedings of a workshop? (where to find the list of publisher in a given field, what are the typical contract clauses and negotiation points, etc.)
I know that we can publish it ourselves (since in the end publish = hosting some PDFs online) but I'm curious to know how the old-fashioned publishers work.
If that matters for the answer, all papers are written in English and one requirement is that papers are open access or allowed to be posted on arXiv.<issue_comment>username_1: There's nothing special about this - go to the publisher's website, find the "contact us" form, and write to them. They'll tell you what they're looking for. Each new project is a approved on a case-by-case basis.
Typical questions to resolve would be whether there's a bulk purchase (without this, chances are very good that the project will not be profitable) and if so at what price, whether you want the book to be open access and if so how much the [article processing charge (APC)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_processing_charge) will be, what format the raw manuscript will be submitted in (can you get all participants to submit camera-ready copies?), and how quickly after the workshop you want the proceedings to be published.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I went through this a few years ago for a conference for which I was the program chair.
Since you want open access, you'll find that the big commercial publishers will want to charge quite a bit (thousands of dollars per paper) to publish your conference proceedings. For open access publishing, there are a few reputable publishers and lots of disreputable publishers that you'll want to avoid.
One reputable publisher for topics likes yours is Dagstuhl's LIPICS series.
If the society that sponsors the conference has its own in-house publishing arm then that can be a good choice too.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: As the [lighthouse keeper](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/48413/lighthouse-keeper "21,762 reputation") mentioned in the [comment section](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/156491/what-are-the-steps-to-find-a-publisher-and-strike-a-deal-to-publish-the-proceedi#comment419227_156491), there is no need to "find a publisher and strike a deal to publish the proceedings of a workshop". Instead, for the sake of making science open access and not wasting research buget paying for open access as authors/editors, you should:
Use [CEUR Workshop Proceedings (CEUR-WS.org)](http://ceur-ws.org/) (gratis for readers/authors/editors/etc., started in 1995, contains over 2500 workshop proceedings).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Workshop proceedings published on CEUR-WS are indexed by DBLP, Google Scholar, and the process to upload workshop proceedings is quite straightforward. Example of workshop proceedings hosted on CEUR-WS: <http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2831/>.
For more details on CEUR-WS, see <https://zenodo.org/record/3556678#.YHzKge5KjnJ> ([mirror](https://archive.ph/yKcAa)) and <http://ceur-ws.org/HOWTOSUBMIT.html#FAQ>.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2020/10/12
| 1,228
| 5,199
|
<issue_start>username_0: In normal years, when I teach in a physical classroom, I teach in sessions of ~90 minutes, with ~30 minutes break.
This year, all teaching is done via Zoom (in real-time), and I wonder whether I should split each lesson into a larger number of shorter sessions, for example, split each 90+30 session into two 45+15 sessions.
On one hand, students are used to the standard 90+30 sessions; changing it might confuse them. Some students may e.g. forget coming back after the break, and this may cause a waste of time after breaks.
On the other hand, in remote learning, it is much harder for students to focus, so maybe they need more breaks.
Is there any research / experience regarding the optimal length of a remote real-time teaching session? Is it indeed shorter than classroom teaching session, and by how much?<issue_comment>username_1: If you search using Google or another search engine for something like "research on maximum effective lecture time" you will get some ideas. In general, long lectures are less effective than short ones because of the student's attention span. Video lectures should be very short, say 10-15 minutes for effectiveness. And with required activities at the end of each short session. So, a long "lecture" can be presented as a sequence of short but complete segments. Real time is a bit different, but keep all of that in mind in course design.
But it really depends on what you and the students are doing in the given time period, rather than the length itself in any absolute sense. A talking head writing on a board or (worse) showing a bunch of slides gets old and boring very fast. If the students have a chance to break it up with questions or some problem solving activities it is better and the class-period can be longer and still effective. Class discussion sessions is another way to break the monotony, but harder online and nearly impossible with video unless there is an effective communication channel shared by every student.
I used to teach a couple of courses that lasted all day and only met once a month. But the face time was usually broken up into small segments and we used very effective, but simple, communication tools so that students could "engage" with the course and the instructors (two of us) at any time through the period between face-time sessions.
The key is to keep the students active and engaged. Once they lapse into passivity you are lost. Some students have the skills and background to keep themselves engaged in sub-optimal environments, but not all do. Perhaps not even the majority.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: No research here, just a small amount of experience to chip in. :) And no answers, just observations...
First, they're coping with many changes that roll in on the news daily or weekly, many of them more of an upheaval than taking the same number of instructional hours and cutting it into smaller blocks. I don't think you should decide based on unfamiliarity in COVID times.
In my experience, your intuition is right: 90 minutes is a long time to be continuously focused on Zoom, but 45 minutes is very doable. Worse, many people (try to) multitask during remote learning, and 90 minutes is a long time to be dividing attention.
On the other hand, I think a longer break is a good idea. Students seem to find it hard to really break on Zoom. They turn off their mic and video or run to the washroom, but it's hard to do the necessary dissociation: standing up, moving their legs, bustling and talking and sharing impressions with peers, getting a breath of fresh air. If they stare at a screen during break, they won't come back with a fully refreshed ability to sustain attention for another block. For this reason I suspect that 30 minutes of break with explicit reminders to get up and away from the computer is more useful than 15 minutes. But 15 is better than 10 and 10 is better than 5.
As for coming back late and wasting time: not your problem. It's no different from deciding to get a snack and wander luxuriously when learning in person. If they're not back on time, the lesson doesn't stop for them.
How about the problem of momentum? Four blocks with three breaks between them is pretty significant as far as stopping and starting. You would need to be very much on point and purposeful to avoid transition/inertia eating into the 45 minutes from both sides.
One idea is to designate each 45-minute block for a different purpose. For example, if all four are direct instruction, the repeated pattern will accentuate the dreaded feeling of sameness. "Is this the third block or the fourth? Did he teach us that earlier today or last week?" Whereas if you teach the first 45-minute block, give them exercises the second one, teach the third, and give them exercises the fourth, that's quite a nice rhythm.
The same strategy also helps mitigate a 90-minute block. Being present and working while the instructor supervises / is present for questions is not taxing; what's taxing is being attentive while the instructor talks and shows slides (on a screen you may not be viewing or have snapped to half of the screen).
Upvotes: 3
|
2020/10/12
| 728
| 3,296
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently working as a research assistant at a University and one of my tasks is to supervise the Master Thesis projects of students in our lab. Most of the projects I manage are related to Embedded Systems and Automation applications.
As part of my supervision, normally I dedicate an hour or two per week for supervision to discuss the development of their project and current issues. Most of the time their issues are related to a lack of technical experience on a subject (which was part of their Master's Course).
As sometimes, the problems are small I will dedicate part of my time to solve it with them. But from my experience, it seems that these issues keep upcoming due to poor research and problem-solving skills. As I am relatively new to supervising Master Students, I would like to know what are some of the key elements to assist them with these type of problems and up to what extent should I help them?<issue_comment>username_1: I suggest asking your supervisor about how you should deal with this problem. Provide examples of the questions you're fielding. Ask for help, don't simply badmouth the students. Your supervisor will know better than anyone on this site can whether the level of support you are being asked for is more than is reasonable.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: There are a range of possibilities, not all good. At one end of the scale you can just provide answers, maybe working out the answer for the student. This is the worst option considered here. Along the scale is your solution which is to solve it with them. Much better, especially if you let them lead. At the other (far) end of the scale is to simply provide them with some resource that is tailored to letting them do it on their own without further help. Even something like a section or even a page in a book. Or a search online that gives them help. This may be too little help for most students.
My own solution would be closer to the latter end, and exactly there with some students. Students need to gain *insight* and to do that they need to work through the crux of the problems they face. But sometimes they don't notice something that is blocking them. If you work with them a bit, asking for what they have done so far and why, perhaps you will get an idea about the nature of the block. If you can redirect them a bit, with a minimal hint, they will come out ahead in the end.
Students and some inexperienced instructors seem to think that the point of exercises is the answers, when in fact it is the learning that leads to being able to provide the answers. Keep that distinction in mind and also make sure your students understand that. Done well, it can also lessen the amount of cheating/copying that goes on.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I found with a masters research project, it works very well to break the problem down into small chunks, and give the student a week to solve each one. It may not be a week of work but there you go, its easy enough to tackle given the time frame.
Then, when they are done, they have gone way further than they could unsupervised. And they gain confidence (not all students at this level have confident problem solving skills, as they are still learning this).
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/12
| 450
| 1,954
|
<issue_start>username_0: When writing research paper, I am often stuck and spend a lot of time working on the introduction. Most of my time spent is staring at a blank page... The introduction takes me significantly longer to write than any other part of a paper.
How can I speed up the writing process for the introduction? I feel that once I can get a reasonable draft that I can iterate quickly, but if I just write nonsense, iterating isn't that useful.
My field is computer science/engineering.<issue_comment>username_1: Write it last.
I'm in CSE too. I always start my papers at Section 3: Methodology. Then I write subsequent sections, only interrupting to fill out bits of Section 2: Related Work whenever it becomes apparent that I need extra contextualization. I carry on until the Experimental Results section is complete.
At that stage, if time permits, I like to let the paper lie for a few days, and get busy with other tasks. On the backburner of my brain, ideas will form on how to frame the paper. That framing is represented in the paper by the trio of Abstract, Introduction, and Conclusions. Of these, I've found that it works best for me to write the Conclusions first (iterating over the main message of the paper, and how that message is evidenced by concrete results from Tables and Figures), and then write the Introduction such that it matches the Conclusion. Finish it off with the Abstract.
This is my process, and you mileage may vary, of course. But I've learned that if you write the Introduction of the paper first, it takes forever and the result will not be very good. You most likely need to change the Introduction anyway once you have written your Conclusions. So keep it for last.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The introduction should state what the state of the art is, what you are going to do, and why. If you have a viable idea for a paper, you have those elements. Just write them down.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/10/12
| 564
| 2,239
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm trying to submit a paper on arXiv, but I can't figure out how to enter my name with accents.
It's supposed to say "Dörr", but arXiv turns it into this:
[Image](https://i.stack.imgur.com/tHuzq.png)
I tried to enter the UTF character directly and also tried to use the latex syntax for accented characters, as described [here](https://arxiv.org/edit-user/tex-accents.php).
Using a different browser didn't help either.
On the same site it says "make sure [...] that any accented characters are properly represented", so it has to be possible to enter them.
Any ideas? It can't be that difficult.<issue_comment>username_1: Your image shows that it is being represented as if it was double-encoded in utf-8. I would first ensure your browser isn't misconfigured to show arXiv page as latin-1 despite being utf-8. Then, given that providing the utf-8 characters fail to render properly, I would configure the page as being in windows-1252 (which would show lots of those artifacts) and try sending the name in that encoding (your browser will use the encoding in which the page was served) which, hopefully, might end up correctly encoded (it would still be a serious bug, though)
Howover, since you claim that you tried to input it as `D\"orr` and it still showed as `Dörr`, that leads me to think that it may be a local representation problem on your end (maybe some other part of the page produces a stray latin-1 character, which makes the browser conclude the page cannot be in utf-8?).
Note you can always [contact arXiv](https://arxiv.org/help/contact) about the error you are receiving.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I got rid of accent marks. You'll always have problems with them.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: I contacted the arXiv support, here's their reply:
"*This is actually something we manually fix later in the process, after you submit. Our legacy perl based system does not handle utf gracefully. If you proceed with the submission as is or with Tom D\"orr we will change it to <NAME> in the metadata so that it will be displayed correctly.*
*We are also in the process of updating our code base to python/flask that will support utf.*"
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2020/10/13
| 794
| 3,265
|
<issue_start>username_0: Recently a manuscript from my Masters by research thesis has been accepted in a Q1 journal with Impact factor nearly 4. At the beginning of the manuscript submission, I requested my advisers to be the coauthors of my article but they denied my request. Is that ethically ok to publish the accepted manuscript?<issue_comment>username_1: If your advisors do not want to be co-authors, I think it is fine. You do not have to feel any sort of ethical conundrum for that matter.
By the way, have you asked them why they do not want to be co-authors?
Maybe they are already well accomplished and well published and want you to be the sole author of the paper; which will be a good thing for you. If that's the case, then your advisers are godly.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: There are a few different situations that could lead to this:
1. **Most plausible case:** Your supervisors determined that in accordance with the standards of your field, they do not count as coauthors.
Different fields have different customs concerning whether supervisors are assumed to be coauthors of papers resulting from the supervised work. If you worked independently and your supervisors agree, then being a single author on the resulting paper will always be reasonable. Since you mention asking them only at submission stage, it does sound as if their involvement is limited.
2. Your supervisors really ought to be coauthors by the standards of your field, but declined to give you an (unfair) advantage or similar.
This is problematic from an ethical perspective. Having another persons consent still doesn't allow an academic to present their ideas as ones own. A carefully worded acknowledgement might work.
3. Your supervisors declined because they are aware of flaws in your paper, and don't want to be associated with it.
While one would hope that peer review would spot problems, there is no guarantee that it does. If your supervisors are aware of any major flaws, it would be your ethical responsibility to find out and either fix the paper, or to withdraw it if it is unfixable.
4. The manusscript is sound, but your supervisors are under political pressure to not associate themselves with the results. (pointed out by nick012000 in the comments)
Probably no ethical concerns about you publishing here, unless the political pressure is there for very good reasons.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: While the other current answers are good, they don't directly answer the main question. *Yes it is ethical* for you to publish on your own. There should be no question about that. Actually, be thankful that they almost certainly think enough of you that they don't see the need or have the desire to share your glory. It is good that the [answer of username_2](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/157540/75368) raised the third point, but I think the tis very unlikely.
Ethics enters in to authorship questions when people are improperly included or excluded from authorship. But there is no question of "exclusion" here, since you are acting on their recommendation when publishing without them.
---
Yes, [username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/157533/75368) implies that there is no ethical constraint.
Upvotes: 4
|
2020/10/13
| 636
| 2,593
|
<issue_start>username_0: Last 11 months have been a roller coaster. Towards the end of my PhD last year, I applied to few places, did not get any offers. My PhD advisor offered me a interim postdoc to support myself while I searched for other positions.
To begin my postdoc, I had to get my work permit. So, I decided not to go to my home country and stay 2 months till I get my work permit and then take a month break before joining my PhD supervisor as a postdoc.
Then covid happened. My work permit processing got delayed. My source of income got indefinitely postponed. I lost all motivation to work and search for jobs.
Finally, I got my permit in June. And since June I am working on the postdoc position diligently. Since January,I had wasted 5 months doing nothing. But since June, I have worked on different projects. Submitted two papers. Have plans for more.
Now, I won't be able to move out of my current country of residence due to covid restrictions. And my PhD advisor offered me an extension on the initial contract till the end of next year.
I am worrying about how it would look to future employers. I already have a 10 months gap between my master's and starting my PhD.
I am very worried. Though I know I can publish 6-7 journal papers till the mid of next year, I am worried about my CV.
My mind says to concentrate on the current job. Keep applying but to accept the possibility that I won't get anything. One year is enough to make a huge change in CV. I should work hard on this postdoc position and consider myself lucky to have this job in the current situation.
What do you think? Thank you for reading the entire thing.<issue_comment>username_1: Don't worry about gaps that are easy to explain, especially by something that will have affected everyone to some extend, such as Covid in 2020/2021 (and hopefully not any longer...).
Keep working on your postdoc, and keep applying to positions that are in your interest.
Besides that, it is totally normal to have a few months between two positions every now and then. I'd love to have such a gap by the way, to take a long holiday without having to explain anything.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Interim postdocs are perfectly normal (in my field). Especially considering the a Covid situation this is not going to be a red flag.
Publishing lots of papers will turn you into a strong candidate.
On a side note: focus on actionable things and clear questions. Your post doesn't really include anything but asking the internet how you should feel. That does not strike me as productive.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/13
| 698
| 2,937
|
<issue_start>username_0: After 2nd round of review (R1) for almost 2 months, I received a sharp rejection letter for my manuscript (in biology) submitted in a certain journal for language-use concerns and formatting issues. Nearly 80% of the comments raised by reviewer #1 and the editor (I think they are one person in this case) are mainly the use of British-English and formatting, but the journal has no clear policy of the English-use as long as style and punctuation is consistent throughout. English is my second-language but we use it in universities and communications, however, I believe the language concern is not an issue as my co-author (my supervisor) is a native English speaker and we proofread the paper many times before resubmission. Our personal assessment based on experience with other journals, this concern should at least be major or minor revisions.<issue_comment>username_1: It is hard to see how ethics enters in to it. Had you paid them something and they rejected it, keeping your money, then it is a different matter. But a submission is just an offer and it can be rejected for any reason. It may not represent the best policy in general, but it isn't unethical.
And, perhaps there are other issues as well and they all piled up to indicate a reject. That is impossible to judge without more information that only you and the editor might possess. It might be as simple as not wanting to do a third round.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: This would be pretty inappropriate. If they are objecting on language-based issues, unless you inserted all the issues during revision (unlikely), they could have rejected immediately, before even inviting a reviewer. If they didn't they could certainly have asked you for corrections during the first revision. As it is, they've simply wasted time and reviewer resources.
A few caveats:
* As <NAME> pointed out in a comment, based on your description, you don't actually know if your manuscript was rejected because of language issues. Taking up 80% of the review doesn't mean it was 80% of the reason your manuscript was rejected.
* In the same vein, even if the remaining 20% of the review was not bad, you can't tell if there are confidential comments the editor isn't sharing.
* If the reviewer pointed out language problems in the first review which you didn't amend, they could be annoyed enough to recommend rejection (see [gnometorule's comment](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/156453/paper-author-has-not-included-all-suggestions-in-peer-review#comment419135_156453)).
Having said the above, you write in a comment that the editor did say they are rejecting because of language issues. In this case, I think there's a fairly good chance that an appeal will be successful. You could try filing one, pointing out that the objection is not for scientific reasons and the paper's language is already fairly good.
Upvotes: 3
|
2020/10/13
| 1,252
| 5,462
|
<issue_start>username_0: Work-life balance is more challenging for faculty than ever under COVID-19. What are equitable, privacy sensitive ways to telegraph needs at the individual level? What are acceptable accommodations to suggest?
To be clear, I am looking for strategies for individuals. If you are underwater from the fallout of this pandemic, it is hard to even join the cause, much less organize. In comments directly below can be found exemplars of the viewpoints these individuals are up against: they are dead weight, complaining, or not team players.
This is a unique year in which to attempt to find solutions: administrative members are distributed, and unofficial channels of communication are often not operational. The unofficial conversations that used to help resolve these kinds of situations are more difficult. Further, faculty and administration vary widely in their interpretation of the current crisis.
This was highlighted for me when a tenured faculty member in a recent meeting was pushed by a dissenting faculty member to point out that she was the vulnerable member in her family, due to obesity, and so could not be physically on campus. No one wanted that moment to happen, and yet it did.
There is, simultaneously, a call to step up and come back to campus, often explicitly.
<https://president.ufl.edu/updates/2020/07/in-person-classes.html>
Regardless of academic rank many are responding to personal challenges ranging from lack of child or elder care, to personal COVID-19 high-risk status, to more exotic things which are more difficult to categorize. My international students are trapped in their home countries, visa-less. Impact is everywhere, and even a faculty member with no 'traditional categories' of difficulty might well be under water. At the same time, universities are making hard choices and cutting positions or asking more, sometimes both.
The impact is clear. My own unit has lost a number of our best people, who have left for the relative certainty and balance of industry, or simply left to focus on the complexity of their own lives. Anecdotally, more women than men have left. I am in the US, where things are admittedly presently a bit more extreme, but I think that this question can generalize across university systems in many countries.
It is my belief that one major lack is a good way for individuals in need to communicate their need. For many reason, they may hesitate. This problem extends up the chain: my dean and provost are both high risk, and both working in the office.
So, what are equitable, privacy sensitive ways to telegraph needs at the individual level? What are acceptable accommodations to suggest? How do we address the untenable state of work-life balance in academia under covid-19?
Aside, that is, from leaving.
UPDATE: I have moved to an industry position, sacrificing my academic 'family' for the health and well-being of myself and my family. I have valued the contributions of this community in my academic life, a chapter I now close.<issue_comment>username_1: Let me suggest two things. First, the administration is probably acutely aware of the challenges you face and have many of the same issues themselves. Losing some of the "best people" is, itself, a wake-up for administrators.
One of the problems is that large universities (especially) move very slowly and have a lot of inertia. But this sounds like a problem that should be addressed in a bottom up fashion, rather than asking for a top down solution.
Meet with other faculty in your own and other departments. Perhaps there is a faculty association of some kind or even a union. List the problems you face and come up with sensible solutions for them. Try to think of more than one solution, some of which have minimal effect on overall finances, though they might require reapportioning funds.
If appropriate, get department heads involved in this and even deans. Discuss among yourselves how you think it ought to be and then work on those issues, probably one at a time. The long term viability of the institution may be at stake as times change and there is no clear end point to the current difficulties. For state-funded institutions you may even need to enter the political arena to obtain changes, especially additional funding.
If you first get public/open recognition of the problems from administrators you have a better chance of pushing proposals for solutions.
Don't neglect working with other departments. There is a lot of expertise in solving problems among the faculty generally. Some of those people are experts in proposing solutions to social problems and dealing with inertia and opposition.
Small-scale short-term solutions may not be sufficient. There are no guarantees that the university will return to what it was a year or so ago. Think and plan for the future. The universities that do this best will have the best chance to succeed.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Individuals shouldn't need to communicate their needs to administrators; administrators are well aware (or, at least, should be) of the problems plaguing administrations. Administrations should step-up, do their job, lead those they wield power over through this pandemic—enabling them to do their job along the way. Of course, this is a massive undertaking, but is surely the sole purpose of administrations: To enable individuals to (collectively) excel.
Upvotes: 1 [selected_answer]
|
2020/10/13
| 917
| 4,076
|
<issue_start>username_0: Long story short, a long time ago (2 years) I had a research project, that for various reasons was not completed. Some months ago I came back to it and started trying new methods, state-of-the-art algorithms, some battle tested for decades, and some novel ones that came in the past few years (after the project got put in hiatus).
I don't disagree my method is naive, but it works fast and is more accurate than all the other ones. I need to mention, my method works only in a very, very niche subset of cases, all these other methods are designed to be general and work on arbitrary shapes, so my method outperforming other methods is not a great discovery it simply can leverage more assumptions than the other methods can.
I measured and tried a bunch of stuff and well, yes the method I came up with is really, really silly it's a naive approximation (it's definitely not an exact solution), but of all the other things I tried, this seems to solve this particular problem in this particular subdomain better than all the other algorithms I have used to solve the problem, based purely on the numbers.
If a paper comes out of this, the paper would essentially be "here's how you can leverage this silly math fact to come up with a rough approximation of the true solution in microseconds, vs hours or days for an exact one".
With that being shared, I don't know if or how I can pitch or sell this to my advisor, considering that after so much time I have come with a lot more work done, just to say that the method he didn't like the first time works better than the state-of-the-art algorithms (for this specific case).<issue_comment>username_1: Let me suggest two things. First, the administration is probably acutely aware of the challenges you face and have many of the same issues themselves. Losing some of the "best people" is, itself, a wake-up for administrators.
One of the problems is that large universities (especially) move very slowly and have a lot of inertia. But this sounds like a problem that should be addressed in a bottom up fashion, rather than asking for a top down solution.
Meet with other faculty in your own and other departments. Perhaps there is a faculty association of some kind or even a union. List the problems you face and come up with sensible solutions for them. Try to think of more than one solution, some of which have minimal effect on overall finances, though they might require reapportioning funds.
If appropriate, get department heads involved in this and even deans. Discuss among yourselves how you think it ought to be and then work on those issues, probably one at a time. The long term viability of the institution may be at stake as times change and there is no clear end point to the current difficulties. For state-funded institutions you may even need to enter the political arena to obtain changes, especially additional funding.
If you first get public/open recognition of the problems from administrators you have a better chance of pushing proposals for solutions.
Don't neglect working with other departments. There is a lot of expertise in solving problems among the faculty generally. Some of those people are experts in proposing solutions to social problems and dealing with inertia and opposition.
Small-scale short-term solutions may not be sufficient. There are no guarantees that the university will return to what it was a year or so ago. Think and plan for the future. The universities that do this best will have the best chance to succeed.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Individuals shouldn't need to communicate their needs to administrators; administrators are well aware (or, at least, should be) of the problems plaguing administrations. Administrations should step-up, do their job, lead those they wield power over through this pandemic—enabling them to do their job along the way. Of course, this is a massive undertaking, but is surely the sole purpose of administrations: To enable individuals to (collectively) excel.
Upvotes: 1 [selected_answer]
|
2020/10/14
| 1,540
| 6,407
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am in a graduate math program in the US, and the professor is teaching via online lectures. The proof she provideed for one of the theorems is a little bit tricky to understand. I think I found a proof that, though is about the same length, I think is much simpler. Could it be considered inappropriate to email the professor out of the blue and give her the proof?<issue_comment>username_1: Email the professor, explain that you came up with an alternate proof, and ask if it is correct.
If you approach it this way, it should be perfectly acceptable to anyone. You get to find out if your more-clear approach is correct, and assuming it is, the professor maybe uses it in the future. If it's not correct, you get to learn where you went wrong. A good exercise for all involved.
Upvotes: 9 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It’s okay to ask if your proof is right and, if it is, ask if there is an advantage in presenting an apparently more complicated version of the proof.
Keep in mind that, when teaching, the technique used in solving a problem can be more important than the solution itself. It might be that this technique comes again later in the course, so having seen it once will help the second time around.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes, it’s fine. Professors are not snowflakes. You can communicate with them just as you would communicate with any other person. And presumably this professor is interested in the topic she is teaching and would be happy to learn about the simpler proof you found.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Just to mention this possibility: it is very well possible that the professor finds her proof simpler than yours. Different people have different opinions on what is simpler / clearer, when it comes to proofs.
Do send her an e-mail, but maybe it is better not to be too absolute with "this is simpler than the other proof" when you write it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I can only second username_1's suggestion. Email the prof, say that you found an alternative proof and ask if it is correct. It is then up to the prof to decide whether or not it is "simpler".
I give my students props from contacting me with suggestions and if you play it that way I cannot see how this would be wrong or inappropriate. The worst case scenario is that either your proof is wrong or that your prof does not agree with it being simpler. Either case would not be an issue though.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Speaking as an erstwhile adjunct professor, my answer is:
I not only don't see anything wrong with that, I would encourage it. Obviously, you want to be polite about it, but otherwise, I think it's a valuable learning experience.
Of course, it could be that the prof knew of your easier proof but did not use it, for didactic reasons. Or it could be that the prof didn't know of it, or it could be that your proof has a mistake, or that it isn't as general as the proof offered.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: I (in the U.S., in math...) would say "of course it's ok to send your own proofs to your professors for comment".
Asserting that your proof is "better", or similar stuff, is probably not productive. For that matter, as in other answers and comments, one of the most profitable outcomes is that you receive a professional critique of your argument, from your professor.
It's not that older people have special powers... apart from having lots of experience, which is almost like a special power, if they've been paying attention. :)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: Of course! You are in science, not politics. I hope! :-)
It's perfectly ok to tell the professor you found a proof you think it's simpler and much easier to understand. You can do that and still being polite. You can fully express what you have in mind, you don't have to pretend you are asking if it's correct or so, because then you only pass half the message you wanted to pass, the professor might not even be sure why you're sending it and you won't be satisfied with it.
Good professor will respond well. It's of course good to do it in such a way that the communication is just between you two. But possibly better than email is personal consultation, if it's available.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: Jokingly. When I was in my first year there was an exam in calculus. Part of it consists of student preforming a proof of their "favourite" law (one on the list).
Two students were able to reduce three-pages long proof just in three claims proof and one of them, after fair coin toss, walked in and performed this proof.
There were two professors assessing students, because there were too many students in the course so both were taking the lectures, plus one guest.
One of them and the guest were insulted by such mocking of the nice three pages of math (it was way too much shortening for them) and were attacking the student's claims and challenging the reasoning.
The other one enjoyed the proof and the discussion it led to.
In the end the student got mark A and just after their exam the professor who enjoyed the time crossed out the proof from the list for ever and since then they use the proof in their lectures and always naming it as Merryman-Trueman proof, after the two students.
---
**TL;DR**
A good professor will examine your reasoning and discuss it with you. Good professor will think high of your interest in th topic and your abbility to think outside of the box instead of memorizing-the-poem.
Bad professor will feel attacked by such arrogance of yours to undermine their genius...
It also depends how you word your email but in any case You will find what type of the professor you have encountered. Just stay polite.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: I would think that its perfectly okay to tell the professor that you think you have found an easier way. As long as your polite, and not telling the professor that they are doing a bad job (Or anything like that) then you should be fine. Just make sure you bring it up politely and ask if your easier solution would also work. Professors just want to educate students, so if you find an easier way, let the professor know as soon as possible so that she can teach other students your way, (if it works). That way you will be helping students in the future grasp a topic easier.
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/14
| 847
| 3,577
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a second year PhD student working in math.
I find that in most discussions with postdocs or even my own supervisor, the pace of the discussion is too fast. The other party invariably seems to think faster and go through to the next step before I have fully processed the current step. I usually have to take photos of the whiteboard, go back, work it through and then realize either that the argument is correct or that there was an error. At conferences or talks, the same is true - the pace of the discussion is too fast for me to meaningfully contribute. I mostly end up listening and this makes it difficult for me to find collaborations because the conversation is too one-sided. If there is no whiteboard and the discussion is over a meal, or when there are multiple people involved, it is that much harder!
While some of it is down to experience, I imagine that even experienced researchers working in fields that are new to them face this issue. How does one "informally" brainstorm with others in an effective manner in technical fields?<issue_comment>username_1: Don't worry about it. You're a second-year PhD student, so you're one of the least experienced people in the room. Everyone should find this reasonable. What matters is that you show a willingness to learn, to grow, to understand, to improve.
Don't be afraid of asking questions. Don't even be afraid of asking stupid questions. Most scientists will gladly elaborate if you show a genuine interest in understanding the topic better.
Study the topics in your field. Deepen your understanding in your own PhD topic, and adjacent topics on which other people at your conferences are working. If you keep working on improving your understanding, you will notice that over time, you will be able to keep up with the pace. The key is to not panic that you're not there yet, but instead display that you are willing to learn.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: **Your experience is normal**: A second year PhD student should not keep pace with postdocs nor advisors. They should learn. It seems like you're doing that.
In a meeting setting, try to understand when it is appropriate to slow the pace to improve your understanding. Don't interrupt when you can learn later; interrupt when you can't, either to learn during the meeting or to arrange a tutorial afterwards (likely with the most junior person, beside yourself). (Meetings are presumably to get work done, so too many interrupts will preclude that.)
In a seminar setting, ask the speaker after their talk, over lunch, or arrange a one-to-one later in the day. (External speakers are usually visiting someone and will have some free time during the day.)
At conferences, you have plenty of opportunities to ask speakers for more details.
>
> I mostly end up listening and this makes it difficult for me to find collaborations because the conversation is too one-sided.
>
>
>
Having conversations will allow you to build bridges. (As a PhD student, I'd suggest focusing on relationships within your department, rather than the broader field. Bridges are useful for research visits, internships, subsequent positions, etc.)
>
> If there is no whiteboard and the discussion is over a meal, or when
> there are multiple people involved, it is that much harder!
>
>
>
Such discussions will become easier once your knowledge broadens. Sit-back and enjoy your meal. Ask questions one-to-one, e.g., after dinner, whilst walking a guest back to their hotel, or the following day.
Upvotes: 4
|
2020/10/14
| 1,487
| 6,499
|
<issue_start>username_0: In my institute, there was no online (or otherwise) platform exclusively available for the current and graduated PhD students. So I created a Facebook group with a vision that the group will allow sharing and dissemination of:
* Useful information such as conference calls, seminars, webinars, colloquia, etc.
* Inter/intra department equipment related information (such as availability of an instrument, technical advice, etc).
* Queries or information related to drafting manuscripts, graphing tools, and software.
* Information on post-doc and other career related opportunities.
* Provide a platform for networking with students of other departments with a scope for inter-disciplinary collaborations, etc.
* Any other information useful to the institute research community.
This is my first experience as a group admin and I'm quite anxious. Is there something I could add to the scope of the group? In general, I am seeking some advice on how can I make this group more valuable to the members.
Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: Do not use Facebook. Academics view it as unprofessional.
Events should be managed using a calendar application.
Most other functions you want to achieve are traditionally achieved with email lists.
When setting up a platform, you do not want it to do as many things as possible. You want your platform to do one thing and do it well. That is the Unix Philosophy, and it works.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I deleted Facebook several years ago, but that's not where I'm going with this answer, although you will get people who don't have or want a Facebook.
Facebook is a poor way to share persistent information. The newsfeed rapidly scrolls past, and comment threading is rather poor, and not built for information-dense sharing like you might get when working through a tricky problem. When you post "Abstract deadline next Friday!" it will disappear within days, potentially not being shown to people who log on a few days later.
Furthermore, if this page is for the entire institute (I assume you mean university), you are going to get many posts from every discipline. I don't need my page full of physics seminars and pharmacology retreats.
For this, I would suggest Slack (or, hesitantly, Discord). For one, Slack already has an air of professionalism, and many groups I know use it internally.
But with Slack/Discord, you can create channels for: e.g. announcements, deadlines, events, software help, writing help, and memes/off-topic. That way each topic is canalized, and if I don't want to help people write, I can just skip that channel, and I can totally ignore the ones not relevant to my field.
I hesitate to recommend Discord because it is very confusing for non-technical people; even more so than Slack, IMO. And, as of right now, it will be mostly gamers who have it installed. Many other types of people will have Slack, and it has decent integrations with cloud services like Google and Microsoft. I suspect you would have more difficulty setting up Slack in some fields compared to others. In that sense, Facebook is a good choice for ease of accessibility.
That said, Discord does have some powerful tools to, for example, tag someone as a physicist, which allows them to see the physics channels and nothing else. Discord is also seen as much more casual; but others on this site have posted they've had a lot of success with it (but when their field is on their profile, they're all in computer science!).
I said in a comment, calendar integration is also critical. I and many others live off their Google Calendar or similar. So if you have a nice calendar system, where I can sign up for an event (then you can see how many people are gonna come), and sync it to my calendar (but not the other, irrelevant events), I would use your system much more. Discord has some decent tools for this, not sure about Slack.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Leaving aside the fact that FB is evil, from the outside looking in, it appears nondeterministic. Not everyone sees the same messages, and you can't guarantee that any member will see any given message. Finding old messages is hard.
The software that powers Stack Exchange, or at least a version of it, is available to universities very inexpensively as Discourse: <https://www.discourse.org/> Someone else has already mentioned Telegram. If I had a limited budget and a graduate student who spoke Unix, I'd look into CoSy: <http://cosy.sourceforge.net/>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I think the first thing would be to involve some staff in the group, if only one or two members. If one asks to be another admin [they may not do], it's worth considering, but it will be useful to have someone else on hand who can feed back with greater immediacy to the faculty.
You already have a handle on most things which will be useful to students in your department. It also might be a good idea to drop in information on journals and podcasts which may relate to your field, as well as information on publishing for other members of the department. You may well find as time goes on that the group will find its own natural identity and momentum, and you already have plenty of good ideas on how to make it useful to the other students. It sounds like you are involved in music, so some relevant events could be posted when appropriate [you mention "instruments", but this could relate to scientific purposes as well, I am aware].
It can be tempting to make a group like this private, but I think it would benefit the department to make it publicly viewable and postable. This way, if any future students or people outside the department wish to contribute useful information, they can do so. If this becomes open to abuse, you can just close the group and make posting for verified students.
Above all, as the admin, it's good to reach out and ask open questions of the student base as to what they need and what you can do to improve things in the department for them, if only relaying information to the staff base. It may also be a good idea to use the group as an occasional base to organise intra-department online socials.
Things like this can either take minimal time and effort or sometimes they can get very popular and overwhelming. In such cases another admin would certainly be a great asset and also, in such a case, I'm sure there would be one or two keen students who would be more than willing to assist.
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/14
| 528
| 2,298
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am relatively new to the writing process. I wrote my first manuscript in APA style and found it time consuming while changing it to the Chicago manual style. I am aware that most journals have their own specific journal styles that we have to follow despite the reference style being the same. However, as per your experiences, in which style of referencing/writing, did you find writing your draft manuscript easier to modify later on? (Modify as in changing styles). Simply put, should I write my draft manuscript in APA or Chicago? P.S. Political Science Pre-PhD student.<issue_comment>username_1: My main tip would be to use a reference manager that automates the task of formatting references. There are [many to choose from](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_reference_management_software). But any good tool should make it fairly trivial to move between author-date format to numbered format. Good tools should also come with a wide range of tools for customising the look and feel of your references. Personally, I use Endnote and it works well for my workflow with MS Word. If you use LaTeX, then you'd want something that works better with BibTeX. That said, I think the big thing is that you get to know the features of your reference manager so you can use it effectively.
In terms of what reference format to adopt, I'd go with the format required by where you plan to submit the work. If it's a thesis, then follow any rules provided by your department. But commonly with PhDs, the format is up to you. In that case, you'd usually adopt the convention (or one of the conventions) of your discipline.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree with Jeromy. The best way to address this issue is to use a reference manager. If you use a word processor [Zotero](https://www.zotero.org/) may be a good alternative. It is free and open-source and has an extensive reference library making it easy to download different styles and format your manuscript.
LaTeX with BibLatex/Biber (Bibtex-successor) is even more precise and reliable with regards to formatting references. However, in the social sciences there is very few journals that accept LaTeX submissions with means that you have to convert it to a word file which can be a pain.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/14
| 637
| 2,863
|
<issue_start>username_0: So as the title says I got the opportunity to publish my article right around the time my article has already been accepted by other **student** journal.
My question now is - is it acceptable to publish an article in both journals, with informing the editorial board first, if in the case of student journal I'm not getting any academic points for it?
I know that self-plagiarism is seen as publishing your paper multiple times in categorized journals to cheat the system for academic progression, but what is the general stand on an issue like in this case?<issue_comment>username_1: **Most journals will not publish an article that's already published.**
Whether the student journal counts as published depends, e.g., informally compiled content may not fall foul of this. (Beyond whether publication is possible, consider whether you've submitted in parallel, which is forbidden by many journals.)
**Ultimately, it depends on the journals.**
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: This question has a number of different components.
1. Does the 'student journal' permit you to republish the article elsewhere? Did you sign any license/copyright agreement with them?
2. Will a new journal be willing to consider your article, given that it has already been published? This will presumably depend on several factors, including (i) the details of what 'publication in the student journal' actually means, (ii) editorial policy, and (iii) the individual editor's interpretation of that policy. All you can do here is submit, explaining the situation fully and honestly, and see what they say.
3. What will the average reader think? Are people likely to come across both versions and regard this as 'naughty'? It is probably undesirable for people to form this opinion, even if you are convinced you are in the right. Again, this will depend on the details. For example, nobody questions the fact that the same text is often 'published' as both a masters thesis and as a journal paper, and in many fields preprint servers such as arXiv are becoming increasingly widespread. On the other hand, publishing identical texts in both Science and Nature would likely be seen as misconduct.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: It will most likely depend on the status of the "student journal". We had a "student journal" which was, officially, an archive of master theses in our program. As such, it is comparable to an archive of proceedings of a conference and does not prohibit submission to internationally recognized journals (or elsewhere) [in our field, "conference papers" do not exist - there are posters, but work presented on posters is usually later published in a journal paper without any issues].
Many of the papers published in this student journal ended up in high-ranked international journals without problems.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/10/14
| 686
| 2,300
|
<issue_start>username_0: I wonder if I can cite an unpublished thesis (Ph.D or Master) in a research paper. If so, how do I do it? Should I also include a link to the thesis?<issue_comment>username_1: Assuming it isn't formally published, then the citation would probably include the university instead of the publisher. Otherwise the same.
Links are always a problem since they are subject to disappearance. It is good to also include the date that you last referenced it there with any link(s).
And yes, you need to cite it to avoid various plagiarism issues.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: How to cite
===========
browsing the [list](https://www.bibtex.com/e/entry-types/) of bibtex entry types, we find:
>
> masterthesis
> ------------
>
>
> A thesis written for the Master’s level degree.
>
>
>
> ```
> @mastersthesis{CitekeyMastersthesis,
> author = "<NAME>",
> title = "Spin structure of the nucleon in the asymptotic limit",
> school = "Massachusetts Institute of Technology",
> year = 1996,
> address = "Cambridge, MA",
> month = sep
> }
>
> ```
>
>
Whether to cite
===============
When deciding if to cite something, the most essential question is: **Are you borrowing an idea from that work?** If yes, then you should usually cite it as to avoid [plagiarism](https://plagiarism.iu.edu/IUcriteria.html). You do not need citations for things that are [common knowledge](https://library.purdueglobal.edu/writingcenter/basiccitationguidelines) (though what counts as common knowledge may depend on your [field](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/2653/129015) and the [audience](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/5372/129015) you are publishing for).
Specificly concerning an unpublished thesis, I quote from [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/13690/129015) answer:
>
> Just because it's not published doesn't preclude being able to cite
> it. You can't not cite the thesis if you're taking information from
> it!
>
>
> The degree-granting institution should perpetually retain copies in
> its library, and most universities these days store PDF copies as
> well. A copy may be harder to track down, but a determined reader
> should have no enormous difficulty in getting a copy of the thesis.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/14
| 547
| 2,086
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is referencing a question on research level from StackExchange in the footnote of a thesis appropriate?<issue_comment>username_1: It's not in Academia.SE answers, but check this out:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/zY0g9.png)
So yes, you can cite an answer.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Maybe
=====
I couldn't find anything specifically on footnotes, but there are some threads on acknowledgement and citation concerning SE contributions.
Acknowledgement
===============
There are some questions concerning the acknowledgement of stackexchange discussions, with the accepted answers saying that is appropriate to acknowledge both the [general](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/23232/129015) SE community, as well as [specific](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/16052/129015) questions/answers.
Citation
========
Since citations are different from acknowledgements, the same does not automatically hold true for them. However, quoting from [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/1581/129015) answer:
>
> Does something learnt from StackExchange need to be cited?
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> A lot of learning goes into a journal article. This learning comes from many sources. That which gets cited is only a small fraction of that. A scientist might (a) read a statistics book; (b) ask a friend; or (c) ask a question on Stats.StackExchange.com to learn more about how to analyse his or her data. In both cases, the person has devised an analysis plan based on having learnt something. However, generally these sources are not cited. In each case the scientist has learnt how to do something, but ultimately the knowledge is already established in the literature.
>
>
> I also think that the vast majority of posts on StackExchange do not constitute a citable unit of original research. That said, where this does occur and it it influences your work, it makes sense to cite the source.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2020/10/15
| 903
| 3,714
|
<issue_start>username_0: I had recently e-mailed a professor asking for opportunities in his lab. He responded as follows -[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/xMuXi.png)
Email content:
>
> Dear [redacted]
>
>
> Thanks for your interest in my lab. My lab is planning to hire multiple Ph.D. students who will start in the fall of 2021, and the application window is going to be this Winter.
>
>
> It's good that you have some relevant research experiences, and I encourage you to apply to my lab at [redacted]. When you submit your application to the department, please mention my name in your personal statement. Also, please let me know when you submit the application.
>
>
> Best,
> [redacted]
>
>
>
Can I take this as a positive response? Does that mean he will take me in if I apply? How do I respond back to him?<issue_comment>username_1: The professor's asking to be kept informed, which is certainly a positive sign because he's interested enough to want to know what you're doing. At the very least he's not outright rejecting you.
On the other hand, there is no guarantee he will take you on until you actually receive the offer letter.
I don't think there's much more to say other than thank him, reaffirm that you will submit an application (if you are planning to do so) and say you will keep him informed when you do.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: That's a mildly positive response. You have a chance if you apply, but it's impossible to make any more qualified predictions about your success chances, because they entirely depend on who else applies.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: This is mildly positive as was said. Now you have to seal the deal. I would say that you now should visit the lab. However with covid-19 and all. Find some way to show interest. Good luck.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: Every program handles admissions slightly differently, sometimes even within the same university.
Some allow faculty to select their own students, with very light oversight from the rest of the university.
However, other programs make admissions decisions via a committee, which chooses a cohort of students based on the applicants' qualifications and the program's needs and capabilities. For example, the committee might want to ensure that wet and dry-lab approaches are both represented in the cohort, perhaps with a skew that matches future TA needs. This is particularly common in programs where one does "rotations" and formally chooses an advisor in the 2nd or 3rd year.
In these departments, no individual professor can unilaterally offer a place to someone, no matter how good they may be. However, professors *can* advocate for their preferred candidates in these departments. For example, if you were ranked in the middle of the pack overall, the prof might argue that you should nevertheless be admitted because you're a perfect fit for his particular lab.
It sounds like the professor is offering to do this for you. This does not necessarily guarantee you a spot--other professors might make even more compelling cases for their own preferred applicants--but it is certainly a positive sign. It is therefore important that you mention this professor *by name* somewhere in your personal statement. Personal statements often conclude with a section describing how your interests and skills mesh with the program's focus, and this would be a natural place to do so. Likewise, follow up by email once you've submitted your application so he can bring your application to the committee's attention.
You should, of course, continue to submit applications elsewhere too. Good luck!
Upvotes: 3
|
2020/10/15
| 541
| 2,376
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a high school student (legally old enough to work) looking for opportunities to work with professors in political theory. The way research is done is quite different from many folks in STEM, so how could I be of use to a professor while deepening my own passion for the field?
COVID has definitely restricted travel, but I won’t have limitations when it comes to being geographically closer to professors I’m working with (living near a major international airport, free schedule during breaks).<issue_comment>username_1: ### Maybe, if the university offers a summer internship program.
I would recommend focusing on your high school studies, but I applaud your desire for learning. Some universities might offer summer internships to allow undergraduate or high school students to work with their postgrad students; if the university you're interested in offers a program like that, feel free to apply for it if you qualify for its requirements.
Otherwise, I would simply state that professors are very busy people whose time is quite valuable, and if helping you isn't a part of their job, then they may not be interested in adding you to their responsibilities without a suitable monetary incentive (e.g. businesses paying a sizable amount of money to get research done on their products).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Let me suggest that you contact, first by email, some professors at the universities, both the local one and another where you will be co-located. Explain something about your interest, but also why you think you have enough background to make a relationship interesting to them.
A local professor might be more help and you might be able to work through a secondary school instructor to make the contact.
But, I think you will have a hard job to convince anyone without some support from somewhere. Interest isn't enough. If you are widely read in political theory it will help.
I worry, of course, that if you are merely driven by the current political situation and have "opinions" about it, then you won't be successful. So, examine your motivation. Political theory is about theory and only incidentally about "politics" as popularly understood.
Have you read Plato's Republic, for example? Anything by <NAME>? If you have some of that background then you might have a chance of success.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/10/15
| 3,677
| 14,835
|
<issue_start>username_0: In a project-based class the submission is in teams of 2 (self-assigned teams).
In most teams, the grade is the same for both members.
However, in some teams, I suspect that most of the work was done by one member, while the other was a "free rider". The suspicions are based on GitHub commits and on interaction during the semester. However, I do not have clear-cut proofs since I do not know how they split the work among them at home. I can test them personally, but this is not sufficient since it is possible that the free-rider knows what the other person did.
I am not allowed to change the grade structure in retrospect, so I thought of an idea that is based on mutual agreement: if the grade that the team deserves is X, I will tell them that their total grade is 2 X, and ask them to agree on a fair division of the grade among them. If they do not agree, then the grade is just split equally between them as usual. Effectively, this gives the free riders a chance to behave fairly and give some points to their friends who did most of the work.
The advantage is that the team members know much more than me what work each of them did. The disadvantage is that this may cause quarrels among team members. Is this a good idea?
EDIT: Thanks for all the answers. I am now convinced that this scheme might create psychological and social problems that are better avoided.<issue_comment>username_1: This isn't the sort of thing you should introduce after the fact. If you make it part of the course design, known to students at the start, then it might work, though it might just cause more complaining from the students. Teams can "share" the work while doing very different things. Each can consider their own contribution to be essential, while their teammate(s) consider their own to be more important.
But changing the grading structure of the course midstream to the potential disadvantage of some students is questionable.
But, my [answer to your earlier question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/143139/75368) also covers this sort of situation: Peer Evaluation. It lets you learn about some things, but retain control over outcomes.
But repeated questions on the same issue implies that you need to rethink your course design.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Given that the teams are self-assigned, most teams will consist of people that are friends/know they work well together. These teams will most likely divide the grade equally, even if the actual work done wasn't necessarily a 50/50 split. These teams probably don't contain the free-riders that you are worried about.
Now for the other teams, these will contain the free-riders. However, free-riders are not really known for, after riding freely, agreeing to a low grade. The goal of free-riding, after all, is to get a high-ish grade. What will you do then?
Like username_1 mentioned, peer-evaluation is an option. A professor during my Bachelor's actually had short 1-on-1 meetings with all students at the end of the course. It was mentioned that even if a student did not participate in a specific part of the assignment because the team mate did, they should *understand* what the others did. They first asked them which part they focussed on how they contributed. After that, students needed to explain the part that the others did. I discussed this with the professor later, during my Master's, and they said that they (practically) always, based on the peer evaluations and these five-minute meetings, could tell who actually contributed and understood what was going on. This will be a (very) time-consuming approach, depending on the size of your classes.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: A problem I see here is that this scheme may motivate people to divide the points "tactically". Say our group project is worth 10 points and I only need 5 for my goal (which may be the least passing grade or the best grade or whatever). Then of course I would take only 5 points and give 15 to my collegue (which is more than the project is worth).
Also, it might motivate people to look for their partners tactically: If I am somebody who does not trust other people and wants to do everything themselves (something which should ideally be discouraged in group projects), I choose the person who cares least about their grades as a partner and get much more points than my project is worth.
Moreover, with this setting, you treat the grades as some currency. students will find it okay to do less/more work because they can themselves discuss and haggle about the grade they got. IMO this is also not something which should be encouraged.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: I like this as an experiment in ethics, but not as an actual grading scheme.
If you allow team work, you will have a small number of people getting better grades than they might deserve. And...so what? It’s not intrinsically different from making homework part of the grade, where friends will help each other. Your job is to teach and assign grades you deem reasonably, not perfectly just.
That is to say, I’m no fan of *any* such scheme involving students “dividing the pie,” your self-declared research interest. I for one would have neither felt comfortable nor able to write meaningful evaluations for all my class members, as was suggested here too. Some people might stand out, and you might enjoy sharing that with your teacher; but I wouldn’t have enjoyed pointing fingers at those struggling. And for many I’d have no true opinion. That is not even to talk about personal feelings about peers almost inevitably shading a student-given grade.
I don’t think the benefit of being marginally more just makes up for the hassle and risk for trouble such ideas involve.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: As someone who would 'carry' in group projects, here's what I figured would improve my experience: *explicit minimal division of workload*.
John does data tables, Steve writes analysis, etc. This way, everyone's incentivized to contribute *something* of substance, and John doesn't have to answer for Steve's horrible analytics. What's "minimal" is something the professor decides.
If an individual lacks a mandated part, and isn't graded for respective part, then the 'carrier' is burdened further to clean up others' mess. In one of my labs, a professor actually did *and* did not take this exact approach for two separate projects but same teams - and in one which he *did*, at least in my team, everyone's contribution greatly increased (and mine became reasonable).
Not suitable for all forms of work, has caveats, but is an option.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: My experience of this is that it is helpful to survey the group members asking each of them who contributed what to the project and whether they felt that the other members had done their share of the work. When I do these surveys I nearly always find that all groups report that there was a fair division of work. I also make a point of asking questions of the various team members when they present their work. After those two steps, I can feel fairly confident in giving everyone on the team the same grade.
Sometimes I do find a problem, either in the responses to the survey or in responses to questions during the presentation. In those situations, I meet with all of the students in the group and try to clarify who did what. If there's a free rider, I will lower that student's grade. I don't raise the grade of other students in the group.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: **Short answer:** In Germany this would be illegal. Here the grade of a student needs to be determined independently from the groups achievements and be purely based on a specific students own work. Objective criteria for grading of this work need to be given.
Of course it is questionable if this is always adhered to. But when reminded of it, the professors have to comply.
**Long answer**:
The legal representation of the student union of Frankfurt summarizes the relevant paragraphs concerning group grading on their [facebook page](https://www.facebook.com/AStAFrankfurtUniversity/posts/774593572642372/):
>
> „#Gruppennoten“ sind nicht erlaubt!
> Für schriftliche #Gruppenarbeiten gilt, es „müssen die individuellen Leistungen der oder des einzelnen Studierenden deutlich unterscheidbar und bewertbar sein.“ (vgl. §12, Abs. 4 ABPO)
> Für #Gruppenprojekte gilt, es „muss der Beitrag der oder des einzelnen Studierenden deutlich erkennbar und bewertbar sein (…)“ (vgl. §13, Abs. 4 ABPO).
> Das gilt für ALLE #Studiengänge mit den Abschlüssen Bachelor und Master!
>
>
>
Unofficial tranlsation:
>
> #Group grading is not allowed! For written group work "the individual work of each student must be clearly distinguishable and evaluable." (cf. §12, Abs. 4 ABPO) For group projects "the work of the indicvidual student must be clearly visible and evaluable (...)" (cf. §13, Abs. 4 ABPO). This is binding for all bachelors and masters #courses.
>
>
>
Referring to the [Allgemeine Bestimmungen für Prüfungsordnungen (ABPO)](https://www.frankfurt-university.de/fileadmin/standard/Aktuelles/Amtliche_Mitteilungen/Akademische_Satzungen/Studien-_und_Pruefungsordnungen/PR-schB_RSO_05_15_Genehmigung_AEnderung_ABPO_22-01-2015_Anlage_Lesefassung.pdf) of the district of Hessen. the other 15 German districts have similar legislation.
You as a professor need to be able to give evidence, that you can (a) distinguish which work was done by which student and (b) be able to show that you used objective criteria to grade this work.
Splitting the grade equally is not legal, as it does not purely consider the students own work, violating (a). Letting the students decide is not objective, violating (b).
**Legal subtleties and partial group grading:**
It seems like some argument can be made, that a certain fraction of the grade is for "team work". Meaning that the ability of a student to work in a team is also his own work and gradable. But this is only allowed in very narrow boundaries, just giving one grade for both certainly is not ok. I can not comment on the legal details of this.
The university of Stuttgart in some instances evaluates 2/3 the students own work and gives 1/3 for the integration with the work of other students in a group project, this is outlined in [Beurteilung von Hausarbeiten als Gruppenarbeiten und Gruppenpräsentationen, Universität Stuttgart](https://www.bwi.uni-stuttgart.de/abt3/files/studierende/Gruppenarbeitsscoring.pdf)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: I think you need to ask yourself what your learning goal of the group assignment is. For example is it to (a) learn or reinforce some specific content, (b) learn to work as part of a team, (c) learn project management, (d) to produce something that will then be used for further learning, or (e) something else.
Once you clarify that, it will be more clear how you should approach grading. Very rarely is it that you want to actually grade the individual student work by directly grading the project. (Do you really expect this game this group is currently creating to be marketable? No. Do you expect this video to go viral? No. ) What you need to grade on in the above scenarios is (a) whether the student knows the content, (b) whether the student learned about how to work as part of a team, (c) whether the student knows principles of project management, (d) was a usable product produced (but the main assessment in this case will be on what they learn in subsequent use) or (e) whatever else it is that you want the individual students to have gotten out of this work.
So what does this mean about grading. First, most of the time in regular classes (I'm not talking about senior projects or something like that) the direct grade on the project itself should not count for very much. Instead each individual should be assessed on the learning outcomes (and they should be defined in a way that you can actually do this). For example, you could (a) assess the students on the content knowledge using a test, (b) have each student write up a short essay on what they learned about working in a team, (c) write up a document where they relate their experiences in the group to what they have been learning about project management in the lectures and readings for the course, (d) assess if they master the subsequent material, (e) something else.
In other words, you have to design your curriculum in a way that achieves your outcomes and lets you assess this at the individual level since your learning outcomes are at the individual level.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: People in my department have used some variations on this, but not quite as blunt as the scheme suggested. Firstly we are generally working with teams of more than 2. Secondly the majority of the grade is given to the team overall. We then give the team the option to share a small number of extra marks amongst themselves as they see fit. They might share them equally, or they might give a particular share to the team member that they feel has worked the hardest.
A second possibility that say been used is to award 80% of the grade to the team, but then ask each team member to write a (very) short reflective piece on their experience of the exercise, that is the final 20% of the grade.
Of course, this must all be prearranged and not announced post-facto. In my university it would all have to be in the module description form, submitted for approval by the faculty board a minimum of six months in advance.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: >
> However, in some teams, I suspect that most of the work was done by one member, while the other was a "free rider".
>
>
>
This is very common - in academia and in real life. You can't make this go away, and in fact, it's useless to try penalizing this through your suggested grading policy change. It is unrealistic to the extent that you'll not only get backlash, you'll be overruled by your department etc. Just learn to live with the fact that a group project means a group grade.
If you want to reduce the extent of "free-riding" - I doubt you really have any other recourse than individual projects.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_11: Given the OP talked o GIT Hub I presume this is a coding assignment. When I see dependencies in work load, I bring both of the pair into my office separately and ask them to give me a code review. It very often comes apparent who has slacked off, but if not, issuing a group grade is justified because the learning outcomes have largely been met by both, that is they understand the problem and its solution. However, maybe only one student got the benefit of figuring it out and their career will speak for that.
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/15
| 3,635
| 14,577
|
<issue_start>username_0: In answering [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/157605/is-it-possible-acceptable-to-publish-the-same-article-in-2-journals-if-one-is-u/), I wondered:
Many fields are now beginning to embrace preprint servers such as arXiv. Typically, authors upload a manuscript to the preprint server at the same time as they submit it to a journal. On the whole, this is seen as acceptable, and not as 'dual publication'.
On the other hand, submission of the same manuscript to two 'proper' journals simultaneously is (in all fields I know) regarded as serious misconduct.
**Where, precisely, is the boundary between 'acceptable' and 'unacceptable' conduct here?** What distinguishes a 'preprint server' from a 'journal'? At first glance, one might say 'peer review'. However, journals come in many forms, including 'open review' (where the submitted manuscript is available for anyone to read and comment on immediately), and 'predatory' (where any submission can be accepted without review if you pay the fee). Similarly, many recognised preprint servers exercise some basic quality control on submissions.<issue_comment>username_1: This isn't the sort of thing you should introduce after the fact. If you make it part of the course design, known to students at the start, then it might work, though it might just cause more complaining from the students. Teams can "share" the work while doing very different things. Each can consider their own contribution to be essential, while their teammate(s) consider their own to be more important.
But changing the grading structure of the course midstream to the potential disadvantage of some students is questionable.
But, my [answer to your earlier question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/143139/75368) also covers this sort of situation: Peer Evaluation. It lets you learn about some things, but retain control over outcomes.
But repeated questions on the same issue implies that you need to rethink your course design.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Given that the teams are self-assigned, most teams will consist of people that are friends/know they work well together. These teams will most likely divide the grade equally, even if the actual work done wasn't necessarily a 50/50 split. These teams probably don't contain the free-riders that you are worried about.
Now for the other teams, these will contain the free-riders. However, free-riders are not really known for, after riding freely, agreeing to a low grade. The goal of free-riding, after all, is to get a high-ish grade. What will you do then?
Like username_1 mentioned, peer-evaluation is an option. A professor during my Bachelor's actually had short 1-on-1 meetings with all students at the end of the course. It was mentioned that even if a student did not participate in a specific part of the assignment because the team mate did, they should *understand* what the others did. They first asked them which part they focussed on how they contributed. After that, students needed to explain the part that the others did. I discussed this with the professor later, during my Master's, and they said that they (practically) always, based on the peer evaluations and these five-minute meetings, could tell who actually contributed and understood what was going on. This will be a (very) time-consuming approach, depending on the size of your classes.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: A problem I see here is that this scheme may motivate people to divide the points "tactically". Say our group project is worth 10 points and I only need 5 for my goal (which may be the least passing grade or the best grade or whatever). Then of course I would take only 5 points and give 15 to my collegue (which is more than the project is worth).
Also, it might motivate people to look for their partners tactically: If I am somebody who does not trust other people and wants to do everything themselves (something which should ideally be discouraged in group projects), I choose the person who cares least about their grades as a partner and get much more points than my project is worth.
Moreover, with this setting, you treat the grades as some currency. students will find it okay to do less/more work because they can themselves discuss and haggle about the grade they got. IMO this is also not something which should be encouraged.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: I like this as an experiment in ethics, but not as an actual grading scheme.
If you allow team work, you will have a small number of people getting better grades than they might deserve. And...so what? It’s not intrinsically different from making homework part of the grade, where friends will help each other. Your job is to teach and assign grades you deem reasonably, not perfectly just.
That is to say, I’m no fan of *any* such scheme involving students “dividing the pie,” your self-declared research interest. I for one would have neither felt comfortable nor able to write meaningful evaluations for all my class members, as was suggested here too. Some people might stand out, and you might enjoy sharing that with your teacher; but I wouldn’t have enjoyed pointing fingers at those struggling. And for many I’d have no true opinion. That is not even to talk about personal feelings about peers almost inevitably shading a student-given grade.
I don’t think the benefit of being marginally more just makes up for the hassle and risk for trouble such ideas involve.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: As someone who would 'carry' in group projects, here's what I figured would improve my experience: *explicit minimal division of workload*.
John does data tables, Steve writes analysis, etc. This way, everyone's incentivized to contribute *something* of substance, and John doesn't have to answer for Steve's horrible analytics. What's "minimal" is something the professor decides.
If an individual lacks a mandated part, and isn't graded for respective part, then the 'carrier' is burdened further to clean up others' mess. In one of my labs, a professor actually did *and* did not take this exact approach for two separate projects but same teams - and in one which he *did*, at least in my team, everyone's contribution greatly increased (and mine became reasonable).
Not suitable for all forms of work, has caveats, but is an option.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: My experience of this is that it is helpful to survey the group members asking each of them who contributed what to the project and whether they felt that the other members had done their share of the work. When I do these surveys I nearly always find that all groups report that there was a fair division of work. I also make a point of asking questions of the various team members when they present their work. After those two steps, I can feel fairly confident in giving everyone on the team the same grade.
Sometimes I do find a problem, either in the responses to the survey or in responses to questions during the presentation. In those situations, I meet with all of the students in the group and try to clarify who did what. If there's a free rider, I will lower that student's grade. I don't raise the grade of other students in the group.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: **Short answer:** In Germany this would be illegal. Here the grade of a student needs to be determined independently from the groups achievements and be purely based on a specific students own work. Objective criteria for grading of this work need to be given.
Of course it is questionable if this is always adhered to. But when reminded of it, the professors have to comply.
**Long answer**:
The legal representation of the student union of Frankfurt summarizes the relevant paragraphs concerning group grading on their [facebook page](https://www.facebook.com/AStAFrankfurtUniversity/posts/774593572642372/):
>
> „#Gruppennoten“ sind nicht erlaubt!
> Für schriftliche #Gruppenarbeiten gilt, es „müssen die individuellen Leistungen der oder des einzelnen Studierenden deutlich unterscheidbar und bewertbar sein.“ (vgl. §12, Abs. 4 ABPO)
> Für #Gruppenprojekte gilt, es „muss der Beitrag der oder des einzelnen Studierenden deutlich erkennbar und bewertbar sein (…)“ (vgl. §13, Abs. 4 ABPO).
> Das gilt für ALLE #Studiengänge mit den Abschlüssen Bachelor und Master!
>
>
>
Unofficial tranlsation:
>
> #Group grading is not allowed! For written group work "the individual work of each student must be clearly distinguishable and evaluable." (cf. §12, Abs. 4 ABPO) For group projects "the work of the indicvidual student must be clearly visible and evaluable (...)" (cf. §13, Abs. 4 ABPO). This is binding for all bachelors and masters #courses.
>
>
>
Referring to the [Allgemeine Bestimmungen für Prüfungsordnungen (ABPO)](https://www.frankfurt-university.de/fileadmin/standard/Aktuelles/Amtliche_Mitteilungen/Akademische_Satzungen/Studien-_und_Pruefungsordnungen/PR-schB_RSO_05_15_Genehmigung_AEnderung_ABPO_22-01-2015_Anlage_Lesefassung.pdf) of the district of Hessen. the other 15 German districts have similar legislation.
You as a professor need to be able to give evidence, that you can (a) distinguish which work was done by which student and (b) be able to show that you used objective criteria to grade this work.
Splitting the grade equally is not legal, as it does not purely consider the students own work, violating (a). Letting the students decide is not objective, violating (b).
**Legal subtleties and partial group grading:**
It seems like some argument can be made, that a certain fraction of the grade is for "team work". Meaning that the ability of a student to work in a team is also his own work and gradable. But this is only allowed in very narrow boundaries, just giving one grade for both certainly is not ok. I can not comment on the legal details of this.
The university of Stuttgart in some instances evaluates 2/3 the students own work and gives 1/3 for the integration with the work of other students in a group project, this is outlined in [Beurteilung von Hausarbeiten als Gruppenarbeiten und Gruppenpräsentationen, Universität Stuttgart](https://www.bwi.uni-stuttgart.de/abt3/files/studierende/Gruppenarbeitsscoring.pdf)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: I think you need to ask yourself what your learning goal of the group assignment is. For example is it to (a) learn or reinforce some specific content, (b) learn to work as part of a team, (c) learn project management, (d) to produce something that will then be used for further learning, or (e) something else.
Once you clarify that, it will be more clear how you should approach grading. Very rarely is it that you want to actually grade the individual student work by directly grading the project. (Do you really expect this game this group is currently creating to be marketable? No. Do you expect this video to go viral? No. ) What you need to grade on in the above scenarios is (a) whether the student knows the content, (b) whether the student learned about how to work as part of a team, (c) whether the student knows principles of project management, (d) was a usable product produced (but the main assessment in this case will be on what they learn in subsequent use) or (e) whatever else it is that you want the individual students to have gotten out of this work.
So what does this mean about grading. First, most of the time in regular classes (I'm not talking about senior projects or something like that) the direct grade on the project itself should not count for very much. Instead each individual should be assessed on the learning outcomes (and they should be defined in a way that you can actually do this). For example, you could (a) assess the students on the content knowledge using a test, (b) have each student write up a short essay on what they learned about working in a team, (c) write up a document where they relate their experiences in the group to what they have been learning about project management in the lectures and readings for the course, (d) assess if they master the subsequent material, (e) something else.
In other words, you have to design your curriculum in a way that achieves your outcomes and lets you assess this at the individual level since your learning outcomes are at the individual level.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: People in my department have used some variations on this, but not quite as blunt as the scheme suggested. Firstly we are generally working with teams of more than 2. Secondly the majority of the grade is given to the team overall. We then give the team the option to share a small number of extra marks amongst themselves as they see fit. They might share them equally, or they might give a particular share to the team member that they feel has worked the hardest.
A second possibility that say been used is to award 80% of the grade to the team, but then ask each team member to write a (very) short reflective piece on their experience of the exercise, that is the final 20% of the grade.
Of course, this must all be prearranged and not announced post-facto. In my university it would all have to be in the module description form, submitted for approval by the faculty board a minimum of six months in advance.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: >
> However, in some teams, I suspect that most of the work was done by one member, while the other was a "free rider".
>
>
>
This is very common - in academia and in real life. You can't make this go away, and in fact, it's useless to try penalizing this through your suggested grading policy change. It is unrealistic to the extent that you'll not only get backlash, you'll be overruled by your department etc. Just learn to live with the fact that a group project means a group grade.
If you want to reduce the extent of "free-riding" - I doubt you really have any other recourse than individual projects.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_11: Given the OP talked o GIT Hub I presume this is a coding assignment. When I see dependencies in work load, I bring both of the pair into my office separately and ask them to give me a code review. It very often comes apparent who has slacked off, but if not, issuing a group grade is justified because the learning outcomes have largely been met by both, that is they understand the problem and its solution. However, maybe only one student got the benefit of figuring it out and their career will speak for that.
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/15
| 700
| 3,135
|
<issue_start>username_0: Some postdoc applications specifically mention who the principal investigator. However, other positions don't have a PI; the postdoc is being hired to join the research group in general and, while there's an expectation the candidate will collaborate with group members, there's nobody who is going to be the "boss." Typically these positions just say "the candidate will join the research group X of Professors A, B and C, working on topics such as..."
When applying to this second type of position, should I mention in my cover letter which professor(s) I'd like to work the most with? Something like "I am particularly keen to collaborate with Prof. B, as we share interests in..."
On one hand, doing this shows I'm personalizing the application to the position and that I put some effort thinking whether I'm suitable for it. On the other, it could be seen as being inflexible ("I want to work with Prof. B and nobody else!") and naming names might be perceived as tacky.<issue_comment>username_1: I'd suggest that you don't name anyone unless you somehow name them all. Not only do you avoid seeming inflexible, you actually maintain some flexibility until you can judge better who would be best if you need to single out anyone.
Indicate that you are familiar with their work somehow, I think, by naming papers you are familiar with. (Familiar with, not just saw somewhere).
Truly collaborative groups probably think of themselves as a unit in some ways.
On the other hand, mentioning specific topics that most interest you would seem like a better option. That might imply one or the other of the members, of course, without stating it.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Before applying for the position, speak to at least some of the professors, especially the ones you are most interested in working with. During conversations, suss out what the professors are actually looking for. Perhaps they'll envisage you working for the group, perhaps one of them. Ideally, you should secure a professor to champion your application.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: If you're in mathematics and the job posting has a slot for "faculty contacts" you should also list the names of the people you want to work with there. The reason is that you can search those data fields on mathjobs to get a list of everyone who wants to work with you, whereas you can't search the text of cover letters.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: Don't mention people by name, mention projects. Go to the group's web pages and read about their ongoing work.
Then, when you write your cover letter, highlight how your skills, experience and interest could *contribute to the ongoing projects*. This not only shows that you are interested enough to look up details about the research group, but also that you spend some time thinking how your research could fit in (and it helps them to see it too).
Making use of the contact e-mail provided with most such openings and getting in touch before applying to the position could also help you best present how you fit to the research group.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/10/15
| 804
| 3,029
|
<issue_start>username_0: For example, let's say I am an early stage researcher named <NAME> (1. A fake double barrel name. 2. No hyphen between the surnames). I'm finding that people are citing my work as '<NAME>hen' or 'S Cohen et al'.
An issue is that I don't identify as a 'Cohen', I identify as a 'Baron Cohen'.
Is there a correct way to handle this to ensure that I can cut this practice off before I become recognized as just Cohen? How do I ensure that I won't be cited as just 'Cohen'?<issue_comment>username_1: Unfortunately, a lot of journals are not very friendly to formats that don't match the standard of: *First, (Middle,) Last.* It's gotten a lot better, but many systems expect one capital letter per name (so *O'Brien* is out).
Of course, always make sure you (or the corresponding author) enter your name correctly, so that the citation and metadata generated by the journal are correct. However, not all journals do that, or make it easily available. You can make a point of mentioning it in talks, etc., but that is slow to disseminate.
Besides that, you have two main options, in my opinion.
* Hyphenate them. You can use a different name in publications than you do in real life.
* Use a middle initial, e.g. "**Sasha *L.* <NAME>**." This implies that everything after the middle initial is one unit, whereas "<NAME>" would imply "Baron" is your usual first name, and "Cohen" your last.
If you see people (like in a tweet) or journalists - or ArXiV submissions - writing about your articles, feel free to correct them (publicly or privately), but correcting citations in published articles isn't usually possible, unfortunately, which is a big headache for the trans community in particular.
Do not feel bad about standing up for your name. In fact, the more people stand up for their own names, the more people who feel like they cannot (because they are foreign, or trans, etc.) will be able to.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: <NAME>'s answer is correct. The only way people... collaborators, publishers, etc. can know is if you *tell them*. My own example of the difficulty publishers and others face is in the names <NAME> and <NAME>.
I would normally have made this a comment, but I want to mention a possible way to help mitigate the problem, the International Standard Name Identifier, or ISNI. You can read about it here: <https://isni.org/> You can also find the registrar for your country there. In the United States, it's Numerical Gurus: <https://numericalgurus.com/isni-individual-registration/> and registration in the U.S. costs $25.
I have the opposite problem from Baron Cohen, a very common name. I've begun to attach this URL to things that might be published: <https://isni.org/isni/0000000491573348>
There is also ORCID, <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORCID>, with which I am less familiar. I understand they coordinate with the ISNI registrars and use a reserved block of ISNI numbers.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/15
| 5,629
| 23,392
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an American high schooler considering what to do in university. I am immensely interested in theoretical physics, and I would quite like to become a professor in the subject (I've self-studied quite a bit of it; while I'm no master, I can still do enough to have a decent bit of reputation on the Physics S.E.). However, I've been hearing some rather concerning things from others already in academia about becoming a professor in physics in particular. First of all, I've heard here that every new crisis is permanently harming the job market in academia overall. Secondly, I've heard in several places (including here, if I recall correctly) that the job market for new mathematics professorships is starting to dry up, which most likely means the writing is on the wall for physics professorships. I've heard plenty of personal anecdotes from friends who have parents in academia about how brilliant folks who went to top class schools are now either not able to find work at all or only able to find work in small, relatively unknown universities. Finally, I've heard from a couple physics professors and chairs that it's somewhat difficult to find a first position in physics in general (though it is apparently relatively straightforward to achieve tenure once you get your foot in the door, so to speak).
I've really enjoyed my self study, and research seems quite lovely with the little experience I have with it. Thus, I'd really, really love to grab a PhD in physics and teach and research for the rest of my time here on this planet, but I'm concerned I'd be left out without a job if I tried to do so! Is my outlook on the situation too bleak, or would I be right to travel a different path and perhaps research on the side?<issue_comment>username_1: It is absolutely possible. You can consult the American Institute of Physics for job statistics, which they publish from time to time.
It is very far from being the easiest way to get a job. If you have the ability to become a physics professor, you can earn a great deal more money as an engineer, banker, or programmer.
It is getting harder to get a job in physics. The money available is not increasing, but the number of people seeking those jobs is increasing.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> I've heard from a couple physics professors and chairs that it's somewhat difficult to find a first position in physics in general
>
>
>
This is a dramatic understatement. I always recommend reading the first chapter of <NAME>'s [book](https://theprofessorisin.com/buy-the-book/). She demonstrates that our universities are not in crisis -- that was 20 years ago. Rather, they are in *decay*. Most departments are not growing; they are shrinking and cutting back. Yet, graduate programs keep pumping out PhDs.
For physics in particular: APS reports that in 2012, [1800](https://www.aps.org/careers/statistics/upload/trends-phd0214.pdf) physics PhDs were awarded. In contrast, there are [9400](https://www.aps.org/careers/statistics/upload/number-faculty0412.pdf) physics faculty positions *total* -- about half of which are at institutions with no physics graduate program (i.e., schools that -- with a few exceptions -- focus on teaching rather than research). From this, you can estimate what fraction of physics PhDs end up with faculty research + teaching positions (see also [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/17431/what-ratio-of-phd-graduates-in-stem-fields-ultimately-end-up-as-tenured-profes#)).
In short: saying you want a faculty position is like you saying you want to join the NBA -- of course you do! But even for the best students, it is a long shot.
>
> I'm concerned I'd be left out without a job if I tried to do so
>
>
>
Now for some good news. 1-year post-PhD, only [4%](https://www.aps.org/careers/statistics/upload/phdinitemp-0316.pdf) of physicists are unemployed. The overall unemployment rate for those with a physics PhD may be around [1-2%](https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/us-pushes-for-more-scientists-but-the-jobs-arent-there/2012/07/07/gJQAZJpQUW_story.html). There are research positions outside of universities, and there are also non-research positions that are both intellectually engaging and financially remunerative. Further, you should not have to incur debt to attend graduate school. Thus, attending graduate school in physics might be a good choice (financially and otherwise) even without the allure of a faculty position. But it is certainly good to be realistic about the situation; indeed, you might consider subfields, projects, and skills that could lead to interesting work both inside and outside of the university.
*Note: this answer, and the statistics therein, refer entirely to the situation in the US.*
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Well it kinda depends what you mean by “physics”. If you mean in the restricted sense of “string theory” the odd are very slim. If you mean more broadly condensed matter/soft matter, quantum optics, experimental physics or any number of physics area “not-string-theory” then it is completely possible and indeed it is an *exciting* time to study physics.
The people studying climate change are physicists. Lots of people working in quantum information are physicists. People trying to understand high-Tc superconductivity are physicists.
There are huge possibilities in industry and good possibilities of doing research in material science (“[invisibility](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780444626448000029)”, photonics crystals, organic semi-conductors, graphene materials). A good deal of technology is now moving to integrated optics (including self-configuring devices). Indeed with quantum computers now slowly coming online, there are bound to be exciting developments in unexpected problems.
Yes there issues in academia - but that’s unrelated to physics. Academia is difficult now for a number of reasons. However my experience is that good physicists find jobs in physics or related areas as often as biologists or economists or chemists do. Physics is less visible than professional degrees like engineering or nursing, but that doesn’t mean there are no jobs in the field.
So yes, jobs as a theoretical physicist specializing in supersymmetry are rare, but once you recognize that this subsubfield is not representative of physics or of the jobs prospects in physics, it’s on par with other sciences.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Finding a permanent research position in *theoretical* physics is very difficult. Theoretical physics implies, by definition, blue sky rather than applied science (but of course theoretical *physicists* can do applied science). Blue sky science is limited to academia, and permanent research positions in academia are very rare and very competitive. You have to be both very good *and* work very hard *and* be lucky to get one.
However:
* Finding a *temporary* job in theoretical physics is doable. You need to be good, but not outstanding. Many PhD students become post-docs. They might get funded for 2, 3, maybe 4 years at a time. Some people chain many such temporary positions, possibly for decades. The upside is that you get to do what you love. The downside is that you're never sure about whether you'll still be employed several years later¹ and that you may have to change city, country, or continent every 2-4 years. Most find this a big price to pay and eventually leave, but you might do a PhD and a couple of postdocs and then change career 10 years later. No harm done.
* Finding a permanent job *as a theoretical physicist* is doable — you just won't be doing theoretical physics. You might be doing *applied* physics, in particular outside academia, or you might be primarily teaching. Plenty of commercial companies and government institutes are interested in applied physics, whether to develop the next next gadget of which they hope to sell a billion copies, or to research environmental issues including climate change, or many other applications. Or you might be doing something else altogether — when I studied applied physics, the tax office actively tried to recruit physics students as soon as they finished their degree. I was quite surprised at the time, but maybe they figured that people who studied physics ~~are smarter~~ have skills complementary to economists or others they might usually expect to hire. Theoretical physicists have good maths skills. Good maths skills are wanted.
Personally, I chose to study applied physics from the start, because although I found theoretical physics and astronomy interesting, I considered that applied physics would equip me with a broader range of career opportunities. I work in satellite meteorology, which I consider part of applied physics. In this field, I have encountered many people who used to work with either particle physics, astronomy, or space science, which are rather blue sky science. Evidently, it's possible to move into applied physics when coming from a background of blue sky science including theoretical physics (astronomy may not be about telescopes, understanding instrumentation certainly helps to tell the difference between measurement and artifact, and understanding instrumentation is quite an employable skill, even when for the physicist it's just a necessary side issue).
Therefore, if you are really excited about theoretical physics, I would decide to go for it. Probably you'll love your undergraduate, bachelor, you might afterward do a PhD and a couple of postdocs. But have realistic expectations: you are unlikely to find a permanent research position doing primarily theoretical physics. Be prepared to either accept to move around a lot hopping between temporary positions, or to transition from theoretical physics into applied physics, or even use your skills outside of physics altogether. Theoretical physicists are unlikely to be unemployed, but they are also unlikely to spent their life doing just theoretical physics.
Good luck!
---
¹One could argue this applies to most jobs; but even though working for the same employer for 40 years is less common than it used to be and job security in private companies may be less than in government jobs, it still makes a different whether the default is "you'll stay employed if you do a good job and the employer is doing well", or "your contract ends unless you or your boss finds money to renew you, even if you do a brilliant job"; and in many "normal" jobs, it may be possible to change jobs without changing city, let alone country or continent.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Just to add to what others have said: Getting a faculty position is a long shot. But that doesn't make doing a Physics PhD a bad option.
*Do a PhD because you enjoy the subject. Not because you can't think of anything you'd rather spend the rest of your life doing, but because you can't think of a more satisfying way to spend the next ~5 years. See the PhD as the goal it self, i.e. spending 5 years of your life being paid to do something you love, rather than as a means of achieving some other goal.*
This might be bad advice it it left you in a bad place afterwards - sacrificing 5 years of enjoyment for starting the rest of your life at a disadvantage. But doing a physics PhD will leave you at an advantage for whatever else you might do with your life other than Physics research.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I think what Zero the Hero said is important to bear in mind too. Like you, I was really interested in theoretical physics at high school. I participated in the physics olympiad, went on theoretical physics summer schools, wrote an expository book on realtivity etc. I was really into it.
After 3 years of undergraduate physics, I switched to pure mathematics and am now beginning a PhD at the intersection of pure maths and theoretical computer science.
Why the change? I realised that the physics I was interested in was at a bit of a dead end. I had aspirations to be a string theorist/particle physicist, but presently the reach of our experiments is so far removed from the theoretical predictions we are making that the latter is starting to border on philosophy. I don't see that changing within the next 20-30 years or so, and even if governments did invest a lot of resources into building higher energy colliders soon, I wouldn't want to support this as there are much more pressing global issues in desperate need of funding.
However there are a number of areas of physics which are becoming increasingly active and have many important applications, including hard condensed matter, soft condensed matter, quantum information theory, nuclear physics. You could be building the next generation of quantum computers or superconductors, coming up with ways to make fusion reactions a more viable source of energy etc. Note that condensed matter is certainly not easy on the maths. It can be as math-heavy as string theory, and some of the mathemtical techniques developed in high energy physics found use in condensed matter (see Ads-CFT correspondence).
Also, I do not think that studying theoretical physics, even to PhD level, will ever be a bad preparation for the job market. You gain lots of analytical and computational skills that are in high demand for jobs in finance, computing, operations research and more. It might not be as clear cut what career you would end up in, say compared with doing a computer science degree or engineering, but there will be plenty of open doors.
EDIT: Also, I should note that if you plan on staying in the states for college, you don't have a pressure of committing yourself to anything at the moment. You probably have at least 2/3 years before choosing a major, during which the current situation will probably iron out and its long-term consequences on academic positions become more apparent. It may also help to audit different classes and speak to advisors once you are in college. They will be able to give you much better advice about your chances in academia, given your abilities, enthusiasm etc.
For the momement, what matters for college applications is to show you are enthusiastic about *some* subject and really go beyond your school curriculum in it. That's not to say you shouldn't be keeping an eye on other options you might be interested in now, but for students interested in STEM it is much better to have a few stellar points on your application than spread yourself thin looking at different options.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: I chose to study physics because I liked doing it, without any expectation that a particular job would be guaranteed for me. And, several degrees later, I'm still in essentially the same position- employed as a researcher, not necessarily knowing what my 'final' career will be (if that's even a relevant concept in this day and age), but liking where I am now. If you go in with this attitude, I think you'll be alright.
Even if the progression to your current dream job *were* completely guaranteed, I would still suggest that you keep an open mind about your career and periodically re-evaluate whether you're doing what you want. You are too young to be locked into one path, and the world is full of changing opportunities that you might not have considered yet. Fortunately, the first step of studying physics- getting a bachelor's degree- will let you explore this while still leaving many options open to you. And this is even more true for the first step of this first step- taking a few college physics courses. Go forth and try everything that you can.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: I'd like to offer a different perspective on this.
I was in your position in 1979, and convinced I was going to solve the unified field theory problem¹ I went to Cambridge to do first a degree then a PhD. But talking to postdocs in the department convinced me that I really didn't want to get on the postdoc treadmill, and even in 1985 there were already mutterings about the terrible job situation in academia. So after my PhD I got a job with a corporate multinational (Unilever) and:
1. it paid much better than all but the most senior academic posts
2. I really enjoyed it
So if you love physics you should not let a fear of job prospects in academia put you off. There are companies out there desperate for clever people and there always will be. I ended up moving into an area (colloid science) that was unrelated to my PhD, but the time spent doing my PhD was certainly not wasted. The skills I picked up doing the PhD were valuable in my job, and more importantly the three years I spent doing the PhD were the best time of my life.
As it happens a student who started in my group at the same time I did stayed in academia and is now [a Fellow of the Royal Society](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynn_Gladden).
A footnote: I too am active on the Physics SE. The [physics chat room](https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/71/the-h-bar) is quite active and there are a number of us there who were or are in academia. You might be interested to ask there about people's experiences.
---
¹ it turned out to be harder than I expected
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_9: Some of the other answers give you the stats and a global view on the problem, so I'd like to add an anecdotal answer.
Not that long ago, I was pretty much where you are right now: I'd fallen in love with physics at the end of high school and I'd started learning on my own. During my physics undergrad I was a good student (I understood a lot of the material better than most tenured professors) and during grad school my supervisors and other collaborators kept telling me I was doing very well. However, after getting my phd I wasn't able to find a good position in physics (or even in other academic disciplines that interested me). Though (as others have mentioned) I'm still happy I took the time to learn physics, the job situation is pretty frustrating.
Now, while my own shortcomings (I'm a lazy bum and I never bought into the publish or perish culture) might explain away the problems I've encountered, all my friends who studied physics were also unable to find jobs in physics (and they are all smart and hard-working). Some of them ended up working as data scientists with good salaries, but it's really not the same. I do know someone who studied physics engineering and was able to find work in a governmental research institute, but that's the exception rather than the rule.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: **I think the prospects for physics PhDs are pretty good (even if most ended up outside of academia) considering the fates of the people I went to grad school with and American Physical Society statistics.**
I started grad school about 15 years ago, so things have probably changed a bit. But here's my experience. From my class of about 55 physics PhD students, I think maybe ~5 of us (including me) got permanent positions in academia. Those of us in academia are **not necessarily in physics departments**, since our research interests changed over the years and you tend to get funneled towards fields where the funding is (biomedical research or to a lesser extent, materials science). I think most of us in academia are doing stuff that we like, even if our research is a mix of physics, chemistry, biology, and materials science. Some people I know ended up at undergraduate institutions and are mostly teaching physics to engineers and doing very little research. I think they like that too.
**Get some experience programming!** Most of my friends and acquaintances from grad school, especially the ones that did theory research, are now **software engineers** (at places including MathWorks and Google). I also have a couple friends with theory backgrounds who do mathematical modeling for insurance companies (also involves a lot of coding). Finally, some of the people who did experimental research ended up at places like IBM, Norfolk Grumman, and Intel. From an informal survey, the people outside academia are making 1.5 to 2 times what I make in academia. Statistics from the American Physical Society show that most physics PhDs are **making pretty good money**:
<https://www.aps.org/careers/statistics/phdsalary.cfm>
Often you can get **tuition remission** and a **teaching or research assistantship** that pays your bills while a PhD student, so most students I know **don't accumulate any debt (beyond what they already had from undergrad)**. So all you have to lose is about 9–12 years of your life (4 years of undergrad + 5–8 years PhD), during which you will work hard and be mentally exhausted a lot. If you like physics, you'll probably enjoy it too!
**My conclusion is that most people with physics PhDs get good-paying jobs (or did 5–9 years ago) and have fulfilling happy lives.**
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: I think you've gotten plenty of good answers, and so now I'll add another personal anecdote/piece of advice. I was likewise at a young age interested in theoretical physics, and ended up getting undergraduate degrees in physics and math and then a PhD in physics with a focus on quantum information science.
I think everyone who wants to get a PhD should hear the spiel that you've seen above -- the numbers aren't good for permanent faculty positions. (I will say that I think this is highly subfield-dependent -- as I was in QIS, which is a "hot" field, many universities were expanding their work in this area and thus hiring in that field. But nobody can tell you what will be hot in ten years.) But the numbers are *pretty great* for everything else, in terms of finding work with a Physics PhD. It's a highly quantitative field with lots of experience analyzing complicated problems from first principles, and depending on what you do in your PhD you're likely to pick up skills in coding, data analytics, data visualization, and presentation.
The other side to my story is that a couple years into my PhD I realized I actually had no desire at all to continue into a faculty position. I was happy enough to finish out grad school, but as for "the rest of my time on this planet," I wanted to do something else. I stayed in school, did plenty of research on possible career paths, managed to convince my professor to let me do a summer internship somewhere relevant to what I wanted to do, and got a job shortly after graduation. It's not very physics-y at all, usually, but it lets me use a lot of the skills and background I gained in graduate school and presents me with interesting challenges on a day-to-day basis.
My point here is, I would encourage you to embrace the fact that humans change and that you yourself may feel your priorities, values, and circumstances shift significantly in the decade it would take you to be done with graduate school. Make reasonable choices based on the path you feel like you want to pursue right now, and re-evaluate them regularly.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_12: Yes but it keeps getting tougher as depts shrink and PhDs keep getting pumped out faster to clog the pipeline to those fewer jobs.
So you would have to be among THE best or else settle for a real job in industry or govt.
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/15
| 623
| 2,779
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is that proper to get messages about your work (almost critique no constructive feedback) at the early dawn, I freaked out from my sleepings not the first time to expose that besides the high pressure to get results as soon as possible. I feel my body is exhausted and sick and sometimes crying, is this behavior normal in academia?<issue_comment>username_1: It is entirely proper to send emails at whatever time anyone wants to. It is up to the recipient to read them as they see fit.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Your question mentions two problems and you only think they have to be related:
* He sends "almost critique no constructive feedback"
* He sends it at early dawn
The second point is nothing you should worry about. In academia it is quite usual that people work (or read mails, write mails, look into papers or proof read what their students sent them) at all kinds of times.
I got mail really early and really late and sometimes I was asked if I like to call the professor.
It would have been okay to just ignore the mail until the next morning, but I was happy to get early feedback and had a constructive discussion. The professor probably wouldn't have had time in the morning and I would have had to wait until he has time in the usual working hours. But there is *no obligation* to read the mail late in the evening, let alone answer it.
The other point is the kind of feedback. I think you'll find here other questions that address this in detail. This can mean two things:
* Your professor may provide harsh feedback and may even be nonconstructive.
* Your professor provides concise feedback that reads harsh but is not meant this way. This type of feedback is quite common and the cases in which other people misunderstand it as harsh feedback are common as well. Try to assume good faith if there aren't more signs.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Messages are asynchronous. The whole benefit of asynchronous communication is that the sender can send them at whatever time is convenient for them to send it, and the recipient can respond at whatever time is convenient for them to do so, with no requirement for those two times to be particularly close to each other.
If you don't want to receive emails early in the morning, the solution is simple: don't check your emails early in the morning. Turn off whatever is alerting you to them arriving in real-time until whatever time you do want to start checking them.
You have absolute and complete control over the hours do not receive emails, irrespective of when they might have been sent, and should not expect others to adapt their working schedule for your convenience when you have such a simple solution to the problem available to you.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/15
| 718
| 3,160
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have noticed that in some fields, it is common to indicate in your CV (with italics, asterisks, or other symbols) if a coauthor is an undergraduate student. I have even seen similar practices for indicating grad student coauthors. I can imagine three reasons for doing this:
1. Emphasize one's own contribution by suggesting that an undergrad or graduate coauthor did not contribute as much to the paper.
2. Emphasize the undergrad/grad student's impressive feat of contributing to a paper so early in their career.
3. Emphasize one's own dedication to mentorship and involving students in research.
Personally, (1.) is not something I would wish to convey on my CV, while (2.) and (3.) are points that I would like to convey on my CV.
In my field (mathematics), I have seen some CVs that indicate when a coauthor is an undergraduate, but it doesn't seem to be as common as in other fields. Perhaps one reason for this is that authors are frequently listed alphabetically in mathematics.
**Question:** In mathematics, would indicating which coauthors are undergraduates convey a positive message about the undergraduate's contribution to research, as well as my involvement of undergraduates in research? Or would this downplay the undergraduate's contribution?<issue_comment>username_1: In terms of the question you ask at the end of your post, I would say that the annotating of undergraduate authors in your CV would generally be seen as a positive and not a negative remark on the contributions of the undergraduate. This is, of course, a guess as to the opinion of the hypothetical readers of your CV.
However, I think it is worth taking a minute to explain *why* someone might be noting undergraduate authors. Based on my experience working as a professor at selective liberal arts colleges (SLACs) in the United States, it usually is your suggestion (3) -- that someone is trying to show how they can have productive research collaborations with undergraduate students. In many SLACs it often viewed very positively, if not expected, that a professor can involve undergraduates in the their research. When reviewing candidate CVs, I frequently encountered such annotations and would almost always have an interview question about how the candidate might involve undergraduates in their research.
Personally, I would not expect that someone would make these annotations to either indicated the quality of an undergraduate [(2) in your question], nor would it be related to any sort of author ordering. And while I can imagine the attitude of people seeking to highlight their contributions to a paper [(1) from your question], I cannot imagine those individuals calling out undergraduate co-authors in their CV. More likely, they would either fight to keep them off of the author list during publication or simply list the publication in their CV without an author list.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: What I have come to understand is that in research your position, your affiliation, your status must not matter. The quality of your work cannot be overpowered and overshadowed by what or who you are.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/15
| 747
| 3,539
|
<issue_start>username_0: I sometimes come across ArXiv papers where the authors claim the source code for the project discussed can be obtained, but on checking the link provided the source code comprises no more than a place holder. So the code is not available, and on subsequent checking months later (in case the authors were in a rush to publish the paper before the code was quite ready to release) the code is still unavailable.
Now I understand there is no obligation to provide source code with commercial potential, unless maybe the project was subsidized with public funds. But what do authors have to gain by claiming it is available when it is not actually available?<issue_comment>username_1: There is no advantage to claiming the source code is available and then not doing that. All it will achieve is irritating the really interested readers.
The most likely reason is it’s a simple mistake. Something like they wanted to do that but forgot. Or other reasons, maybe department policies came up that prevented the author from doing that. Or maybe the author found another more suitable place to publish the code and forgot to update the link in the paper. Or...
The simplest solution is to contact the author directly.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Papers which claim availability of source code are more likely to make it into a collection of references that are not actively required for a particular paper. Also some publication guidelines may demand the availability of source code when it is actually necessary for making the paper's claims open to verification.
And that's just for assuming that the dead links are intentional. There is a multitude of reasons of why such information may not end up there essentially. One of the most boring real-life reasons is "the code still needs cleaning up and documentation" since papers are often done under time pressure, and there just are no resources after publicatoin to actually do the actually intended clean-up and documentation.
In that case, contacting the author is your best bet. It may end you with some not-well-usable code. It may end you with some dissatisfactory or no reply at all. But it certainly is the best way to get behind something that you think may be relevant for your further work. And it may be what is needed to make the author invest the effort of making stuff publishable after all: if one feels "nobody is interested anyway", cleaning up stuff for publication will easily end up on the eternal backburner.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I don't know about arXiv, but on bioarXiv, people will often upload their manuscripts at the same time as they submit them for peer review. People will put in links for data and code that they intend to make available when the peer-reviewed form of the manuscript is published.
Some times this is because they want to protect their data/code until the last possible minute. Other times they tell themselves they'll get round to sorting it out before the peer reviewed form is published, but then forget.
Note: I am saying what happens. I'm definitely not saying this is good or acceptable practice.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I think what they should have written is that "it will be available upon publication". Many people will provide the source code only after the paper is published. It is possible they intended to release the code upon publication, and they may need to get approval from their funding source etc. They should use proper language though.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/10/15
| 1,771
| 7,542
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have published in journal X and given them the rights to my work. In the "Author's Rights" clause, it says that I am allowed to post my work to pre-print servers (in the form immediately prior to publishing and sticking the copyright on) such as arXiv.
I am also allowed to distribute the copyrighted version for teaching and technical purposes, conference presentations, or other scholarly activities, and also allowed to post the copyrighted version to a personal website.
Here are my questions:
* I can't understand the logic behind why I am given so many rights. Where does the journal make money? In what scenario does someone want to read my work and not very easily find a free way to do so?
* I realize that if someone wants to cite my work, they have to cite the official version, which boosts the reputation of the journal. Is the main point that journal subscriptions negotiated with research universities have more bargaining power, based on impact factor?
* I am planning on posting my work to a pre-print server while referencing the official DOI of the copyrighted version. It simply feels odd to me, even though I know it's perfectly legal.
* What am I missing? I realize all journals are different, but I want to better understand why author's are given these rights. I feel like a copyright transfer is a big deal.
* From my perspective, I want eyes on my paper. From the journal's perspective, they want money from my work. How are there so many subscriptions to journal X if it's so easy to get ahold of the papers for free?<issue_comment>username_1: **Short answer:** Pre-prints are not a big threat to the business models of journals and there are scientific norms that mean that journals are expected to permit pre-prints.
**Longer Answer:**
**Why do universities and others pay for journals when some of the articles in these journal subscriptions are available via pre-print servers and other means?**
* Readers want access to the copy of record supplied by the journal.
* Readers want access to every single article, not just the subset that are available as pre-prints.
* Readers want efficient and consistent access.
* Readers want an attractively formatted PDF or HTML copy.
* Although not a pre-print server, it's also worth noting that universities respect copyright and therefore do not see services like scihub that provide more comprehensive free access as legitimate.
**Why do many journals allow authors to share pre-prints?**
* They don't see it as a big impost on their business model given the points above.
* Many journals have an embargo period on post-prints (i.e., pre-prints that have been updated based on the feedback provided by journal peer-review). These are presumably designed to encourage purchase of journal subscriptions.
* Some journals may appreciate the importance of username_2 dissemination even where the potential readers do not have a subscription.
* In some fields, pre-prints are very entrenched to the point that if a journal did not allow pre-prints, they might be seen poorly by that field and receive fewer high quality submissions.
* More generally, there is competition amongst journals, and allowing pre-prints is one small way that journals can compete for submissions.
* There has also been an ongoing debate about the business models of journals. Journals are receiving pressure from various parties to permit these forms of distribution.
* Also, pre-print servers are generally non-commercial. I have seen some publishers ban positing on ResearchGate because they are for-profit and serve Ads alongside pre-prints.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> What am I missing?
>
>
>
That we are the geese who are laying golden eggs for the publishers. Their business model is to do little and to get paid huge sums of money for it. Scientists do essentially all the work: the writing, peer review, and the editorial work. All that publishers really do is copyediting, and quite frankly they often do a mediocre job of that.
If publishers forbade researchers from posting preprints, then researchers would post preprints anyway. If publishers tried to *enforce* such a restriction, then researchers would stop submitting there.
The username_2 publishing industry is an example of economic [rent seeking](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent-seeking), generating profits without creating wealth. The balance is precarious, and publishers understand that it is in their economic interests not to disrupt it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Adding to some of the other answers.
Many grants now require that works supported by said grants be freely available in some form. This is the famous “open-access” debate about people paying to access research paid for by government (and thus tax-payers) monies. NOT allowing this would mean fewer submissions.
Overall, pre-prints etc don’t seem to be much of a threat since [this industry is very profitable](https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jun/27/profitable-business-scientific-publishing-bad-for-science?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: That's an interesting example of two different [Nash equilibria](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nash_equilibrium). If all top journals in a field allow to publish preprints, then one journal/publisher disallowing it would simply lead to no-one publishing there. If the norm is to forbid it, then one journal allowing it will probably just decrease its revenue (it would attract more good papers, but that's not directly monetizable).
Same on the scientists' side: if everyone else publish on Arxiv, then publishing my papers in a journal that disallows it would simply diminish the visibility of my work. If the norm is to embargo/paywall publications, then by not following it I just cut myself off most good journals.
Historically, different fields ended up in different equilibria; for that reason, some use arXiv, some don't. This is also en example of a situation where a regulation, e. .g, mandating "green" open access by some big funding agencies, could move the situation out of the "bad" equilibrium. Whether it's what happening is another question.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: The main thing you are missing is the "Big Deal" model that publishers use with university libraries (pioneered by Elsevier). The basic way that this works is that you pay one price for all the journal you get from a given publisher, and this price is based on the previous price you paid plus a certain increase each contract. You can change what journals are in the bundle, but you'll still have to pay what you paid before plus 5-10% each new contract. Your choice as a library is to either cancel the "Big Deal" entirely (which some libraries are doing now) or to continue on subscribing to journals in all fields. Now we get to the critical point:
* Most of the grant money is in biomedical sciences, and it's the biomedical sciences which drive the subscription decisions made by the university.
* Preprints are mostly in minor fields like physics and mathematics which are largely irrelevant to universities decisions.
Publishers just want to keep the preprint disciplines happy enough that they don't start pushing too hard to cancel the "Big Deal." Meanwhile universities can't cancel the Big Deal just because the preprint disciplines don't need the journal subscriptions anymore, since the much more valuable non-preprint disciplines still want the subscriptions.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/15
| 813
| 3,316
|
<issue_start>username_0: I wrote an email recently to the author of a book. I'm working on the master's degree in Hungary, the author is a professor in Canada. I'm not a native English speaker. My letter looked like the following:
>
> Dear Dr. [professor's full name],
>
>
> [body of the email including an introduction with my full name]
>
>
> With best regards:
>
> [my first name]
>
>
>
When I write to someone for the first time, I make the salutation and the self-introduction formal. But I tend to write my first name as the signature because I feel this shows that I don't insist on keeping the high level of formality I started the email with. In subsequent emails I choose the level of formality to be the same as it happens to be in the reply to my first email.
However, the reply to my quoted email seems to me to be so informal that I don't dare to imitate its level of formality without asking for the international academic community's, i.e. your suggestions. Their letter looked like the following:
>
> Hi [my first name],
>
>
> [body of the email]
>
>
> Best, [professor's first name in diminutive (!) form]
>
>
>
So is a signature usually indicative of the intended level of formality? Would it be appropriate to start my reply like this: "Dear [professor's first name]," or "Dear [professor's first name in diminutive form],"? Or can my habit of "imitation" backfire often and make me seem insulting?<issue_comment>username_1: Most professors do not put much thought into their salutations and signatures. They just use the same thing, or nothing, in every situation.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In my experience, the salutation often indicates something about the level of formality, while the signature typically conveys much less.
The signature is effectively meaningless because many people automate the signature on their emails, so it is literally not something that they are thinking about. Sometimes it will indeed convey a person's preferred level of formality, but since it's so often automated, that's not a safe assumption to make.
The salutation, on the other hand, is something that people definitely use to indicate their assumptions about the nature of a relationship. You don't really have a choice here, because pretty much every culture uses choice of salutation to indicate assumptions about level of formality, and even omitting the salutation has a meaning. Most readers will at least *notice* level of formality, even if the more cosmopolitan are unlikely to take offense. Similar things apply in other choices as well for languages where relationship is strongly reflected in pronouns (e.g., *usted* vs. *tu* in Spanish) or other linguistic options.
If you are in doubt, it's usually better to assume a higher level of formality. People are generally appreciative of attempts to be polite, whether or not they are needed.
Thus, for example, in the particular case that you cite, Canada is a fairly informal culture, and the professor has almost certainly indicated that they are comfortable with you using more informal language. If you are not comfortable with that and continue to say "Dr.", however, they will likely just take it to mean that you are from a more formal culture and trying to be polite.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2020/10/16
| 435
| 1,932
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm working as a research assistant in a mechatronics lab. My research and work is largely based on designing circuits, robotics and programming. My PI also works on mechatronics. But I've also worked with two other professors. For one of them, I had to develop circuits for electrochemical studies and for the latter, I worked in a clean room for photolithography. But their fields ( chemistry and MEMS packaging respectively) are way different from the field I want to apply for ( mechatronics and robotics). Will it affect my application if I use a letter of recommendation from them, since their primary field of research is different from mine?<issue_comment>username_1: When I review an application's letters of recommendation, I look at what the letters say about the candidate first and who wrote the letters second. This means that a really quality letter from someone that knows your work is the number one goal here. If these "out of department" professors can give you a quality recommendation, I would not hesitate to ask them. They are still going to be familiar with what graduate programs overall are looking for and their disciplines are still somewhat related to your program choice.
Overall, you should perhaps have one letter from a professor in the field you are apply to. However, a quality letter of recommend is the #1 goal here.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: If your ability in developing circuits for electrochemical studies sheds light on how good you would be designing circuits for mechatronics (and I suspect it does), definitely get a letter from them.
If all the professor can say that addresses your ability in mechatronics is "he was smart, diligent, and careful," then that's certainly better than no letter, but you might be better off with a letter from somebody closer to your field, even if you haven't worked directly with them.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2020/10/16
| 472
| 1,995
|
<issue_start>username_0: So [CORE](http://portal.core.edu.au/conf-ranks/) is the de facto standard benchmark to check the quality of a computer science conference.
However, there are some premier events that are not covered by this ranking.
For instance, I'm quite puzzled with the [IEEE International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER)](https://saner2021.shidler.hawaii.edu). It will be the 28th edition of this conference in 2021, and yet SANER has not been included in CORE! What is more, it is a well-established venue, recognized in the software engineering community for the quality of the accepted research papers.
Any thoughts why SANER is not ranked A, or as a matter of fact not ranked at all?<issue_comment>username_1: When I review an application's letters of recommendation, I look at what the letters say about the candidate first and who wrote the letters second. This means that a really quality letter from someone that knows your work is the number one goal here. If these "out of department" professors can give you a quality recommendation, I would not hesitate to ask them. They are still going to be familiar with what graduate programs overall are looking for and their disciplines are still somewhat related to your program choice.
Overall, you should perhaps have one letter from a professor in the field you are apply to. However, a quality letter of recommend is the #1 goal here.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: If your ability in developing circuits for electrochemical studies sheds light on how good you would be designing circuits for mechatronics (and I suspect it does), definitely get a letter from them.
If all the professor can say that addresses your ability in mechatronics is "he was smart, diligent, and careful," then that's certainly better than no letter, but you might be better off with a letter from somebody closer to your field, even if you haven't worked directly with them.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2020/10/16
| 351
| 1,560
|
<issue_start>username_0: Novice here. I am looking to submit a manuscript to a journal, *Monthly Review.* The journal website does not specify any template whatsoever except for the instruction to use Chicago Style, 16th edition for referencing. Should I include an abstract and a title page with a short bio in the submission (as is the custom in most social science journals I know of)?<issue_comment>username_1: Papers aren't normally published in the exact form of their first submission. I suggest that you write the paper as you think it should be written and submit it. Let the editor and reviewers decide if you should make modifications.
The title page is unlikely to be necessary in a first submission as it can be added later if needed (unlikely here). But an abstract might be helpful to the editor in choosing reviewers and to the reviewers in getting a quick overview.
But they will likely, in this case, ask you to remove them for publication. It is a process. Flow with it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I think that you should write the paper just like you would want to write the paper. If you have editors, then they will make the modifications and tell you if you should add an abstract.
If your paper is long, then you should add an abstract to help the readers know what your paper is about, and a title page can be added later, that doesn't need to be done first.
If you do feel like you should include a title page and an abstract page, then by all means do so. If it makes you feel more comfortable, then do it.
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/16
| 539
| 2,227
|
<issue_start>username_0: My manuscript has got accepted and published online as "in press" in an Elsevier journal.
I noticed that it is an open access journal late after its acceptance.
I have not signed any forms yet, but the "in press" manuscript is online.
I cannot afford the cost and asked for a waiver. They declined my request.
Can anybody recommend me what to do?
What happens if I don't pay the fee? Will it affect my chances of future publications in other journals of the same publisher?
Please let me have your thoughts.
Thanks<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Can anybody recommend me what to do?
>
>
>
Apologize and retract the paper.
>
> What happens if I don't pay the fee?
>
>
>
Your paper will not be published by this journal.
>
> Will it affect my chances of future publications in other journals of the same publisher?
>
>
>
Probably not. I doubt they track this behavior. Many of Elsevier's journals are edited independently, and will not care about a mistake made in a different journal.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Assuming you can't pay the fee, then you should make it clear to the journal that you can't pay the fee. What happens next is up to them. It's possible they will retract the article; it's also possible they will publish it anyway as a gesture of goodwill.
Will it affect your chances of future publications in other journals of the same publisher? It's possible. Modern editorial management systems are capable of tracking submissions by the same person, and the data can be shared between journals. The real question is whether the journal will take action. They are more likely to take action if they think you were being exploitative, and less likely if they think it was a genuine mistake. In the former scenario, the exploitative author submits to the journal knowing they will not publish there, but are making use of the journal's resources/time to get "free" peer review for their paper. It's similar to how taking up "free consultation" services with no intention of actually purchasing the service can be viewed as exploitative. To avoid looking exploitative, you should definitely say that you noticed the journal was open access too late.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/16
| 603
| 2,559
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm doing a master's degree in theoretical physics in Europe. After the end of the master, I want to pursue research in the area A. In fact, I've already come in contact with a professor that works in the area A in a different country.
The problem is, I'm struggling to find an advisor for a possible master thesis about the field A. I contacted roughly 6-7 professors at my university already and they either: 1) are too busy and don't want to start a new project, or 2) are not interested in what I want to do because they only accept projects strictly related to their recent research interests, or 3) don't answer my emails (after 2 weeks of waiting).
I'm considering to accept a master thesis in a different area B due to these reasons.
How would it be seen from the point of view of a prospective PhD advisor?<issue_comment>username_1: Can you ask your prospective PhD advisor? Surely it is not impossible to change areas between masters and PhD, but for some topics some earlier experience may be very helpful. So it depends.
As a supervisor, I'd not normally expect a PhD student to have worked in the same area before, although I had two PhD students who had done this, and it was actually a good thing; and in one case I wish a student would have learnt more about the area of their topic before the actual start, but you can do that even if your thesis is in a different field. Most students who "switched" had successful projects as well, so I wouldn't expect this to be a big problem, but there is still a possibility that a supervisor prefers a student with more experience in the same area, if available.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This depends a lot on how the degree is structured in your field and in your place of study. If you are required to obtain an advisor to take you on in order to start, then it is their answer to this question that is the only important one. Different people will judge differently.
However, if the admissions process is more general, as it is in most fields in the US, then there is little need to continue in the same field as long as you are willing to take the courses necessary to get you up to speed in the new field.
But, from your question, it sounds like you are in the first situation, unless you want to move. If that is the situation, then you need to find an advisor who is convinced that you have the necessary background. That might require that your doctoral field is closely related to your masters work, though it isn't necessarily the case.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/17
| 774
| 3,386
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently in process of applying to open postdoc positions.
As a global regulation, universities require for me to provide research statements as well as cover letters.
Many articles in the web advise to avoid technical language. This is understandable, because the person who is reading the statement might not be competent in the field I have worked so far.
I have also read [this excellen answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/5349/15949) from [JeffE](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65/jeffe), which attempts to draw a clear line between a technical wording, and a *very* technical wording in the statement.
I am applying to a position in the field of theoretical computer science/computational geometry. Because of the nature of the position I am applying, I must use some technical language to demonstrate my knowledge on the topic.
However, I am really doubtful about writing a statement which contains *not enough* technical language, misleading the hiring committee of thinking that I do not have deep enough expertise.
As a result,
I now have two different research statements. One is technical, one focuses on the everyday applications of my research.
I don't have a strong publication record. Thus, the only strength I can highlight is the significance of my publications. I cannot decide which one to submit.
The only solution comes to my mind is to contact with the corresponding faculty members whom I will potentially work under, asking the acceptable level of technicality in my research statement.
I wonder if this seems unprofessional.
Should I send a mail asking about the level of technical detail?<issue_comment>username_1: Can you ask your prospective PhD advisor? Surely it is not impossible to change areas between masters and PhD, but for some topics some earlier experience may be very helpful. So it depends.
As a supervisor, I'd not normally expect a PhD student to have worked in the same area before, although I had two PhD students who had done this, and it was actually a good thing; and in one case I wish a student would have learnt more about the area of their topic before the actual start, but you can do that even if your thesis is in a different field. Most students who "switched" had successful projects as well, so I wouldn't expect this to be a big problem, but there is still a possibility that a supervisor prefers a student with more experience in the same area, if available.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This depends a lot on how the degree is structured in your field and in your place of study. If you are required to obtain an advisor to take you on in order to start, then it is their answer to this question that is the only important one. Different people will judge differently.
However, if the admissions process is more general, as it is in most fields in the US, then there is little need to continue in the same field as long as you are willing to take the courses necessary to get you up to speed in the new field.
But, from your question, it sounds like you are in the first situation, unless you want to move. If that is the situation, then you need to find an advisor who is convinced that you have the necessary background. That might require that your doctoral field is closely related to your masters work, though it isn't necessarily the case.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/17
| 548
| 2,436
|
<issue_start>username_0: Can I submit a paper to a conference if I have presented it at another conference earlier but it wasn't published in proceedings?
Last year I submitted my work to a conference and it was accepted as a long paper, so I thought it was going to be published in the proceedings, but it seems they have a loophole in their rules. Long story short they they didn't publish the long paper. They published my other abstracts, but not the long papers due to this awkward loophole. I was planning to submit to a journal, but with the reviews and revisions, it will be a lot different from what I have right now. Can/should I submit the paper to another conference instead? One that will actually publish?<issue_comment>username_1: Can you ask your prospective PhD advisor? Surely it is not impossible to change areas between masters and PhD, but for some topics some earlier experience may be very helpful. So it depends.
As a supervisor, I'd not normally expect a PhD student to have worked in the same area before, although I had two PhD students who had done this, and it was actually a good thing; and in one case I wish a student would have learnt more about the area of their topic before the actual start, but you can do that even if your thesis is in a different field. Most students who "switched" had successful projects as well, so I wouldn't expect this to be a big problem, but there is still a possibility that a supervisor prefers a student with more experience in the same area, if available.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This depends a lot on how the degree is structured in your field and in your place of study. If you are required to obtain an advisor to take you on in order to start, then it is their answer to this question that is the only important one. Different people will judge differently.
However, if the admissions process is more general, as it is in most fields in the US, then there is little need to continue in the same field as long as you are willing to take the courses necessary to get you up to speed in the new field.
But, from your question, it sounds like you are in the first situation, unless you want to move. If that is the situation, then you need to find an advisor who is convinced that you have the necessary background. That might require that your doctoral field is closely related to your masters work, though it isn't necessarily the case.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/17
| 790
| 3,157
|
<issue_start>username_0: My question in about the general situation in the US universities related to the two body problem.
My impression from what I have heard is that most of American universities are located in small university towns where there are very few other job places. So for spouses of university employees there are not many options to find a job.
My question is whether my understanding is correct. Is it typical that spouses cannot find jobs?
At the moment I cannot ask a more specific question about concrete place. By it is important for me to know what is going on in general.
**ADDED.** My spouse works in chemistry. But in industry rather than academia.<issue_comment>username_1: I'm not sure this is really an answer, but a bit of perspective. While it is true that "most colleges (at least) in the US are in small towns" that is because there are a lot of small colleges; more than six thousand degree granting institutions overall. And even some of the universities in small towns are very large with large departments and likely some non-academic positions open. So the situation isn't as dire as it might seem.
Also, many large urban centers from coast to coast have a lot of colleges and universities within a 10-20 mile radius. New York, Chicago, Atlanta, and on and on. "Small" is relative also. Champaign-Urbana is "small" by NYC standards but big enough for most purposes.
If a couple are in the same (sub) field it is harder, of course. But some places also recognize the issue and will accommodate a couple if one of them is especially desired. This can result in its own problems, of course, if one person gains tenure and the other not.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Your perception of the situation seems to me fairly accurate, but there are some critical details:
Yes, in a small college town, if your partner is not an academic (ok, there's a significant separate issue of "spousal hires"... addressed in a moment...), and does not want to be involved with pizza, there are limited opportunities. Obviously. And your department, and the university, cannot really do much to change this.
Happily, in recent years, the "issue" of academics being partnered with academics (unlike the "simpler" days of yore when wives just followed their academic husbands ... wherever...), is being much better acknowledged and addressed, at least intermittently, by some universities. It is my perception that there is still a tendency to stigmatize "spousal hires", but, also, given the realities (!?), this attitude is less and less acceptable.
Yes, I do think any sort of equity for partners (among many other equity issues) will involve major changes in pretensions... The pandemic has jarred things loose in some ways, which may be good, but it has also diminished resources, which tends to make people pull back and be stingy ... I don't know what will happen.
But it does not quite make sense to plan our lives on the most cynical premises, since then the optimum might be just to exit as soon as possible. In contrast, I think some gambles, even though definitely not "sure things", are worth making.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/17
| 559
| 2,193
|
<issue_start>username_0: We have a project to do with them but I don't have the time and am not sure if this email is appropriate for them. What do you think? I would greatly appreciate your advice.
Here is what I am thinking of sending them.
*Hello guys,
Hope you having a good weekend
I’m writing to you to let you know that unfortunately and for personal reasons, I have to drop this class. I have sent an email to the professor, so he should be aware of it very soon.
I hope you understand, and I wish you guys all the best on the project.
Sincerely,*<issue_comment>username_1: Your suggestion looks fine. I would consider making an offer to bring them up to speed on anything you have been working on that could help them out.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think that your suggestion, like what Scott thought, looks perfectly fine, but you should make a few edits.
This is what I think you should send.
*Hello guys,
I hope you are having a good weekend,
I’m writing to you to let you know that unfortunately, for personal reasons, I have to drop out of this class. I have sent an email to the professor, so he will be aware of it very soon. (If you were working on something for the project, courtesy Scott) I was working on 'blah' and will send you the attachments so that you can use my work. I hope you understand, and I wish you guys the best on the project. Sincerely,*
Some points I like about your email
* You were polite
* In it you told the team why you had to leave
* And you wished them good luck/best
**Good Luck!**
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: That is just fine. Happens all the time. At least you told your team.
Some of my students just disappear.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: All you need to do is tell them politely, whatever you say is fine, include "I'm sorry" or some similar expression of regret, what you wrote is fine.
More importantly, tell them **now**. Don't wait or spend time crafting the perfect message. The more heads up you give them the less impact you have on them. It's much more rude to wait writing the perfect email than it would be to send a poorly written email on time.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/18
| 827
| 3,499
|
<issue_start>username_0: For the [National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program](https://www.nsfgrfp.org/) (NSF GRFP) application they ask:
>
> Other serious disability related to a physical, mental, or emotional
> condition is included in my disability
>
> (Please specify. Cannot exceed 255 characters.)
>
>
>
Here I listed dyslexia and the academic accommodations I receive. **Is this appropriate?** What do they mean by "Severe Disability".
My case is particularly harsh. In my **Statement of Purpose** I briefly talk about my history of overcoming this as well as how learned to capitalize on my other strengths to compensate for this deficiency. This is particularly important to me, but might not be something that should be mentioned.
This could apply to other academic applications. Is this something that should be mentioned on a PhD application, or is it best to avoid this topic?<issue_comment>username_1: Dyslexia is widely recognized as a disability.
Deciding if dyslexia is "severe" is a matter of opinion. Only one person has a well-informed opinion about the severity of your dyslexia: you. If you think it is severe, no reasonable person will question it.
Your strategy of mentioning your disability in the context of how you were successful overcoming it is a good strategy.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I believe there is not one answer that suits all circumstances, as different bodies will ask the question about disabilities for different purposes. You need to be clear in each particular case what information they are needing from you and how that information will be used in their internal processes. Having that clarity will enable you to tailor the information to the needs of the organisation's selection processes.
In the particular example you gave, the [NSF declares that they particularly seek to promote a diverse base for their awards](https://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=6201):
>
> NSF actively encourages women, members of underrepresented minority groups, persons with disabilities, veterans, and undergraduate seniors to apply.
>
>
>
So you would need to give information that would enable them to determine that you are part of an underrepresented group and how you have worked to overcome your disability.
In other applications, such as a PhD application, they may ask the information to ensure they have made adequate provision for your interview, or allowed adequate consideration of the writing of your personal statement, or that they have appropriate provision in their research laboratories for you (such as in the case of more severe physical disability). Or equally in a PhD program they may be seeking to implement a positive recruitment program.
Some applicants believe that their application will be prejudiced by giving information on their disability and take the decision to omit that level of detail. I cannot say that this does not happen, but being informed as to the purpose of asking the question gives an applicant more confidence in supplying the level of detail that would enable their application to be well received.
Addressing the topic of dyslexia in particular, there is an increasing base of argument that [dyslexia can give an advantage in certain aspects of intellectual and creative activities](https://www.dyslexicadvantage.org/) but again you probably have no way of determining if that opinion is held by the organising you are applying to or not.
Upvotes: -1
|
2020/10/18
| 1,082
| 4,825
|
<issue_start>username_0: I work in an university where the teaching language is not English, but where research can be carried out in the language of choice of the director (which is generally English since most graduate students do not speak the official language of the university).
Although the university offers linguistic support for new employee who do not know the official language, it seems that this is seen as a severe hindrance by candidates and it severely limits the pool of available candidates (especially for tenure-track positions). My question is twofold. Are candidates generally discouraged from applying to a position for which they cannot speak the language? Are there ways to word the job offer to ensure that this is not seen so much as a hurdle since linguistic support is offered?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think that you can paper over the hindrance by formulating the job offer in a particular way.
I live in a country neighboring a big country that tends to force everything in the native language. There are plenty of job opportunities there, but many of them would require me to teach in the local language. If I were to apply to one of those, this has the following disadvantages:
* I need to learn the local language;
* I need to translate all my teaching materials into the local language;
* the students will not be challenged to learn English, so instead of facing a challenge head-on, they get to take the easy way out;
* the students will want to write their master's thesis in the local language too, so I would need to translate all their work into English if I would want to derive joint publications from it;
* the students will have learned all technical terms in the local language, which puts them as a disadvantage when they enter the international job market.
There are plenty of countries on this planet that do not force me to deal with this situation. The situation forces me to do all kinds of unnecessary extra work, and the only benefit is that the students will be allowed to take the easy way out, their work will have a smaller reach, and the university graduates will be of lower value to the international market. Why on Earth would I apply? No matter how much linguistic support you throw at it, I would always prefer to teach in Canada, or Ireland, or Australia, or New Zealand, or Scandinavia, or...
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I think if I needed to learn a language well enough to teach in it in two years then that would basically mean I spent those two years learning that language as a full-time job and getting very little research done. I could imagine making that substantial sacrifice for the right job in the right location, but it's a very big hurdle. This is on top of already having a big adjustment moving to a country you're unfamiliar with. Unless the position is clearly better in some way (pay, teaching load, location) it's going to be a difficult sell.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: You cannot change the location of your university and the fact that the local language is not English. Moreover, the question focuses on tenure-track positions, so I will interpret that as positions where the goal is that the holder stays for a longer period of time (lets arbitrarily say 10 years), but correct me if I am wrong. Even if teaching in English was not a requirement, the holder would still need to learn the local language. You can survive in many places with only knowing English, but to make the best use of everything that is possible you often need to know the local language. So, in practice I find that the requirement to teach in the local language, with the accompanying support, actually helps foreign position holders adept to their new environment. So there is no need to be defensive about that.
Regarding your first question: I would say that there is continuum of candidates where on the one extreme are people who enjoy experiencing new places, and for whom learning the language is less of a chore and more part of the experience, and on the other extreme are other people for whom learning a new language is going to be too much. Your university will have trouble attracting people who are more on the "language-phobic" side of the spectrum, but that is not a bad thing as they would not be a good match for your university anyhow.
Regarding your second question: keep it short, to the point, and factual. Those who are not daunted by learning a new language, just want to know whether the requirements are reasonable for them. Is there a transition period, and if yes how long? What kind of support is there? In the advertisement, that needs to be very short, but you could include a link to a place that provides more information. Again, don't be defensive about it.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2020/10/18
| 1,212
| 5,114
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an Indian, currently in 12th standard and I am pretty sure next year I am going to be in a decent UNI for my bachelor's in physics. I have read a lot about undergraduate research in Western colleges but I am not very sure about that here in India, as I have heard that a very small amount of money from the GDP is spent on research every year - like 0.6%. So I was curious if I will be able to get any research opportunities during my initial college years or not.
Another question is:
-- Are researches necessarily done by college professors or there are other groups of researchers who provide opportunities out of school?<issue_comment>username_1: Some observations:
* In India, as far as I know, some institutes like CMI, etc. offer (or used to offer) internship programs. Please note, it is usually very competitive to get selected. Earlier, they used to select students based on [NPTEL](https://nptel.ac.in) exam results. I remember reading somewhere that you could also email the respective professor and ask if he/she is willing to assign an intern. So, it is best to email the professor. He/she might invite you to work with him/her during Summer/Winter vacation.
* Sometimes, I see professors of electronics asking undergrads to write codes. So, you can understand that they would let you do something which perhaps they might not be very comfortable with (reasons being, new languages, new areas, etc). I remember a friend of mine was assisting a professor by writing python codes for some machine learning experiment. Most of the Physics/Electronics professors in India above 50s are comfortable with FORTRAN, while the younger generation learns Python right at high school.
* Usually, you would not see much research in a normal college offering undergraduate degrees. They wouldn't have the equipment, etc. They go to a university for those.
So, if you are willing to contribute to research the best thing would be to:
* talk/email professors from your areas of interest. If you are in a reputed institute like in one of the IITs, IISc, etc. it becomes easier and it's best to try to get into one of such institutes.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: **It depends on your university, its professors and the institute policies.**
There is significant research happening in universities, but in India, it's most prevalent in the top-ranked institutes/universities, which are mostly government institutes. Can you get involved in initial years? Yes and no. It's difficult to answer without knowing if your uni is decent w.r.t to the world or just the country. I study at IIT Delhi (Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi) and I'll tell you my experience:
* Yes, you can ask professors to get involved in research in your initial undergrad years. You'll most probably not have the required background, but there are professors willing to help you learn and develop and/or explore interest(s). You'll not contribute significantly but it'll help you start learning. To reach to the level of actually publishing something, it'll happen later in undergrad. A freshman is just getting started will college and sophomore with their major. It is after that that you'll start taking advanced courses - but who's stopping anyone from learning!
* For summer and winters, many students apply for research opportunities in other institutes and universities for research interns in summer. A lot of people from the top IITs and/or IISc also go to research interns abroad. At IITD, we also have institute programmes to do projects in summer. A lot of information about such programmes is shared over mailing lists or informed by your seniors in college. Most of the research opportunities are obtained by emailing. Even for research programmes, a better path is emailing someone from the research team first - unless the guidelines state otherwise.
* If you're not in IIT/IISc/IISER, you can mail professors from these institutes to get involved with them. However again, that requires you to show more dedication since there are already students from that institute itself showing interest. Very few to none have dedicated research programmes for external students.
* Most professors will deny, some will be open to short projects while some might ask you to dedicate longer times. Usually the shorter projects do not provide a new learning curve, so research projects are usually the latter ones. Landing an opportunity depends on how you approach professors and show interest. They do not need you, you need them; show interest, be willing to learn.
In conclusion,
* Can you have research experience in your undergrad in India? Yes.
* In initial years? Depends on you and under whom you apply.
* Are researches necessarily done by college professors or there are other groups of researchers who provide opportunities out of school? Not all researchers are professors but most of such opportunities are available to grad students so your best bet is first reaching out to professors in or outside your university since they're more open to working with students.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/10/18
| 544
| 2,354
|
<issue_start>username_0: A friend of mine had failed core courses during his master's program. He had to retake the exams and passed them with minimum grade. However, his research output was good and he was able to publish a journal paper (first author, IF~4).
Now he has been accepted for a PhD in Canada on the same topic as his master's. He will be working with application of the courses he had failed in.
Should he continue with his PhD journey? At the university he will be carrying out his research, they don't have to take any coursework. So, he would have to continue with his research without having to take any courses.
Is he suitable for PhD? As far I know, PhD students are supposed to be proficient in the coursework.<issue_comment>username_1: I'm going to answer here as if *you* are the "friend."
If the university accepts you into a doctoral program they have fairly high confidence that you will be successful. Otherwise they are just wasting scarce resources, including money, space, and faculty time.
It may be that you have some deficiencies and I hope that the educational system in place gives you the time and opportunity to fill any gaps, but you probably also have some compensating points in your favor.
It is good, of course, to try to figure out why you had issues in the past and to correct what can be changed.
But doctoral work is different from coursework and the skills required are not the same. Trust the people who admitted you to the program that you can do it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm not a major believer in the performance in a single or even several courses as an indicator of research potential.
People come in with different skill sets, different studying skills, even different life starting points. How many grad students struggle with depression or other mental illness? How many are from disadvantaged backgrounds? How many are the first in their family to attend higher education?
It is cruel to use course grade to fully determine a person's potential.
If the person is doing research despite failing courses then there are other things going for him or her. Perhaps they are good are organizing information and giving presentations. Or perhaps they are a different type of thinker/person than what those courses demanded, e.g., a hands-on person vs a theory type.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/18
| 663
| 2,839
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am learning a new numerical modeling technique (molecular dynamics) that requires learning graduate level maths and physics concepts. I am learning from youTube videos and books. However, I am getting all overwhelmed and am retaining nothing.
I am feeling disappointed because I am not able to grasp the subject that is very important for my postdoc success. My entire postdoc contract is based on the assumption that I can learn this in 6 months and produce results in the next 6 months.
I cannot sit through classes as postdocs are not allowed to do so in my university. I have access to online materials only.
I am feeling super stressed out and overwhelmed. Any advice?<issue_comment>username_1: Reading and watching videos is not a substitute for learning. Treat the material like you would if you were in a class. Find exercises that you can do to assure that you have "mastered" the material. Take notes. Make checkpoints at which you can assess your progress. You learn from reinforcement and feedback. The latter is hard in online learning. Find someone who can give you some feedback and answer questions. Find a working group if possible and learn it as a group, reinforcing one another.
I wonder, also, whether you can informally sit in on a course while not taking it. A friendly professor might permit it and even let you take exams informally. I've done this as a professor, actually, when wanting to learn the basics of a new field.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: As username_1 said, reading books and watching videos, although you will learn a bit, is not a good way of learning. There are many different substitutes that will actually help you. When watching videos (as you have been doing), just sitting and watching won't help you. You need a way to retain that information. That could be taking notes, typing on a google doc, making bullet points, etc. You should also always have goals in mind. If you have goals, you have something to push too. I have found that making goals are very helpful when learning something overwhelming. Taking it one step at a time.
If you have a friend that is good at this topic, ask him/her for questions. Don't be afraid to ask! I have found that asking family and friends for help really helps you out.
Some other things that could help you not get overwhelmed are:
* Breathe and take frequent brain breaks. If your brain is constantly working, you will get tired and start seeing blurrily.
* Take a walk, being outside with nature is scientifically proven to calm you down.
* Get better sleep, being overwhelmed does not mean you have to stay up all night trying to understand a topic. Your body needs sleep!
* Focus, don't get distracted by funny cats during your youtube video lessons. Always stay on topic.
Hope this helps :)
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/19
| 717
| 2,993
|
<issue_start>username_0: I like exactly this format:
```
Knowledge -> Task -> Knowledge -> Task
```
And the knowledge is required to do the following task. Not more. Not less. Therefore you know that the task is solvable and you do have enough knowledge. In other words:
```
Knowledge1 -> Task(requires only Knowledge1) -> Knowledge1+Knowledge2 -> Task(requires only Knowledge1+Knowledge2)
```
How do you call this method of teaching?
Books and courses that I see are all the same:
```
Knowledge -> Knowledge -> Knowledge -> Knowledge -> Knowledge -> Knowledge -> Knowledge -> End.
```
I think I have to read till the end, even summarize in mindmaps, just to realize later that I have no idea where to start.
Therefore I need to create my own tasks in between.
But I don't know whether how I solve my tasks is accurate.
How could I handle this?<issue_comment>username_1: Reading and watching videos is not a substitute for learning. Treat the material like you would if you were in a class. Find exercises that you can do to assure that you have "mastered" the material. Take notes. Make checkpoints at which you can assess your progress. You learn from reinforcement and feedback. The latter is hard in online learning. Find someone who can give you some feedback and answer questions. Find a working group if possible and learn it as a group, reinforcing one another.
I wonder, also, whether you can informally sit in on a course while not taking it. A friendly professor might permit it and even let you take exams informally. I've done this as a professor, actually, when wanting to learn the basics of a new field.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: As username_1 said, reading books and watching videos, although you will learn a bit, is not a good way of learning. There are many different substitutes that will actually help you. When watching videos (as you have been doing), just sitting and watching won't help you. You need a way to retain that information. That could be taking notes, typing on a google doc, making bullet points, etc. You should also always have goals in mind. If you have goals, you have something to push too. I have found that making goals are very helpful when learning something overwhelming. Taking it one step at a time.
If you have a friend that is good at this topic, ask him/her for questions. Don't be afraid to ask! I have found that asking family and friends for help really helps you out.
Some other things that could help you not get overwhelmed are:
* Breathe and take frequent brain breaks. If your brain is constantly working, you will get tired and start seeing blurrily.
* Take a walk, being outside with nature is scientifically proven to calm you down.
* Get better sleep, being overwhelmed does not mean you have to stay up all night trying to understand a topic. Your body needs sleep!
* Focus, don't get distracted by funny cats during your youtube video lessons. Always stay on topic.
Hope this helps :)
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/19
| 1,065
| 4,597
|
<issue_start>username_0: I got my PhD earlier this year. I have been productive during my PhD, published 4 papers during my 5.5 years duration in decent journals. My advisor was not an expert in my area of research, so my research ideas, methodology and analysis were completely isolated endeavour. This helped me become independent researcher but it also made me seriously unconfident in my technical know-how and research abilities.
My PhD was on a different field than my Masters and Undergrad degree. I took some courses to come up to speed, but I did not do many of the necessary courses because I thought I could self study them. I did self-study, but since I did not give exams or diligently solved many exercises in the book, I have a gap in the understanding of the core fundamentals of my field.
For example, one of the course I had to self study was numerical methods. I read the theory, made notes, did some exercises. But only retained a part of the subject because I had to add Newton-Rapson method in my code, so I just remember that.
Similarly, another course was Finite element method. I read the theory, made notes, did some exercises. But only retained a part of the subject because I did not have to develop FEA codes in my research. I used an opensource solver and focused on getting results for my research.
All these half-baked fundamentals made me realized that I am not equipped well for a career in research. I get overwhelmed when I start to revisit the fundamentals now. I feel I missed my chance when I should have studied more seriously and asked for help for the topics I was facing difficulties.
I had so much time in PhD to improve my knowledge and technical knowhow. After PhD and during postdoc, I am finding it harder to concentrate as I have to produce results at a much faster pace than my PhD and I cannot dedicate time to study and develop fundamentals. How to address this knowledge gap after a PhD?
Please don't say its imposter syndrome. I am just asking on how to improve technical/fundamental knowledge outside a university environment? Because, I feel it is not possible to gain deep understanding about a subject without the university/classroom setting.
I am really troubled and am worried about my career prospects. I have been looking for jobs in industry and at the moment I am not getting responses. So the postdoc position I am in currently will support me for the next year. However, I have to find something till then. If I don't have confidence in my abilities, none of this would matter. I would not be able to get a job.<issue_comment>username_1: While I'm not convinced it isn't just imposter syndrome, I'll also assume that you know something about it already.
However, you sound as if you know how to get the job done in research, focusing on what is needed to perform well. It isn't necessary, of course, to know everything before you start a project. Little would get done if that were true.
However, note that the situation has changed. In grad school and maybe in the post doc you were surrounded by a support system of people that you could bounce ideas off of and get feedback. The more independent you become the less automatic that is. So, I suggest that you try to reproduce that environment virtually by forming (or joining) a circle of collaboration.
A lot of very productive people maintain relationships with their former advisors and become part of that person's network. They invite others to come and speak or they go elsewhere to speak (and meet and collaborate).
It is very difficult for most people to do serious research in a vacuum. A few can manage it, but the collaborative network is a much richer environment for the generation and testing of ideas.
It doesn't have to be a classroom. You can take a much more active role.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: It seems you've focused on speed, both in research and in your education, passing by the formative knowledge building which simply takes time, concentration, depth, discipline. Maybe to get moving focus on things that don't involve too many of your gaps, and, over time, take the time to fill in a few. I have no doubt there are plenty of interesting corners of your field you can dive into.
One trick that's worked for me is cobbling together lecture notes for a course I'll never give. You end up teaching yourself, developing a deeper understanding. What I suspect though is that you see all the things you don't know, but somehow everyone else on the planet does, and you feel a bit overwhelmed. Let it pass, just dig in.
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/19
| 439
| 1,861
|
<issue_start>username_0: We did an experiment and the results unexpectedly support a famous theory. I am not entirely sure how to write the full paper or sell the results because I am not too familiar with that theory. And I don't know which journals welcome that theory. I think chatting with that theorist will surely help.
Shall I directly send our results and drafts to that professor, or shall I send a short cover letter first, which concisely describes our results and shows how his theory is supported, and then send the paper only if the theorist agrees?
---
I talked to my advisor and they agree I could contact this person, but I'm not sure how to start. The theory is famous for its philosophical and mathematical elegancy but one of its important implications is hard to test.<issue_comment>username_1: My advice would be to send a note introducing yourself and explaining what you have done and the results. Don't "flood" the person in the initial contact. It is too easy to assume such mails are from cranks. I guess mathematicians still get letters with "squaring the circle" constructions.
Offer to share further if you like. Offer to collaborate if you like. Say you have some questions if you think you need their help.
But a shorter note is more likely, I think, to lead to more.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This is a complicated topic and you should definitely ask your advisor. There could be all sorts of potential pitfalls, e.g. perhaps there are caveats/loopholes to your experiment, perhaps you only supported a restricted form of the theory, perhaps the theory had unknown parameters that your experiment helped fix, and so on.
Given the dangers, don't try to navigate this yourself. If it comes to contacting the theorist, your advisor is likely to know more about what to write, as well.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/19
| 2,469
| 10,588
|
<issue_start>username_0: The paper I just got to review consists of Theorem A and its Corollary B, the latter settling a major open problem in the field, it is said.
Unfortunately, the problem is not open, it was done in an obscure paper half a century ago (a not uncommon mistake, I must stress this doesn't imply or suggest foul play). I haven't yet started to read the submitted paper properly, but I know that - if correct - Theorem A on its own merits publication. I worry that if I point out the obscure paper to the author in the review, they may want to withdraw or very substantially change their submission, possibly making swathes of my review irrelevant and thus wasting my time and work. What is the proper etiquette here? Should I:
1. complete an honest review of the whole paper and only then inform both author and editor that the problem was settled before?
2. write a very short "why don't you mention that old paper?" review framed as "needs **MAJOR** revisions"?
3. contact the editor and ask them to pass the information before I agree to write the review?
4. write my review with a comprehensive comparison between the submitted paper and the old obscure one?
5. other?
Point 4. is just a bonus question to see if people here do think that it's referee's duty to do so (I am of "in the perfect world we would have time for that" persuasion). I am wary of point 2., since it may prompt some editors to reject the paper outright, and it doesn't seem fair in this case. Hence I wonder about point 3. For what is worth, in my field I do have access to the paper before I agree to referee, so my impressions are not based just on the abstract, in particular I am sure the author does not cite the obscure paper.
---
**UPDATE:** Thanks everyone for your suggestions. Here's what I did, and why.
The paper under review and the older paper were both quite short for the field, so I spend one afternoon skimming through them. I concluded that the methods were significantly different, but there are parts of the older paper that will influence the body of the paper under review, and not only merit a "We note that the Corollary B appears in (...)" line.
I then filed a review recommending a resubmission after revision, pointing to the prior paper and how I see it might influence the present work. I explained that I didn't go too deep in the paper (for the reasons mentioned above) but I will be happy to review it if resubmitted. I also tried to be supportive, stating that the results seem correct (I could write that after that afternoon reading) and interesting, and in particular appropriate for publication.
I also wrote directly to the editor and appraised them of the situation. I politely asked them to a) contact the other reviewers and notify them about the prior work, as I honestly expect they may not know about it, or b) pass my review to the author before all other reviews come in. The editor sent me a generic "thank you for your time", and that was it.
I accepted Allure's answer, as I think that if the papers were not so short, I wouldn't be able (and willing to spend time) to compare them so quickly and thus would pass that responsibility entirely to the author. I also wouldn't be able to quickly write anything resembling a review, and so probably would just ask the editor to contact the author and persuade them to resubmit after they take a look at the old paper. Moreover I convinced myself that I should contact the editor outside of just filing the review, since it may take arbitrarily long for the other reviews to come in and are eventually made available to the author, and all this time is wasted for them (not to mention for the fellow reviewers, as in this particular case it is possible they too can be unaware of that older paper). What motivated me in the end was the possibility that the author could find out that older paper while still waiting for the reviews, and then worry (as before, arbitrarily long) about ramifications - hence I think it was better for me to break the news to them with a generally positive message as soon as possible.
While I don't know if I will be called to referee this paper again, it's nice that we mathematicians have arxiv and so I will be able to see what happens with it either way - published in this journal? elsewhere? better? For all interested, I promise to update this question again in five years or when the paper is finally published (whichever comes later:)<issue_comment>username_1: Let me suggest that you do a proper review and somewhere, it doesn't really matter where, note that part of this is already settled and needs at least a citation of prior work. Since the work is old it may just be an oversight on the part of the authors as you suggest yourself.
However, in mathematics, the reasoning behind a statement, the proof, is almost always more important than the final statement itself, especially if the proof is novel in any way. This is because proofs offer insight in to how to approach problems that simple statements do not.
The fact that an old result emerges simply as a corollary to a new result isn't especially surprising, actually. It is an interesting fact that might, in itself give some insight into problems related to the old result.
If all questions in mathematics could be answered by the same set of techniques, then it would be a pretty boring field.
And, as you say, Theorem A seems on the face of it to be independently valuable. Do your best job and don't neglect to point out problems and omissions along the way, as you normally would.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I think you take too much responsibility for other persons' (presumed) actions. I'd say write in your review what you know (that the problem was settled before) and what you think (namely that Theorem A merits publication in its own right). Be as comprehensive as you like; certainly you help the author and maybe editor by providing some more detail, this mainly depends on the time you can spend on this.
It is the job of the editor, not yours, to decide about rejection of the paper. Don't base your behaviour on the assumption that the editor might do something, in their own responsibility, that you wouldn't agree with. Neither base your behaviour on assumptions of what the author will do with their own work if you write this-or-that and whether this may or may not be good in your opinion. It is up to them to decide that. So give them open and proper information on the standard way (i.e., in your review) and leave their job to them. Note by the way that if the editor decides to reject, there are many other journals, and maybe the author will in their next attempt to submit just cite the original paper and state clearly what is original about their own approach. As an expert in the field, you may even be asked to review that update.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: If I understand your question, you're saying that Corollary B has already been proved half a century ago, but the authors are apparently unaware of it.
If that's the case, you should point it out now, before you start reviewing. As you point out, the authors will probably have a lot to rewrite, which could make swathes of your review irrelevant.
I would tell the editor the issue and suggest pointing it out to the authors (i.e. option 3), but also say that you can review the paper anyway if they prefer. You can potentially save a lot of time this way. If they say you should review regardless, you probably don't lose much time, either.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: When reviewing it doesn't hurt to be practical as well: What would serve the author best in this case? Does this create extra work (resp. fewer rewards) or mean less work for you?
In this case, it sounds like conveying the valuable information of a prior proof to the author would let them decide whether to rewrite the paper (the most likely outcome, you say) or let it stand. So it does no harm to the author, and might save you some work. Sounds win-win to me. But it might also mean that you never get to review the paper (if it is withdrawn and submitted elsewhere), so you need to decide if this is so undesirable an outcome that you want to avoid it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: You say that Theorem A is publishable on its own, but is it publishable in the current journal?
If not, I think the best outcome for the authors is to get a quick review explaining that Corollary B is already known, and consequently the results are not as strong as they think and you would recommend submitting a revised version to [some other journal]. They can then get on with this without much delay.
If it would still be strong enough for the current journal, then presumably the authors will still want to publish there. So in order to recommend any course of action you will need to actually check whether the proof of Theorem A is valid; I see no reason to say anything before doing this.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: The editor should be happy to receive this:
>
> I believe the author should change their paper substantially, in light of Corollary B having been solved in XXX, and I think this should be communicated to the author forthwith. XXX is a publication of a far away field so it’s not surprising it was overlooked. So it seems inappropriate to write a fully detailed (I err on the side of meticulous) review now, when much of the text ought to be remodeled or cut, and a detailed review would be a poor use everyone’s time and delay the author’s progress. Hence this short initial review.
>
>
> This work is valuable but less groundbreaking than thought. I think it shows excellent work and will surely warrant publication after the necessary revisions, but perhaps journal YYY would be a better forum.
>
>
> After sending this I will continue work on a more detailed review, as some additional feedback is warranted beyond the above. Please interrupt me if it’s not needed.”
>
>
>
Is this inherently going to be much slower than option 3? To the contrary, I think.
If the editor will reject him outright even if you recommend another round after major revisions, your submitting a detailed review won’t help, so there’s still no good reason for one. Only if username_1’s right is there a good reason for one - namely that a reworked Corollary B is still worth publishing as a novel solution to a solved problem, so some effort into critiquing it is worth making, but focus on getting it in fast, not perfecting it.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/10/19
| 2,506
| 10,566
|
<issue_start>username_0: There's an [interesting question](https://law.stackexchange.com/q/15986/10458) over at Law.SE on the possibility of suing a university over what the OP saw as unfair disciplinary practices. I have often wondered...
**Is there a type of professional or professional practice related to advising or representing students and/or faculty within the context of *internal* disciplinary procedures?**
As a concrete example, let us assume that Mary was expelled for allegedly falsifying data for her thesis. Mary contests this.
* If she sues in civil court, she should consult an appropriately-qualified, local attorney.
* But if she instead takes her argument directly to the university's disciplinary committee, she will need someone with an in-depth knowledge of the policies, procedures, rules of evidence, witness disqualification criteria, time limits, etc. that are *internal* to the university. This person could scrutinize the investigation in-depth and "beat them at their own game" by pointing out how the evidence, *according to university policy*, should be seen in her favor or does not meet the internal requirements for expulsion.
Another example might be a purely advisory context: perhaps one is considering a romantic liaison with a student, and is wondering whether this could affect their employment.
Does such a professional or service exist? Is this a domain of highly specialized "regular" lawyers? Is there a separate professional practice for academic advisors?
Clarifications:
* This is a general question; I'm not currently facing a situation on which I need advice.
* If necessary, we can limit the scope of the question to academic misconduct (plagiarism, falsifying data, cheating on exams, etc.) rather than personal misconduct.
* I will tag this as US to further limit the scope, but I'm certainly interested in any answers, regardless of the location.<issue_comment>username_1: In the United States, there is a lot of variation from institution to institution. If such an office exists, your best bet is to ask the ombuds. An ombuds is generally an impartial third party who mediates disputes within an institution. Ombuds typically cannot make binding decisions, and merely serves as an advisor between parties. Many institutions in the US have an "Office of the Ombuds", or something similar. For a couple of descriptions of what an ombuds' office may do, see:
* [University of Arizona's Ombuds](https://ombuds.arizona.edu/content/overview)
* [UC Riverside's Office of the Ombuds](https://ombuds.ucr.edu/function_services/function_services.html)
* [MIT's Ombuds Office](https://ombudsoffice.mit.edu/our-approach/our-services)
Many institutions also often maintain separate offices for addressing specific kinds of complaints. For example, most American institutions of higher learning have a Title IX office, which is meant to focus on issues of sex and gender discrimination. The Title IX office will often be tasked with investigating accusations of misconduct, and may employ one or more attorneys who specialize in Title IX cases. Such an office may also employ or authorize various semi-professional investigators or coordinators to help deal with their caseload—the [ATIXA website](https://atixa.org/about/) may give some insight. The Title IX office might work in parallel with a civil authorities (police and the courts), and may issue academic penalties (suspension or expulsion, for example) independent of a criminal case. There are attorneys who specialize in these issues, both in terms of prosecution and defense.
Most institutions also have some kind of "Academic Integrity Office" or "Offce of Student Conduct" (often housed under the umbrella of a Dean of Students). These offices are generally tasked with adjudicating accusations of cheating, plagiarism, and (if applicable) honor code violations; and may hear cases of discrimination, harassment, or sexual misconduct. Typically, this office is empowered to make decisions regarding student conduct, and can issue penalties (such as failing grades in classes, suspension, etc.). Most institutions have some kind of formal process, and the decisions are often made by a committee consisting of faculty, administrators, and/or students. Appeals generally go to a provost, president, or chancellor of an institution, and can eventually involve attorneys who specialize in academic misconduct (there are property rights associated to education, hence these kinds of issues cannot always be resolved internally). Examples include
* [University of Arizona](https://deanofstudents.arizona.edu/student-rights-responsibilities/academic-integrity), where academic integrity falls under the purview of the Dean of Students,
* [University of Nevada, Reno](https://www.unr.edu/student-conduct), which has an independent Office of Student Conduct, and
* [UC Riverside](https://conduct.ucr.edu/policies/academic-integrity-policies-and-procedures), where accusations of misconduct may be brought before the academic senate.
Depending on the nature of your question, any one of these offices (or its equivalent) might be of service. Within an institution, you might also consult with HR, the chair of your department, your dean (assuming that you are faculty), your union (assuming that you are represented by a union, either as a graduate student or as faculty or staff), an appropriate vice president's office (e.g. VP of Student Services), or an outside attorney who specializes in the appropriate field.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I’m not aware of what you are asking about existing *as a type of professional that one can retain* (as per your question) — I suspect that would be a rather poor way to make a living — but at my university there are people who are available to consult on matters such as Mary’s expulsion case.
Since Mary sounds like a graduate student, the relevant place to go would be the university ombuds office. In some cases the student union or an employee union of some sort may offer some help.
If Mary were a faculty member, she would go to a committee of our academic senate where advisers would be able to advise her if the thing she wants to complain about is a violation of her rights as a faculty member, and about the procedure for challenging the administration’s decisions.
These advisers are themselves regular faculty members like me and only do this as a “side gig” for a few hours a month, but they will have received specialized training that gives them the knowledge to offer this sort of advice (in fact I am currently on a sister subcommittee of this committee so I received a lot of the same training myself), and will also have auxiliary staff they can turn to who specialize in the relevant policy matters and can offer further information if the need arises.
These advisers won’t be available for an unlimited time. Likely they will be able to meet with Mary 2-3 times and discuss her questions, but it’s not quite the same as having your own lawyer or other professional that you retain on an hourly basis.
Since through my involvement in the sister subcommittee I am privy to faculty grievances a bit like Mary’s, I can tell you that faculty members who really need professional help with their grievance process *will* often hire a lawyer (I have also seen cases of students hiring lawyers for help with a disciplinary matter), and this can make a big difference - it’s far from easy for someone without experience in these administrative processes to navigate the system. A lawyer may not be intimately familiar with the specific institution’s policies, but broadly speaking they have the right training and skill set to help in such challenging situations. They don’t come cheap, however...
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: All that stuff would still generally be best done by **a lawyer**. Aside from being knowledgable in actual law (or at least able to look it up properly), lawyers are well-versed in finding and analysing rules/policies/procedures, and marshalling evidence and argument to achieve a desired outcome within a set of rules. The skills that lawyers use would transfer easily to internal university procedures conducted under university policies. (Note that some university procedures do not give much latitude for use of counsel, but they would almost alwayes be entitled to attend hearings, etc., and give advice.)
If you are looking for a specific type of lawyer then you probably want someone who is good in contract law, administrative law, discrimination law, and litigation. These are the main areas of law that are likely to bear on university processes relating to university disciplinary procedures. In particular, if you are dealing with a public university then they are subject to rules of *administrative law* that may go beyond their written contractual obligations, so a lawyer will be aware of legal requirements imposed on the university that its own staff may not be familiar with.
The main reason that lawyers are not usually used for this type of thing is simply that they are too expensive for internal matters like this. Nevertheless, for certain wealthy people, it would be perfectly natural for them to hire a lawyer for a matter like this, particularly if it involves a matter of high importance to them.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: An additional perspective (from a European university, if that matters), adding to already good answers. Mostly in case that someone with a concrete issue finds this question later.
I would most likely advise our grad student to **wait retaining a lawyer until absolutely necessary**. Apart from the non-negligible monetary cost of doing so, bringing your lawyer to a meeting can often be interpreted as escalating the conflict, which in systems where private disputes are rarely settled in court, will mean that the university will do likewise. As such, retaining a lawyer might close the door on amicable solutions.
I have personally seen some cases where students (possibly by online advise) will "lawyer up" in cases about minor academic misconduct (plagiarizing an assignment in a course), which promptly made our dean forward the case to the legal department -- we are not equipped to handle such things ourselves. This meant that cases which would have been handled with a slap on the wrist and a failed course, was now dragged out in a lengthy legal procedure. In such cases, consulting with the student union or university ombudsperson is almost always better.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/10/19
| 1,740
| 7,035
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was recently invited to write a letter of recommendation for a colleague applying for a tenure-track position at UCSD. The email said:
>
> Although a candidate may request to see the contents of letters of evaluation in accordance with California law and University policy, your identity will be held in confidence. The material made available will exclude the letterhead, the signature block, and material below the signature block. Therefore, material that would identify you, particularly information about your relationship to the candidate, should be placed below the signature block. In any legal proceeding or other situation in which the source of confidential information is sought, the University does its utmost to protect the identity of such sources.
>
>
>
Firstly, how does this protect my identity, if the applicant knows whom he has invited to write letters?
Second, doesn't this policy lead to worse letters, without personal anecdotes and examples?
Third, the industry standard has been to allow applicants to waive their right to see the letter, and if they don't waive that right then the letter writer may refuse to write the letter. Doesn't UCSD's policy remove this safeguard for letter-writers?<issue_comment>username_1: As I understand it, although job applicants, grad school applicants, and so on, can nominally "waive their right to see the letters", in most states this seems to be not enforceable, in the sense that it is not legally possible to genuinely waive this right.
When I've written letters, I construe peoples' waiving of "rights" to be an expression of intent, plus, an acknowledgement of the actual state of things. Yes, I've had people (misguidedly, in my opinion) *refuse* to waive these rights, which makes me wonder about their perception of things, and who's giving them advice.
And, yes, if someone is of the turn of mind to explicitly refuse to waive, I am much more guarded in my letter... ironically, usually because there are concommitant awkward issues as well.
And, yes, letter readers certainly understand that (in the U.S., in academic math, anyway) there is an expectation of at least pretending to not plan to ever demand to see the letters.
Yes, if we imagine that letter-writing should be fair and unprejudicial, then the issue of non-confidentiality might seem an unhelpful complication. However, decades ago, and, still in many scenarios, information is passed and decisions made in some sort of good-ol'-boy network rather than on a level playing field. That was, and continues to be, a bad thing, and needs pushing-back-against. (My own dept's faculty hiring has traditionally been a sort of star-chamber proceeding, and only this last year some of us have objected to it...)
So, yes, ... complications. :)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Firstly, how does this protect my identity, if the applicant knows whom he has invited to write letters?
>
>
>
The candidate has asked several people to provide letters, so there is still a possibility he will have a hard time distinguishing the letters of the different writers. It is a weak level of anonymity, but it’s something.
Also, the policy is the same for letters solicited for promotion cases, in which case the letter writers are *not* (or not only) those suggested by the candidates. So while in your specific situation it’s not particularly useful, it is quite useful in other cases.
>
> Second, doesn't this policy lead to worse letters, without personal anecdotes and examples?
>
>
>
This seems impossible to answer. It might, or it might not, and even if it is, this policy exists for a reason, see below. (By the way, I still see plenty of letters with personal anecdotes and examples, and this is in a university that follows the same policy as UCSD.)
>
> Third, the industry standard has been to allow applicants to waive their right to see the letter, and if they don't waive that right then the letter writer may refuse to write the letter.
>
>
>
I’m not 100% sure about this but I believe that at one time there was a court ruling in California that held that an employer is not allowed to keep confidential documents about an employee that the employee cannot review. Allowing the employee to see an anonymized version of the letters resolved that legal issue. By the way, as far as I know the right to view your letters only applies if you were in fact hired, so candidates that were rejected will likely never get to see the letters on their case.
As for waiving the right to see the letter, I don’t know the details, but I suspect that this right to know what your employer knows about you was seen as so fundamental that it would be illegal for an employer to require the employee to waive it. And not requiring it but only “allowing” the employee to waive it would create a kind of coercive pressure that probably amounts to the same thing. So...
>
> Doesn't UCSD's policy remove this safeguard for letter-writers?
>
>
>
It does, and yet as I said this is done for legal reasons. In any case UCSD and its sister UC campuses that use the same policy somehow are still able to attract good faculty. So seemingly the policy seems to be working okay.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_1: Another different sort of answer, that may address one of the endless elephants parading through the various rooms of academe:
In the U.S., for example, if one has been asked to write a letter for a person who arguably/documentably has significant mental health issues, treated or not, the situation is tricky.
I note that over the years I've been the target of a few "grievance hearings" at my Univ, which, to my perception, amounted to students "with issues" deciding that I was the source of their problems... in some cases because I was the only faculty person willing to talk to them.
At a personal level, of course, this was very hurtful... but, um, was "educational" about what mental health issues can be.
It is important to not a-priori discriminate against people with mental health issues, of course. Um, and, how can we civilly and appropriately describe the potential dangers to other people? I don't know.
On a sappy/naive level, it was and is very disappointing that "being nice, being supportive, spending time, being encouraging" can still leave you as a target for threatened litigation.
(Again, I emphasize, this complication is *NOT* a reason to discriminate against people with mental health issues... it is just an issue that should be attended-to, if we all are to succeed collectively. And I do not know how to do it, myself.)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: My personal solution to this and similar problems: I routinely show my letters of recommendation to the recommendee. Even if they have waived their right to see the letter, I have not waived my right to show it to them.
There are occasional instances when this isn't the right thing to do. It may well not be in the case you ask about.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/10/20
| 1,813
| 7,792
|
<issue_start>username_0: We are all aware that the *h-index* of a researcher is the metric for evaluating the cumulative impact of his/her research publications. I am asking the question regarding a doubt that arises when we compare researchers based on the h-index.
I come from a background of theoretical physics where we come across two types of researchers: (1) those who works on theory and (2) those who works on data analysis (mostly within a collaboration). For example, consider the following two researchers:
1. One is a senior professor who works on quantum field theory and string theory and has produced several outstanding papers over 25 years. **His total citations = 7311, h-index = 40, i-10 index = 57**.
2. The second has obtained his PhD in gravitational wave astronomy about 3 years ago and is presently a postdoc at Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Physics. Most of his papers involve doing data analysis as part of the gravitational waves collaboration. **His total citations = 31121, h-index = 46, i-10 index = 75**.
So, in my opinion, it wouldn't be a wise idea to compare them based on their citations and h-index since the more experienced researcher has a much lower h-index even though he has produced several outstanding papers in his area of expertise.
**My Question:**
In view of the above example:
* How do you compare the quality of two researchers when they are in different fields of research? Are there any other means to evaluate the quality of research?
* How do you evaluate researchers where most of their citations come from papers where they are one of a large number of co-authors and their non-collaborative works are cited much less often?<issue_comment>username_1: Reliance on any single index has many confounds. And these flaws are amplified when you attempt to compare academics across disciplines.
That said, there are more thoughtful ways to make use of metrics.
Here are some of the main things that should temper your use of h-index:
* **Proportion of first-author or lead-author papers (e.g., 1st, 2nd, last author)**: All else being equal, the esteem attributable to an author in publishing an academic paper is increased when the author leads the work.
* **Number of authors per paper**: All else being equal, fewer authors per paper suggests that the author of interest is contributing more to each paper.
* **Average time since publication**: Papers accumulate citations over time. So, an academic with many recent publications may have many papers that will ultimately contribute to their h-index after a period of time has elapsed for those citations to accrue the requisite number of citations.
* **Discipline-specific citation practices**: Disciplines vary in their referencing practices. The two big differences are (1) number of references per paper, and (2) citation half-life, which is to say the time it takes an article to receive half of all the citations it will ever receive. People who are in fields with more references per paper, get more citations and as a result, a higher h-index. People in fields with shorter citation half-lives see a more rapid rise of their h-index, although eventually (10 to 15 years after publication), differences in citation half-life will generally matter much less. In addition, citation databases vary in coverage of different fields (e.g., web of science probably makes biomedical researchers look much better than computer scientist compared to Google Scholar).
**What are you trying to measure?**
Here are some fairly orthogonal elements from which you can conceptually derive other indicators:
* **Annual Output**: Their contribution in partnership with others to Annual Academic Output, where output corresponds to overall value: some kind of product of both quantity and quality (or impact).
* **Personal Contribution**: The proportion of their contribution to that output.
* **Career length:** The number of years that they have been making this impact.
So, from this perspective, h-index is mostly a function of annual output, career length, and the vagaries of discipline-specific citation practices.
**Personal Contribution Indicators:**
If you are interested more in personal contribution, you might get some of the following indicators:
* Number of first-author and lead-author papers. This could be broken down based on the quality of the output as indexed by things like discipline specific journal ranking (e.g., Q1 on Scimago) or annual or total citation counts.
* Fractionated paper or citation counts. E.g., sum of papers where the value of each paper is one over the number of authors. This would mean than one sole-author paper equals 10 10-author papers. Other weightings are possible to incorporate the value assigned to first-authorship or incorporate the assumption that actually having 10 10-author papers is more valuable than 1 sole-author paper.
Productivity indicators:\*\*
If you are comparing researchers at different career stages, it can be important to control for the fact that people with longer careers have had more time to publish and more time for those publications to get cited.
If you are more interested in research productivity, then you probably want to focus on indicators of either average annual academic output or output over some recent time period (e.g., last 3 years, last 5 years, etc.).
A few indicators include the following:
* H-index divided by years since first publication. Variants include the annual rate of increase of h-index over the last five years. Note that this does not control for variation in personal contribution or discipline citation practices.
* Number of first or lead author papers per year. This could be adapted to focus on number of such papers in journals of a certain quality.
* Average annual increase in annual citation counts over the last x years.
**Summary**:
All citation-based metrics have issues. That said, if you are aware of the limitations of the different metrics and draw on a complementary set of indicators, you are more likely to make a considered assessment of an academic's research impact.
In general, it makes most sense to compare researcher metrics to discipline-specific norms. It's important to characterise their publication style: quality versus quantity, degree of involvement in each paper, small number of authors per paper versus many authors per paper, etc. And it's also important to be clear on whether you are interested in recent productivity versus total career output versus total career impact.
More importantly, metrics are heuristics. Where important decisions are being made, they shouldn't replace reading the person's actual work or seeking out assessments by knowledgable experts.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Seems like relatively easy problems to solve.
>
> How do you compare the quality of two researchers when they are in different fields of research? Are there any other means to evaluate the quality of research?
>
>
>
Compare to the median in their field. For example, search up the metrics of ~10-20 researchers in the first field and calculate their median h-index. You can also calculate the standard deviation. Then you can place the researcher into a percentile, and compare that.
>
> How do you evaluate researchers where most of their citations come from papers where they are one of a large number of co-authors and their non-collaborative works are cited much less often?
>
>
>
You can exclude outliers by removing them from your sample before calculating the h-index.
By the way, there's a relevant section in the [Wikipedia article on h-index](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H-index#Comparing_results_across_fields_and_career_levels) you might be interested in.
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/20
| 1,118
| 4,493
|
<issue_start>username_0: I made a huge mistake while doing my Ph.D. I did my Ph.D. on a topic that I was excited about but did not feel confident in. And lo behold, I got a Ph.D. in 5.5 years with skillset, which is not at par with the requirements of the openings in my area of research (computational modelling of the additive manufacturing process).
My research involved fairly simple methodology. I can publish many papers on my topic or research area in decent journals as there are several open ended questions, but that won't get me any tenure track position or industry job.
The majority of publications or grants in my research area is for experimental research. Computational research is not that hard to do and also does not get standalone grants. I should have carried out some experimental research during my Ph.D., but I was always hesitant to propose it to my bosses.
Now after graduating, I am realizing the slim prospects of landing a job with my skillset and CV. I want to do some experiments in my Postdoc position with my Ph.D. advisor. Also, I need some contacts for my next move. Will it be alright to ask my Ph.D. advisor (now postdoc advisor) for help with defining my career path?
Edit: The reason I am asking this because I am hesitant to blurt out my insecurities and my issues to my professor. I have good relationship with my advisor, I don't know if I should bother him with this.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes.
The slightly longer answer is your advisor is there to, well, advise you in any part of the academic process/life. Honestly they should be talking to you anyway above career paths, to decide things like which projects to do (to maximize academic prospects), whether additional skills/training is needed (to be competitive applying for industry positions), whether you should be thinking about fellowships/grants (which need a lot of time to write, especially the first time).
Regarding you comment about you expertise not being needed. You got a PhD in your field. First, your supervisor probably had to convince people it was worthwhile (to get funding) and you had to convince people it was worthwhile (to get the PhD). So at least some people thought it was worthwhile and the results needed. Think of it this way, you say everyone uses a simple model, well now you are the person who can provide the better model for them to use.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Most advisors don't know how to get jobs outside of academia, it's kind of humorous how delusional many of them are.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes, **and**.
Yes, because one of the hats an advisor should wear is that of a mentor who focuses on your academic and professional development. I like <NAME>'s take (in [*The Graduate School Mess*](https://books.google.com/books?id=-CioCgAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q=advisor&f=false)) on how advisors should help students rather than trying to produce copies of themselves:
>
> Advisers have to treat their students as their own people, not as family members, or worse, as potential mini-me's. Given today's job prospects, many promising scholars and teachers will choose not to pursue professorships. That decision may disappoint an adviser, but it's the adviser's job to fight such feelings. "Be suspicious," says English professor <NAME>, of advisers who "stop you from making your own mistakes and finding your own path." [...]
>
>
>
So there's an implicit assumption that advisors should help you with the next step after the dissertation. Yes, they write recommendations, but they should ideally be helping you figure out what that next step is. Hopefully they're also providing some kind of validation if you don't do what they expect.
So just *ask*. You might be surprised by the reply.
**And?** You can also look for mentors beyond your advisor. If your advisor is the kind that would treat you as a mini-me, having someone else helping you out would be huge. Even if your advisor is helping you, if they're a good mentor, they will acknowledge that you should be building connections with others. For instance, you can:
* Identify people at your postdoc institution who you could talk to about their own career trajectory or the work they've done, to learn more about your options
* Take advantage of digital conferences to meet people who do work you find interesting
* Take a class or seminar with someone who could help you transition to experimental research
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/20
| 631
| 2,520
|
<issue_start>username_0: Question as in the title. If I have got a Bibtex entry such as
```
smith2019apples
```
can I change it to, say,
```
smith2019pie
```
?<issue_comment>username_1: It is unlikely that this is specifically documented anywhere, but the answer is almost certainly no.
Article entries in Google Scholar, which contain the BibTeX link, are based on information crawled by Google on the web. This itself cannot be changed by you, even if you are the author. This is also mentioned in their [help page](https://scholar.google.com/intl/en/scholar/help.html#corrections):
>
> The description of my article is wrong and I am appropriately
> irritated. How do I correct it?
>
>
> We apologize, and we assure you the error was unintentional. Automated
> extraction of information from articles in diverse fields can be
> tricky, so an error sometimes sneaks through.
>
>
> Please write to the owner of the website where the erroneous search
> result is coming from, and encourage them to provide correct
> bibliographic data to us, as described in the technical guidelines.
> Once the data is corrected on their website, it usually takes 6-9
> months to a year or longer for it to be updated in Google Scholar. We
> appreciate your help and your patience.
>
>
>
The articles on your profile, for which you can edit some fields, are connected to these existing Scholar entries.
It appears that Google Scholar uses the format for its BibTeX entry names. Since you cannot change the title in the original crawled Scholar entry (which would not make much sense in any case), it is unlikely that you can change the BibTeX entry name either.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Yes. When you export the `.bib` file, you can run a script (Python, Ruby, shell, other, your choice) over it to transform the name Goggle Scholar gave it to whatever format you want ***after you download it*** and before you check it into your source code repository. If this is something that you do frequently, a script is really the only way to go. This isn't necessarily easy. There are some parsing libraries out there, but they all seem to have some issues which you might have to fix or fix the output of (by hand or with another script).
What you can't do as @username_1 points out, is change what Google Scholar calls it in their records since that's a programmatic construction itself that will consistently give it the name you are seeing until that code is changed by Google.
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/20
| 3,818
| 15,849
|
<issue_start>username_0: I periodically get requests from students to know their "grade so far". From what I can tell, this is becoming more prevalent, and more encouraged by administrators. And there is a box for "Total Grade" in our LMS, turned on by default, which I have to manually disable.
I feel that telling them a number might mislead. For example, this fall, the final exam is split into sections corresponding to the midterms, and students can replace each of their midterm scores by doing better on the corresponding section of the final. Also, there will be an extra credit final homework. So, even if a student is failing "so far", that doesn't necessarily mean that they're likely to fail the course.
What is the best way to address such questions? Be evasive? ("It's complicated...") Give them a number, even if misleading, along with some caveats that they might not read? Or design simpler grading schemes in the future, even if the "complicated" features were intended to be helpful?
A few remarks following the comments:
1. I have provided them with their grades on every assignment so far, and I have also told them exactly how their final grades will be computed. The issue is—the students who ask, say they're a bit confused about how well they're doing (even though I did my best to explain it clearly), and seem to want an answer like "Your average is 73% so far".
2. The students should be perfectly capable of assessing their performance so far. But they are overwhelmed, they are struggling, and they are anxious—especially this fall, with the ongoing pandemic, and where I'm teaching online and not face-to-face. And they might be afraid of hidden gotchas—some rule buried in the fine print of the syllabus, which I'm going to call them out on later (I'm not). I can sympathize with my students' desire for a simple answer.<issue_comment>username_1: One solution to this, if you are willing to change the grading scheme, is *Cumulative Grading*, which I used for many years and [explain in an answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/112251/75368) to an older post.
The student is always aware of where they are and what they need to do to achieve their goals. I found it very satisfactory and it also reduces complaints about grading.
---
A search on this site for *Cumulative Grading* will turn up some more comments on the practice.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: If I were a student, I would prefer your second suggestion: A number along with some caveats.
Basically I would want to know what I have to do in order to pass.
When I taught my first class this summer I was giving my students a number and then a short note which explained that I wouldn't be assigning letter grades until the end of the course, so I don't know their letter grade along with a sentence or two about how I personally *think* they are doing and what I think they can do to improve. This seemed to work pretty well.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: The students wants to view their grade. You don't want to provide an incomplete view.
I would recommend giving the student a spreadsheet filled with the data they have so far. This would require preparing a template with the needed formulas, then when a student, copy and paste the results of the evaluations so far in the proper cells.
This is similar to user111388 proposal of giving them a table, but better for the students as they don't need to fill anything or take the effort to calculate their grade. It's already embedded in the sheet, in the way you want.
For example, rather than showing them their "current" grade as if they received a zero on the final exam, the document may show "The student did not take the final exam", forcing them to change the cells with guesses on how well they would do on the final exam, or the different parts. You can even lead them, with questions like "Did the student retake the first midterm on final exam ?" Yes/No ("oh, so I can retake the midterm in the final exam? Interesting" -don't expect 99% to have looked it up on the syllabus-). Or, quite the opposite, make some warnings appear if the filled values seem overly optimistic.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: To give another perspective, I think by withholding their grades so far, you may actually be doing the students a favour.
I had a class where the lecturer didn't give any marks back at all during the semester. You could turn up to tutorials and consulting hours and get as much help as you wanted (within reason of course), but the actual number of your grade, or even the actual assignment was withheld - not by accident either, I distinctly remember getting an email the day after the exam saying we could collect all our coursework.
Of course we all whinged and moaned about, but in the end, it ended up being my best subject that year. I was terrified of failing so I put in a lot of effort to make sure I understood the material for the (heavily weighted) exam.
I don't know what the story behind that decision was - that particular lecturer was known for doing things like that, so he could have been making a point to the students and the university for all I know. Maybe it never happened again.
But over 10 years later, I still remember the lesson I learnt from that class: sometimes you will be in a position where there will be no feedback and you'll need to commit, so you better be damned sure you're confident in your answer.
As for how to deal with it, if you choose to go that way, just stick to your guns and bear the brunt of the questioning. I don't know how the lecturer handled it himself, but I can imagine him outright ignoring the emails, or simply saying "No."
I will add that this was a third year course, and was compulsory for the major I was taking, so the context may be different to your case.
Edit:
To address the top voted comment more visibly, I never said no feedback ever. Feedback is a very important tool for gauging your understanding. Feedback doesn't have to exclusively come from graded assessment either. I'd argue far and away the best form of feedback comes with *engaging in the course*: taking advantage of the resources given to you!
Further to that, the fear I had of failing came from (I'll be honest here) having a habit of not taking the best approach to learning, basically relying too much on graded assessment as my only practice and feedback. I'm a little embarrassed to admit it, but I'll wager I'm not the only person who has ever fallen into that trap.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: I find it helpful to describe the algorithm by which I will calculate the grades in the syllabus. Then, when I get this sort of question, I refer them to the syllabus (Yay! Maybe this means someone will actually read it someday).
By algorithm, I mean something like:
* You will get 12 homework grades, the two lowest of which will be dropped.
* Homework grades are all scored out of 64 points (yeah,
I'm teaching digital logic, so a power of two).
* Your homework average will be weighted as 40% of your grade
* ...
* The average of your exams will be weighted as 25% of your grade.
* If your weighted average is above 90%, you will get an A
* ...
It is sufficiently detailed that students can do the same math I will do. They always know exactly where they stand and exactly how well they need to do to get the outcome they desire.
This process has worked well for me for decades of teaching. I rarely get the "grades so far" question.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: I think it is a reasonable request. And that you should keep running grades for them, off of a point count, along with a calculation of what they need to do to get the next higher grade (or the like).\*
This is actually standard at the service academies. Now, granted, they emphasize teaching more than R1 schools do. But still. You might think about just emulating the practice.
\*I.e. cumulative grading, not some if-then, option value complexity.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: What I try to do in Calculus 1, is that halfway I will provide an "estimated grade" using my own ad-hoc model which I only explain vaguely and not in complete detail. I then give this grade and explain that it's very common for people to increase/decrease one partial grade (B to B+), somewhat common to increase/decrease by two, but it is rare in practice for people who continue to attend and hand in work to increase/decrease by more than that.
The reason for an ad hoc model is two-fold: if I'm dropping the lowest *two* quiz grades for the semester I should only be dropping the lowest *one* quiz grade halfway, and *exam* scores are a better predictor of *final exam* scores and the final is overweighted so I need to overweight the midterm exams in the model. By contrast, if I just turn on Canvas's option to show final grades based on the syllabus calculation it will not make these adjustments and so will systematically give grade estimates that are too high.
I think this process gives the students what they want: an estimate of what their current grade is and a reasonable idea of what their final grade is likely to be.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: >
> What is the best way to address such questions? Be evasive? ("It's
> complicated...") Give them a number, even if misleading, along with
> some caveats that they might not read? Or design simpler grading
> schemes in the future -- even if the "complicated" features were
> intended to be helpful?
>
>
>
As a general principle, I'm in favor of maximizing transparency in course procedures, and not minimizing it or being evasive. Sometimes I wrestle with colleagues over this, many of whom argue explicitly for the opposite. Students deserve clear signals about their performance level, and when they need to change direction to achieve success.
For me, I keep very simple grading procedures, and keep the weighted total visible to students in the LMS at all times. Benefits of the simplicity:
* Makes the grading procedure easy to communicate and understand.
* Allows students to verify/check grades if desired.
* Makes the weighted total meaningful throughout the term (no "resurrection" finals as someone put it).
* Makes it easy to support with a formula in the LMS (e.g., no need to delete or overwrite data for any reason at the end).
Note that I'm working at a community college which is part of CUNY, which implies some important facts about the situation in my courses. One: Despite what some comments assert, it's not a given that our students can take a grading formula and compute their own grades (even from a very simple formula with only three components). In fact, it's possible that no student of mine has ever independently done that. I routinely need to walk inquiring students through the process of taking the formula and substituting known values and coming up with a result.
Moreover, by keeping the formula very simple, and no overwriting of other data at the end, immediately prior to the final exam (which is when the bulk of the inquiries occur) there is exactly one unknown value: the final exam score itself. So when students ask, "What do I need on the final to pass?" they can actually get a concrete answer. As noted, I always need to walk them through the formula and guide them to algebraically solving for the desired final exam score. Generally they are amazed that this is possible, sometimes expostulating with delight, and take photos to document the event, etc. This may be the one and only time for them that algebra has actually solved a concrete problem that they initiated. So this itself becomes one of the capstone lessons in my courses, and I've structured the grading formula in an intentional way to support this lesson and moment of discovery.
Finally, I actually started using the LMS many years ago specifically in response to this issue. On my annual student evaluations my lowest score was in the category of, "Instructor keeps me informed of my progress". So I started using the LMS so as to have the information available to students automatically 24/7 -- and thereafter my evaluations on that item popped up to the top. Students deserve useful feedback like that, especially if they're too weak to make that determination themselves (whether through cripplingly weak math skills, Dunning-Kruger syndrome, or various other reasons).
By keeping the grading process very simple and totally transparent (via the syllabus and LMS), you'll be helping your students with clear information, assisting weaker students who can't even tell if they're in trouble, generally reducing student anxiety, reducing inquiries of this sort, and saving your personal time for more productive pursuits.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_9: Thats what a syllabus is for. Point them to the grading scheme and they can figure it out for themselves.
Halfway through the semester you could send out emails with their current grade.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: There is a lot of benefit for you going over with a student how they have done so far and what they can do to do better. If, as you say, they can still pass you should be able to explain this to them. Probably you can just have a standard document that you post that explains this. Figure for every student who asks there are 10 that are wondering but reluctant to ask.
Among other things, students need to know if they should withdraw from your class. Many institutions have deadlines by which his must occur. If a student is failing or close to failing, I think you should reach out to them before that deadline and let them know. You may think they know this, but even before the pandemic there were students who were confused, overwhelmed, having other problems which may lead them not to really understand this. (I can say this as a parent as well as a Professor -- it's shocking to me how little communication there is from some faculty and also how hard it is for undergraduates to figure out basic things like are you failing.) There is no point in fooling a student who is going to fail into staying in the class. It's no benefit to you either.
In my experience sometimes the students who are most concerned are, conversely, the pre-meds and other high performers. In their case they want to know what they have to do to get an A, and it's great if you can clarify that.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_11: Use an online gradebook that that enables some level of student access.
My students were able to log in at any time and see their current grade based on all the scores that I'd entered.
There's a bunch of them out there
<https://myelearningworld.com/top-10-online-gradebooks-to-make-teachers-life-easier/>
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_12: This is how it is done in France (we have a small set of official school software across the country - all of them are horrible), a screenshot from the portal of my son's school:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Hioqr.png)
I left the first marks because I am proud of him.
What the text pointed by the arrow says (with an exclamation mark at the end):
>
> this information is provided purely as an indication and does not engage neither the teachers, nor the school!
>
>
>
It means that the students get some insight of how well they are doing and how the conversation with the parents will be complicated, but the final mark is something independent.
This final mark is often the actual average, but sometimes teachers will modify it to account for other elements (participation etc. - usually to up it). Whether this is good or not is controversial, but at least you have a case of
* showing the marks as you go
* having a clear warning that this is not the final mark
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/20
| 1,656
| 6,741
|
<issue_start>username_0: I wonder what is the best strategy to follow to respond to students who book an appointment with you and do not show up. It is just so un-nice when this happens.
I do not want the student to be upset but at the same time to honour his/her bookings.<issue_comment>username_1: It is perfectly reasonable to ask for an explanation and, if necessary, an apology. Some students need to be taught even the simplest social niceties as they are in a new environment initially.
However, you also need to respect the privacy of the student so that a general explanation may be all that can be rightly expected. "Unexpected emergency" can be enough.
And you might even object to a "flip" excuse posing as an explanation or an obviously insincere apology.
But the sword is double edged. If you miss an appointment or are late to one, you should also apologize, of course. But lots of things can be treated as "teaching moments" that aid a person in their future career, even if it isn't "subject related."
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Maybe ask for explanation and if it's reasonable then rebook if they still need it and if it's not then ask them to not do that anymore and explain that the time could be used for other more important things.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I disagree with the posted answers, asking for an explanation is not necessary, and it would strike me as pretty rude and weird if a professor emailed me back to say "*Why* didn't you make the meeting?" Especially if I missed it for highly personal reasons. They aren't my parent or mentor.
Give them until the end of the workday or so, and if they haven't apologized or reached out, something appropriate to say would be:
>
> Student,
>
>
> Please give me a heads-up if you aren't able to make your meeting, so that I don't wait too long for you. If you would still like to meet, please (let me know/schedule online).
>
>
>
If the student has a reasonable excuse (got sick, personal emergency), they will likely let you know. Sometimes they'll let you know even if it's unreasonable.
If not, they will still have learned their lesson about oversleeping, etc. by understanding they disappointed you and interrupted your day.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: It’s not just students who do this. Every professional I know - doctors, lawyers, professors, psychotherapists etc - regularly has experiences with people who make appointments and don’t show up. I think the best course of action is to accept that this happens and save your energy and outrage for other things. There is no point in contacting the student. They may contact you later to apologize and/or try to reschedule, or they may not; it’s up to them and beyond your control.
At least be thankful that as a professor you don’t lose income when this happens (unlike many other professionals) and are free to use the time to do other useful work. One trick I’ve learned is that when I have an appointment coming up with a student, especially one that I don’t know well, I sometimes prepare in advance some unrelated work to do while I wait for them to show up (usually minor tidbits like sending off some emails), keeping in mind that I could be waiting a lot longer than I expected...
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Back when this was something I had to deal with, I would:
1. Always have something to do if someone doesn't show up for their appointment, or if their question gets resolved very quickly.
2. Write brief emails to no-shows along the lines of
>
> Dear X:
> I'm following up on our appointment today at 14:00. I hope everything is OK with you.
> Let me know if your question is still relevant and you would like to reschedule.
> If you answered your own question, I'm glad, but next time I'd appreciate
> a heads up for scheduling purposes. Ditto if something came up and you just couldn't
> make it. See you in class tomorrow, I hope!
>
>
>
3. Get progressively more direct if people missed several appointments, to the extent of refusing to make further appointments (leaving the student the option to come for the office hour I had for appointment-free visits every week).
Note the tone of the email in point 2 is not demanding of an explanation (or indicating a desire to judge whether excuses provided are adequate), but is also openly asking for a change in behaviour, without pulling rank or going passive-aggressive. Generally I got belated apologies and improved future behaviour. And a couple of times the "I hope everything is OK", meant genuinely, surfaced that something pretty dire had happened (where a pure chastising email soliciting an apology would have been cringingly tone-deaf!), including a student on the verge of an emotional breakdown where we were able to get them help.
Now, a couple of decades later, I'd still do the same -- and suspect I've written stuff not too dissimilar in tone to peers and superiors too!
Basically: **be frank about what you need to change, don't make an investigation of it, and open the door to empathy.**
**Editing to add**: Comments/other answers have pointed out potential different *cultural* expectations, and/or that the tone is not optimal if there *turns out to have been a real emergency*. Regarding the first, agreed: needs to be tempered by cultural norms. But if student behaviour feels outside of local norms, do go ahead and address it. Regarding the 2nd, also true. At the risk of going very math/stats-nerdy, there is a Bayesian prior regarding what caused the missed appointment. My answer assumes the Bayesian prior is fairly flat between emergency, forgetfulness, student self-absorbtion/failure to consider from others' point of view, and overall excessive academic stress. The tone tries to be acceptable and hopefully effective in all these instances. If your Bayesian prior is more heavily weighted to one pole, your optimal tone will change. This includes repeat offenders (where the Bayesian prior weighs more heavily on self-absorbtion), reason to suspect emergencies, etc.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_6: **Nothing**
As other answers have suggested it’s good to have another task to be doing in office hours and I choose times when I am likely to be not my most productive anyway. I don’t pay much attention if students don’t turn up. They don’t intend it to be a personal slight, in my experience at least. Some are forgetful, some have difficult lives, and some are just a bit crass. At the end of the day, I’d sooner spend longer with those that do come than chide those that don’t.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: I would just brush it off. If they really need it, they will come back or email you
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/20
| 1,191
| 5,564
|
<issue_start>username_0: My post is more related to private research than academic research, but as I think they could be strongly related, I thought this would be the most appropriate place to ask.
I have recently started working for a small startup in Brazil, where we conduct intensive research to develop a product. However, I have some doubts about how this is done in terms of ethics and licensing.
I am also student of a federal university and so I could freely access non-open-source papers via proxy or via Google CASA. However, I do not think this would be ethical since my work research is not related to the university, so I use to conduct the work research on anonymous browsing. However, my workmate researches using Mendeley and share with me pdfs of the papers, which are frequently non-open-access material. I have already questioned her about it, but she thinks it is everything ok and I'm not so sure of it, as brazilian people do not care much about these things. About this:
1. Am I right in thinking that university students should not use the free-access benefit to access papers for work?
2. If she is having access to non-open-access papers via Mendeley, does this mean that her university account is being used somehow or is it possible for a personal account to have this benefit via Mendeley?
3. Since the pdfs are being shared internally but we are not making any business on themselves but on the knowledge we absorb from them, would this be considered commercial-use or be infringing any license/copyright terms?
If the answers to these questions point that the company's research conduct is beign wrong, I would appreciate to make things right. I wish we could be successful following the most ethical, legal and responsible ways, so I have one remaining question, maybe the most important one:
* What does a research company need to have a research power close to a university, i.e., to have a free/viable access to research from the most important publishers? Does research companies invest on buying every single material, limit their work only for open-acess or is there any kind of program for research in private companies?<issue_comment>username_1: I approach the ethics of this question in terms of society membership.
If a person is a serious member of a research community, they should be helping to support that community in a number of ways, including paying money to help support the publications maintained by its research societies. Universities generally both support societies and provide access by means of their libraries, which maintain institutional subscriptions to everything above a certain level of popularity, with the cutoff determined by their budget.
For well-established companies with a significant presence in research and development, it will typically work in exactly the same way. For example, where I work we have somebody in charge of library services who maintains institutional access to all the frequently needed collections of publications.
But what about when a company isn't well established or if the library doesn't cover a publication?
I do *not* believe that it is reasonable to pay for random individual articles. The problem is that you usually can't tell if the article will be of any use until you've got the PDF, and you often have to go through many such articles in many different publication venues to find which ones actually matter. If you start using a society's publications frequently, however, then you should support the society: either you should ask the library to subscribe or you should get an individual membership that gives you access (as is often the case).
With startups, I do think there is a reasonable grey area. The company is likely operating on a shoestring budget and doesn't have the ability to establish anything like a library. But people in the startup often legitimately "wear multiple hats" where they are also part of a university and part of their responsibility in the university includes helping to transition technology via the startup. Thus, I would expect that startups reasonable exist on an ethical continuum, where many small and early startups effectively shade into the universities they are affiliated with, but over time should transition to maintaining their own subscriptions as part of becoming an established citizen of the scientific community.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Here is how it used to work:
1. The university bought journal articles from a publisher.
2. The publisher printed and mailed the article to the university.
3. Any random person could walk into the university library and read the article.
4. The random person could use what they learned to make money, so long as they did not violate any patents. The patents issue is
unrelated to the copyright on the article.
In my opinion, using your student account to access electronic journal articles through a university subscription and then using what you have learned to make money is ethically equivalent to the steps listed above, which have always been ethically acceptable. As a student, you should be encouraged to learn as much as possible, even if that learning is not related to your degree program.
However, **legally** you must follow your university's policies. We do not know what those policies are. They may impose some limits on the purposes for which you can use the university's resources.
Do not consume university resources for the profit of a private business. Reading a journal article is not consumption.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/21
| 978
| 4,051
|
<issue_start>username_0: I emailed to a professor about a research question. In most cases I reply to them asap. In some scenarios I think I cannot do this asap because:
1. He asked me a very difficult question that takes a long time to get an answer.
2. I don't have any further questions for now. But I might have them in the future.
3. He does not show any interests on me. He's response is professional yet short (little interests). He does not ask me any questions. I don't have too much to say.
From what I read on this site, people seem to suggest that, since a professor reads thousands of emails, I should not bother to send another email unless it includes a considerable amount of new information.
However, my advisor told the contrary: to show respects, I should almost always send the last email: professors can ignore me but I cannot ignore them. For example, in case 1 I can say that "I will spend more time on this problem", in case 2&3 I can say that “Thank you for your answers. May I email you again if I have other questions later?". My advisor said something like: although everyone is equal, there is still a hidden "hierarchy" thing: lower people are expected to show more respects and do more works to maintain the relationships. I think he is trying to be honest here.
What is the standard etiquette in USA?<issue_comment>username_1: The higher on the hierarchy people are, the less they will care about this.
The reason is simple: They don't even notice if you don't send an email.
If you had ever seen a professor's inbox, you'd understand just how many very important emails they receive. You can safely assume that they won't even remember that High GPA didn't send the last email in an exchange. You are lucky if they remember you at all (unless they know you personally).
Now, politeness is a very cultural concept. If your own culture and conscience requires sending a "thank you" email, by all means, send it. Usually, it will just be ignored, but there is a chance that someone will appreciate it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In the US, many professors really don’t like the idea that students tremble in fear at any interaction with them, and/or regard them as a class of semi-divine beings who need to be constantly flattered and paid homage to. Any idea that the student’s actions are motivated by ideas like
* “*hierarchy*”
* “*I should not bother to send another email unless it includes a considerable amount of new information*”
* “*I should almost always send the last email*”
* “*professors can ignore me but I cannot ignore them*”
* “*lower people are expected to show more respects and do more works to maintain the relationships*”
* “*Is it impolite to not to respond to professors' replying email asap?*”
* etc
will be seen as upsetting and in many cases offensive to such professors.
The standard etiquette in the US is therefore to treat the professor with the same respect and professionalism that you yourself expect to be treated with (and that any professional person *ought to* expect to be treated with) by anyone in a professional working environment. That is, if the context of the email requires an urgent response, then you should answer with a corresponding urgency and immediacy; and if it doesn’t, then you should answer within a time frame that makes sense for that context. The fact that you are a student emailing a professor has no effect on whether the time interval to answer an email is polite or impolite.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I agree with username_2's post above. The advice that your advisor shared does not, in my opinion, reflect US culture. As a professor, I am not offended or upset if a student does not reply to an email UNLESS I stated within the email that I needed a response. If a student does not send me a reply, I assume that my email addressed their concerns and that no further explanation is needed at the moment. Some of my students will reply with a brief 'thank you,' but this is not necessary.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/21
| 645
| 3,025
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have submitted my research work for a conference in data science, after two months of review it got weak rejection. So I decided to submit it to another conference (the submission was closed so I contacted the chair asking them if it possible and they reopened the submission system for me because I have a positive record with them and multiple publication for the last ten years). The first conference is A ranked and the other is B.
Now, the first conference contacted me telling me that I can submit my work to their symposium and the paper will be appeared as normal full paper in the final indexing. My paper now is already under the review process with the B ranked conference. But, I would love to have in my records a publication with the first A ranked conference.
Can I contact the second conference again and ask them to cancel my submission? is such a thing acceptable in academia? because I am really looking to have the record with the first one. I am in my final year in the phd and will not publish anything soon because I am planing to start my thesis soon.<issue_comment>username_1: One way to deal with this is, to be honest. Tell this immediately to the second one. You can choose or decide upon the further course of action once the first is done.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: In general it is indeed a bad practice to cancel a submission, especially if some days have elapsed and the review process has started. The editor might have already dedicated significant time examining the submission, finding and assigning appropriate reviewers for its topic, etc. It is even possible that he has already sent it to reviewers and that they have already started their review.
In your case, since I understand that you asked for your paper to be reviewed as a favour after the submission system had already closed, it might even be slightly worse, since the editor made an exception for you.
If you are really sure that appearing in the symposium of the first conference is important for you and your career, you can probably indeed ask for a second favour from the second conference's chair. If you do so, I would recommend explaining the situation and apologising quite profusely. I would suggest ensuring that in your explanation it is clear that conference A is a unique and important opportunity for you.
Personally, I would be somewhat annoyed, but I wouldn't consider it unacceptable. Make sure, also, that the chair has no reason to believe that you submitted the paper to his conference while it was still under review for the first one. That would indeed be unacceptable, and could do great damage to your reputation.
Also, before you do this, you should probably make sure that you understand the terms in which you would be accepted into the first conference. Being accepted into the symposium is likely not the same thing as being accepted into the main track; and it might be treated very differently from an indexing or a rating perspective.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/21
| 1,466
| 6,027
|
<issue_start>username_0: There are many websites who let people anonymously attack studies just to disparage the authors. An example is Pubpeer (I confess that I had never heard of it before being warned by a colleague).
If I have my work attacked on a swindler website that protects the accuser's identity while exposing the author to embarrassment, what do I do?
1. Ignore it?
or
2. Get into an argument to prove that you are being deconstructed in a
dishonest manner?<issue_comment>username_1: It is probably a mistake to react in any way to cranks, no matter what they do. Consider that the [Streisand Effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect) will just amplify their words.
Even a law suit is unlikely to be beneficial for the added reason that the people involved probably have too few assets to make it worth the effort, especially when you add in the additional publicity they get.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I know pubpeer only for being sued by a researcher who, it turns out, had to subsequently retract over 40 papers. So I wouldn’t call them a “swindler website” or probably the ACLU wouldn’t have gotten involved in defending them. If you get hit by a genuine crank, all you can do is ignore it - getting into an online argument is never a good idea. If it reaches genuinely defamatory levels, there is of course a court option. As these comments are left by anonymous users, I’d at least try to reach out to the site owners first.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: To some extent it depends on the website and the way they work. If at all possible there, I think I'd write a rebuttal in the most rational and unemotional style. I also think that scientific argument should not rely on the names of the people who argue. A criticism is not invalid or "swindle" just because the author is anonymous. Obviously there is unfair criticism and it may happen that somebody writes something "just to disparage the authors", but there are other reasons to remain anonymous, particularly the fear of having the own career sabotaged by influential people that can't take criticism. Criticism in my view is essential for science in order to improve, and all too often published results are taken as "true" by readers without checking the argument in any detail.
Ultimately in the eye of the impartial reader the style of the critic may or may not discredit itself, and if it doesn't, I'd say it is worth a proper reply. I appreciate people who react to criticism in an open-minded and reasonable way, and I'm surely not the only one. Obviously chances are it isn't worth the time to get engaged in a long debate, particularly if the criticism is based on lies and misrepresentations, however I would want to leave at least one reply making my point clear in a way that a neutral reader can see what my take on this is, and that I am willing to address issues in my work.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I'm not sure what other "anonymous websites" are you referring to, but [PubPeer](https://pubpeer.com/) in particular is not something I would associate with a term like "swindler website". I would recommend everyone unfamiliar with PubPeer to take a look at [their FAQ](https://pubpeer.com/static/faq) to judge for themselves whether their rules and procedures are rigorous enough for a legitimate post-publication discussion platform.
First and foremost, one of the key principles of PubPeer is that every comment needs to be factual and verifiable:
>
> Q: What can my comment contain? Facts, logic and publicly verifiable information.
>
>
> A: By far the most important rule for commenting is to base your statements on publicly verifiable information.
>
>
> …
>
>
> Allegations of misconduct are forbidden on PubPeer. They are anyway unnecessary. Your audience on the site is mostly composed of highly intelligent researchers and scientists. They are quite capable of drawing their own conclusions if the facts are clearly presented.
>
>
> You should also avoid personal comments about authors and speculation about researcher actions and motives.
>
>
>
All comments on PubPeer are moderated to ensure they comply with the rules. You mention your work being "attacked", "disparaged" or "deconstructed in a dishonest manner"; does that mean the comments in question were in violation of these rules, or just that they perhaps exposed uncomfortable yet real weaknesses of the work?
Either way, the preferred course of action is to follow the FAQ again:
>
> Q: My paper has been commented! What can I do?
>
>
> A: PubPeer offers you a permanent right of reply. **We encourage you to respond on the site.** There are special facilities for indicating author responses. We believe that honest, careful and competent authors should provide “after sales service” for their publications, by clarifying any points that readers find unclear.
>
>
>
By engaging in the discussion, you can explain points of your work that were perhaps misunderstood by the commenter or inadequately supported by the data included directly in the paper.
Finally, note that whatever you publish would always get discussed both in public (at conferences or in journals) and in private (at various group and department meetings or Journal Clubs around the world). PubPeer just provides a convenient platform for such discussion that can work in the 21st century. The alternative of publishing thousands of articles like "Comment on Comment on Paper X" simply does not scale given current publication volumes.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Many of the answers here suggest that you should not respond to low-quality public criticism. This is a good approach. An alternative approach is to reply with:
>
> Thank you for your interest in my research.
>
>
>
This reply has two functions.
* Some malicious criticism will be deterred if the criticizer realizes the researcher is watching them.
* It indicates the researcher is not willing to get involved in debate.
Upvotes: 3
|
2020/10/21
| 4,979
| 21,446
|
<issue_start>username_0: This is a 101 philosophy class in an online format. Each week we have over 100 dense pages of a textbook to read as our sole source of information for the class. The teacher does not do any teaching and relies on the textbook.
Obviously a textbook is beneficial but especially for a 101 class, it is difficult to grasp these complex ideas without the input from your professor. Is this wrong? I am having a hard time understanding concepts and actually learning. No lectures or actual teaching. There are no actual in-class sessions: the work is posted at the beginning of the week and we submit by the end. Other classes I take in this format have provided lectures but this one does not. He only grades the work we did. Being paid to provide no expertise and guidance, only grade?
The assignments are discussions and quiz questions based on chapters in the text, that have to be usually 750 words or more. When he grades them he sometimes comments and says "yes that is true". It is one discussion with usually 2 open ended questions and 2 quiz questions that are long open ended each week.
Further remarks following the comments:
1. Typically, discussions for this class are not beneficial because most people don't actually engage and debate/ go back and forth. We do not have discussion it is solely our interpretation of the readings. Most just say "I agree with what you said and I like this part..". So it is not actually helping us learn and debate. But I cannot blame my classmates because the discussion we have to post are over 750 words so why would they want to read something similar to what they wrote. They can only do so much, they are not doing anything in this case except for grading which is frustrating to me.
2. There is only 21 people in the class. Obviously that is a lot of grading to do but he assigned it and could set the word count to be lower if he chose to. Most teachers reuse the same assignments and discussion questions each year or get them from the textbook. Every module/unit has been posted since September, so he is not lesson planning each week. He only has to grade each week, I am not denying that is a lot of reading but can you understand that it is frustrating for a student to not receive any actual instruction, but I am still spending a lot of money to take the course?
3. The professor has not mentioned any office hours. I have not tried sending questions by e-mail; will try that and see if I get any useful responses.<issue_comment>username_1: Sorry to disappoint you, but this sounds like a perfectly good teaching method, especially for philosophy. It is akin to the [Socratic Method](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_method) in which the "teacher", Socrates or Plato, asks leading questions and then reflects on the answers, especially if they are seriously wrong.
The instructor is, I think, trying to teach you to "think", not to listen.
But take advantage of the situation by asking questions whenever you have them. You might also ask whether it is proper to form discussion groups among your peers on the material.
If you can be successful in such an environment then you are well placed for future study. There is nothing to condemn here.
And note that a person doesn't "learn" because of what the teacher does. They learn because of what they do themself. If the professor provides meaningful resources, meaningful exercises to reinforce the ideas, and meaningful feedback on student attempts they are doing their job. Don't confuse "lecturing" with "teaching". Either can occur without the other.
---
Learning isn't a spectator sport. It is an activity.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If I understand correctly, the professor has:
* assigned readings
* facilitated online discussions
* given written assignments and quizzes, and graded them
But:
* the professor does not himself participate in any activities (lectures or discussion)
* the online discussion format does not lead to many useful interactions with peers
* the professor gives only superficial feedback to written assignments
This does seem like poor practice. You are attending university partially to gain from the *professor*'s expertise, rather than just reading books and discussing with peers. This is a class, not a book club. I acknowledge that there is a legitimate teaching style that involves activities, discussion, group work, and/or individual interactions rather than lecturing. But if your professor is as hands-off as you describe, I do not believe he is using this method, or at least not effectively. At a minimum, I submit that he should provide more detailed feedback (even at the cost of grading fewer assignments) and post a few comments in the discussion board to raise the level of the debate.
Despite this, I doubt there is much you can do. The professor did curate a course for you, facilitated group discussions, and is grading several pages per student per week (which may be a significant time investment). So unfortunately, I doubt that complaining to the department would lead to significant changes, at least in the short term.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: I'm teaching in a philosophy department and I believe students definitively sometimes need explanations and/or explications to clarify concepts before even being able to use them in a discussion. The distinction between the ontic and the epistemic planes is a case in point. Also, you cannot just have them "discussing" things aimlessly in the mere 50 minutes that a seminar session lasts for.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: I agree with username_1's answer here that, in principle, your professor's teaching method here is sound - and, in fact, for particular kinds of subject matter, may be much preferable to a more "traditional" structure. But I also agree with username_2's answer, that it sounds like this may be a poorly executed example of an otherwise sound teaching strategy. I want to complicate things a little, here, though.
Most schools have now been fully online for three academic quarters, one of them summer. Many faculty do not teach at all in summer quarter, because enrollment is lower and there are fewer classes to teach. So this is likely your professor's second quarter - *ever* - teaching fully online. And, speaking as a professor myself, teaching is itself a skill, and online teaching is a very different version of that skill. Just like you wouldn't expect yourself to master philosophy in one quarter, don't expect your professor to master online teaching in one quarter. And yes, other professors may be doing better - but other students may be doing better than you are, and that doesn't mean you don't deserve support. And, just as a little window into the life of an instructor: I received a grand total of *one week* of training in online teaching, and that was outside of my contract hours, so I was mostly unable to attend because my other jobs got in the way. Your instructor's situation might well be similar.
So, you're probably right to feel like the professor should be doing more here. My advice is to think about what exactly would help you learn that you think would be in the professor's power to provide. Would it help to have video office hours where you can talk through ideas with him? Would it help for him to record short "commentary" video or audio to accompany the readings? Would it help for him to participate directly in the class discussions, and if so, how - since it presumably *wouldn't* help for him to just take control of those discussions? Once you have a couple of concrete suggestions, contact your instructor directly (or, if you want to be anonymous and are okay with waiting, put them on the evaluation form many schools provide at the end of the quarter). I can't promise he'll take those suggestions, of course, but I know that's what I would want from my students.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Yes, you're right to be frustrated with what your teacher does not teach, but the problem may be more with remote learning than with the class itself. From what I've read, many students do not like their remote learning experience as discussed in [How College Students Viewed This Spring's Remote Learning](https://www.insidehighered.com/digital-learning/article/2020/05/20/student-view-springs-shift-remote-learning) for example.
I've taken online courses in coursera.org and while I found them good, I found support and interaction sporadic, some courses had none whatsoever. So, your frustration seems to me to be part of remote learning in general as most teachers haven't developed a good method for teaching remotely; Teachers were trained for in-person classes that haven't translated well to remotely located students who are forced to rely on blogs, forums, emails, texting, etc, that do not result in consistent response to their questions and needs. For example, if you ask a "stupid" question in class you will get an answer whereas if you ask it in a forum, you will get nothing or a snarky comment that doesn't help you.
My guess is that colleges are trying to deal with your reality, such as [Remote Teaching Good Practices: Beyond the Tech](https://sites.dartmouth.edu/teachremote/remote-teaching-good-practices/), but they aren't there yet and until they are, you will not have a good learning experience without a lot more effort on your part to fill in the holes that your instructor and other students are not filling.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Different people learn in different ways. It may be that the way your professor is expecting you to learn is the way that he finds most effective for him to learn, and he assumes it will be most effective for you too.
A perfect teacher provides resources and opportunities to suit many different learning styles. There are not many perfect teachers.
If you have 100 pages of text to cover, you probably couldn't get through that in one hour of lecture.
If the professor is not good at the kind of lecturing you are hoping for, then you might well find that his attempt to provide it would be even less useful than what he is currently providing.
It doesn't matter whether you are right to be frustrated, the important thing is that you are frustrated.
I suggest you prepare and ask one question about the course material each week. You might be pleasantly surprised by the answers.
I suggest you look at alternative sources of information, such as Coursera and edX.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: In addition to all of the other, good ones: It is worth keeping in mind that "teaching" is not the same as "lecturing", even if maybe in your past, teaching has always taken the form of lecturing.
At its core, "teaching" means "facilitating learning", and that can happen in many different forms. Lecturing is one approach, but we know from educational research that it is often not the best one.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: I would expect a professor at this level of class to lecture (that is, teach). It is important to guide students through the material.
Due to COVID restrictions, one could use virtual meeting strategies (e.g. 'Zoom', etc.) to protect people. However, there should be view-able lectures.
What does your course catalog say about the course? What does the syllabus say?
Economically, sometimes a school will offer a refund, but that is highly variant depending on which school, what type, which country it is in, and so forth.
Best wishes with this.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: OK, I'll say the elephant in the room. For most students Philosophy 101 is very likely a course taken purely to meet general education requirements. This is just as true at traditional four year institutions as at community college. Actual philosophy degrees only make up less than half of a percent of total four year degrees.
Most people in your class have no interest in learning about philosophy. They do not want lectures, they do not want feedback, they only want a grade (preferably a passing one). And they would prefer to not spend a lot of time on this class, since they don't care about it and they have other competing things that they want to spend time on.
Any feedback from you that the professor did not teach enough will be counterbalanced by feedback from other students if the course becomes more time consuming. The professor and department know this and are probably mindful of how much they can require of students for this particular class. So you can certainly write a complaint in the end-of-course evaluation, but you shouldn't expect that much action will be taken based on it.
Instead, I recommend that you just avoid course sections that are in formats that you don't like.
1. You can find online review sites (e.g. RateMyProfessor) where other students will post reviews specific to the course and instructor. If you read between the lines, you can find courses where there is lots of interaction with the instructor. Try looking for "makes the information interesting" or "includes a lot of personal anecdotes" or similar description.
2. You can make a few friends who have been at the school longer than you and ask them for personal recommendations.
3. You can sometimes find the syllabus from previous semesters (or the syllabus for upcoming semesters posted early) and get a feel for the communication style of the professor and the types of assignments.
4. Most schools have a drop/switch date after the beginning of the semester (maybe in the first week or two) where you can potentially switch to another section of the same class for free if you don't like the teaching style.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: So, there's a lot of decent advice in this thread but the question (correct me if I'm wrong) seems to be asking four things:
1. Is this a normal way to teach? (prevalence)
2. Is this an acceptable way to teach? (quality)
3. Will I be expected to learn under these circumstances going forward? (predictability)
4. Are my feelings about this situation valid? (validation)
with the third and fourth questions stemming primarily from a lack of comparison (freshman in college).
So to answer your sub-questions:
1. **It's "normal" as in people do it, but it is definitely not the norm.** Many professors get hired because they are brilliant researchers. Some researchers are passionate about education and go above and beyond to make sure their students understand the material. Some are not. Lectures, even for online courses, have included supplementary material - be it PPT files, practice exams with solutions, pre-recorded videos, office hours, or additional literature - for every single course I've taken, including courses where the professor just read out of the book. I would say most professors prepare more for their students than this one does. That said, others will have different experiences. Take my assessment with a grain of salt.
2. **Depends on whom you ask.** Some people like being able to do work at their own pace without having lectures (which sometimes raise more questions than they answer if the instructor makes mistakes). Some professors - brilliant as they are - are disconnected from their students and simply do not have realistic expectations for what people can learn on their own. Some students are comfortable learning that way, and would have just absorbed the textbook regardless of the instructor. Expecting some sort of supplementary material or help is more than reasonable, though.
3. So here's the thing. **After high school, you will be expected most anywhere you go - whether it's in academia or in industry - to more or less teach yourself.** College is about "learning how to learn," so at a certain point you should be prepared to learn material on your own whether the instructor is "good" or not. The expectation is that you are a self-driven adult, and that you know how to ask questions and get the answers - whether it's from a person (like a professor or teaching assistant) or a reference source (book, tutorial, article).
I think this expectation is limited; yes, you need to develop the skills to learn effectively and resiliently. But I also think some (keyword: some) people use this mindset as a reason to excuse low-quality education and absolve instructors of responsibility that they place onto the students. Everyone starts as a beginner somewhere, and expecting people to pay high opportunity costs to not receive the attention or resources they need is baffling. I absolutely agree that **students should be held accountable for being active learners and taking initiative, but they also need a foundation from which they can begin to ask and answer those questions.**
4. This question, while fine, is not really suited for StackExchange. It's subjective and not actionable. However, **whether it's valid to strangers on the Internet is irrelevant. You deserve to feel however you want.** Even if he were an engaging and focused professor, you don't have to enjoy his teaching style or have a high opinion of his teaching.
Furthermore, the problem will not be solved with feelings. **It might help to treat this situation as the first trial of many in life. And to do that, as per others' suggestions, look into other resources and research the professors before enrolling going forward.** If it's too late to drop the course, just try your best to learn as much as you can. With that in mind, **make sure to take care of yourself** above everything else. Sometimes students' mental health really takes a backseat in academia and that should never be the case; your health and well-being should be supported by your education, rather than the other way around. If your frustration bubbles over into something more dangerous, please leverage mental health services.
(And on a personal note, I felt the exact same way as you about this teaching style when I was in college and can sympathize a lot. This, too, shall pass. You can do it! :) )
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: Ok Lori:
The most important thing here is for you to note lose your focus from your primary reasons for being in school and for taking this class. There will be many occasions in the rest of your life where you will feel like you're being shortchanged by someone and you have no recourse. It will be frustrating and you will feel like the deck is unfairly stacked against you. But you cannot allow those circumstances to derail you from your mission.
Some more observations:
1. College is hard and reading a 100 pages a week is super challenging when you first encounter it. The skill you need to develop is to first focus on how to get a bigger picture understanding. Try to see how the ideas in a particular chapter connect to those in other chapters. Once you have this big picture, it will enable you to have some context for a particular week's material and help you absorb it better. This is a critical skill you need to develop.
2. No lectures, particularly for freshmen, is a bit rough. If you were a graduate student in a Ph.D. program then this would be totally acceptable but its a touch extreme for freshmen undergrads. But these are the cards you've been dealt. Make an appointment with the teacher to discuss what you can do to get a better handle on things. The teacher might give you good tips. Always be ready to reach out for help. If the teacher is unresponsive then reach out to the department head. Not to complain but to explain how you're finding the current setup difficult and what you can do to help yourself. Again, don't complain to the professors. They are human and they may start to tune you out if you do. Try to work with them to get tips on how to absorb the material better. It's possible that the department and the teachers are jaded and don't care about the quality of instruction for elective courses but as humans they might try to help you at a one-on-one level.
3. It's ok to be frustrated but try to use this energy to empower yourself. Look inwards to see if there is anything in your own study approach that can be changed. College is supposed to be several levels harder than high school and it is supposed to challenge you and stretch you. It's possible that the teacher is mailing it in or it's possible that you're not used to a more challenging environment and you need to step up your game... or both. Try to empower yourself to change your circumstances here. Worst case, since its already October end, at least commit to not letting this course hurt your GPA.
Good Luck!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_12: Yes, you are absolutely right to be frustrated. I am a professor who is also taking a graduate course in physics. My professor goes over the home work for the first 45 minutes of class and then asks if there are any questions. I have asked him if he plans to ever lecture. He said no, and this is how he does things (meaning COVID or no COVID). I am not sorry, but no way. This is truly a disappointing experience. I was hoping for brilliant lectures and inspiring conversations with my classmates. But its more of a recitation class being led by a well-meaning graduate student, rather than a course with a professor. What we are being taught is the antithesis of how to think. We are being to taught that solving a set of problems is more important than mastering techniques.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/10/22
| 731
| 3,081
|
<issue_start>username_0: From an outsider/student's view, STEM professors are:
1. not taking courses
2. mostly not doing things outside of their research comfort zones
3. not (?) studying up much except for their research, certainly not doing exercises from the back of a book and looking up solutions somewhere
4. some graduated 40 years ago or even more.
5. teaching the same course for past 20 years, which let's face it, is sort of like teaching history with numbers.
6. not visibly getting taught by their research students or anyone else for that matters.
How is it that a lot of the professors are publishing cutting edge research (especially in STEM) involving the latest tech and gadgets? If I am not reading the news, I wouldn't know what Apple is doing right now let alone develop an algorithm that mimics what their Face Recognition AI is doing.
How is it possible that a professor with a PhD in analog circuit back in the 70s could do research in today's massive microchip fabrication process when a tremendous amount of information/material is needed to get up to speed both in terms of theory and practical knowledge? Do these professors have fabrication facilities in their garage or something? How would they know without being in industry or taking a course?
How is it possible that a professor with a PhD in numerical optimization from the 80s where the latest and the great was quasi-Newton method is doing research on the latest deep learning algorithm? How can this person even be proficient at this? Are they taking courses on Coursera or something?
How do you do it?<issue_comment>username_1: In short, your premises are wrong.
* Professors read papers to learn.
* Professors meet with their peers, both at conferences and informally, and learn from them.
* Professors do learn from their research students.
These are slow methods of learning, but over many years they add up.
Further, in fast-moving fields of research, nobody "keeps up" in the sense of knowing everything that is going on. It isn't necessary to know everything that is already known to create new knowledge.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: By having PhD students and post docs. Not saying professors don't do research but a big part is having the idea then handing it off to a student/post doc who does the research. PhD students gets to spend 3-4 years becoming the expert in their tiny subfield. At some point the PhD student will start teaching the professor new things. Post docs help to really push an idea forward and make progress. Master students are also helpful in "testing the waters" in new areas. It doesn't matter so much if their research goes no where but can be a helpful probe to see if an idea has some merit.
Professors are also usually usually the ones organising conferences and sitting on the committee's deciding who gets to speak and who gets money. So not only do they get a front row seat to learning what people are doing, and where the field is going they are also the ones helping to direct where their field goes.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/22
| 569
| 2,217
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've heard various occasions where students with mediocre bachelor's degree grades, but superb master's degree grades, get rejected by PhD programs due to their poor bachelor's degree grades.
What could be the rationale behind focusing on the now likely outdated bachelor's degree grades when more recent and up-to-date master's degree grades are available?
(Note I am not guessing they were rejected due to their bachelor's degree grades, the professor who interviewed and wanted to take the student in, explicitly stated that he/she could not due to the student's poor bachelor's degree grades)<issue_comment>username_1: In the U.S. and in math, at least in my experience, graduate grades tend to be less reliable measures than undergraduate grades for how one did in a class. Graduate grades tend to be A -- "good" **to** "excellent", B -- "total-incompetence-but-attended-class" **to** "acceptable", C -- essentially you failed (for some programs, you're gone if you accumulate 3 C's).
Universities and departments range **from** "B's are rarely given and C's are almost never given" **to** "A's tend to be given for work consistent with passing the Ph.D. qualifying exam in the subject", B's tend to be "not horrible" to "good-but-not-exhibiting-future-Ph.D.-potential-performance", and perhaps a few C's are given for especially bad work.
Nonetheless, I would think nearly all A's and well above average recommendations in a Masters program would undo all but the very worst of undergraduate grades, and maybe even those. But a 3.3 Masters average and typical-good-sounding recommendations are not going to undo a 2.8 undergraduate average in one's major.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In the US, graduate class grades tend to be inflated. If you're applying to a prestigious place, it might be the case that they can't accept everyone who got straight-A's in the master's program and are forced to use the undergrad grades as differentiation criteria in the category of course work.
Otherwise, an upward trend in grades can generally help you, but the trend has to be robust under the correction for the higher average grades in grad programs.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/10/22
| 1,302
| 5,240
|
<issue_start>username_0: (Apologies if this isn't the place to ask, as I'm not a college student or independent researcher).
I am a secondary school student in Ireland currently working on a large project for a history class and the topic I have chosen is relatively obscure. The most thorough of the few books written on the matter seems to be currently out of print. I found a used copy for sale a while ago at an exorbitant cost, but I'm unable to find even that now.
Would it be okay for me to email the author to ask if he could direct me towards somewhere where I could find a copy of the book, or send me a pdf? I would be willing to pay, although I doubt I could afford the full price of the book originally which was upwards of $100.<issue_comment>username_1: A question like this is almost always acceptable to ask. I cannot imagine that somebody will take offense at this, and I expect most academics appreciate high-school students looking for help and a reliable source, and I expect most will try to help if they have the time. However, time is big limitation for most academics, so do not be put-off if the author doesn't respond, or possibly bluntly mentions they cannot help. This will *not* be personal.
Make sure to keep your email polite, but especially, make it to the point. They will not really care about your life story, but introduce yourself as a high-school student, introduce your topic/research and mention that you want to use their book, but are not able to find it and don't have the funds to buy it, and ask if there is any chance that they can help you by the means you proposed, but do not outright ask if they can send you a copy for free. Thank them for any time they invest.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_2: Asking for a book outright will likely come across as quite rude - it sounds like you are asking for his work for free. Some authors won't mind, others will be very offended ([example of a similar case](https://time.com/3929526/taylor-swift-apple-music/)).
Asking where to find a copy is much more acceptable. If the author's willing to give away their work for free, and they have access to a PDF, they might just give you the electronic copy. If they don't have an electronic copy, chances are they have some hardcopies, but it will be difficult for you to purchase them because you will probably need to pay for postage. If the book is out of print and you can't purchase one from them, they probably can't help you locate a copy, although you might still learn if a second edition is being planned.
You might want to ask your local librarian for help in locating a copy of the book. There's a good chance they can help you.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I don't think I can improve on the [answer of username_1deK](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/157945/75368). It is fine to ask.
But I think it is unlikely to be successful as the prof may not have a copy to be spared.
But there is an alternative open to nearly everyone. If you are in a place with a university, go to the library there. If you are not, then ask your school (or town) librarian for help in borrowing a copy from some larger library. Inter-library Loan is a widely used service provided by large libraries and especially research libraries.
Even my small village library has been able to get obscure works for me from larger places.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: You can ask. Is it acceptable - well sort of; BUT is is polite and proper?
Offering to pay helps negate the asking issues.
It would be silly as the author would not have copies of the book to give out unless it had been self published.
He probably has no pdf and may not even have WP files.
Your best bet is to look at worldcat.org and see what library has the book nd then contact them to borrow it.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: A question like this is *always* acceptable to ask. I don't think any body will take offense or be angry with this question. However if the author feels like he doesn't want to, send him a thank you email.
Make sure to keep your email polite but about the topic and straight forward. Say that you are a high-school student and tell the author what you will use the book for. Mention that you were not able to find it and don't have the budget or money to buy it.
PS: Also, many book places like better world books, and ebay, and craigslist might have your book. Check those websites out, maybe your book will be there for $50.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I think so. For some reassurance: I once emailed a well known mathematician that left the field for another one, around the year I was born, to his new professional email. So I asked if he knew any way I could get the book. My exact phrasing was this:
>
> Many times I tried to find a copy of the book, but sadly I failed, and it is currently quite difficult to access the university library to get a copy (if they have any). I was wondering if you happened to have an electronic copy that your publisher may allow you to share with me?
>
>
>
He sent me a signed copy that he had in his house (I presume he has many more from the publisher) with a nice message all the way from the US to Ireland.
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/22
| 1,100
| 4,605
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a mathematics student in a French university.
But I have studied many other subjects on my own with university books.
So I would like to have a diploma or an exam that proves that I have a certain level in these subjects.
I had thought about the CAPES or the agrégation exam but I don't want to have to teach after I have obtained them.
Note. I am moving towards an academic career.<issue_comment>username_1: Note that if you pass the "agrégation" (i.e. successfully pass the exams) but don't teach after, then you cannot call yourself "agrégé de mathématiques" (as it's reserved for people who then teach) but you are allowed to say on your CV that you successfully passed the exams (I think it's "reçu au concours de l'agrégation", but not 100% certain). I shall not comment on the morality of potentially taking up a place in a competitive exam with limited number of places (the Mathematics one always has more places that admissible candidates, but still...). However it sounds like a lot of effort just to get a diploma.
The more traditional route is to get a "Licence" in another subject by taking online classes -- so there aren't any mandatory classes -- for the year of L3 at a nearby University (provided you can get an equivalency for the first two years of L1-L2), and taking the exam. It's not uncommon for students in Physics, Mathematics, or Computer Science for instance to get one or more degrees in related topics this way. If the secondary discipline is less closely related to Mathematics (say Philosophy or Ancient Languages), then it may be trickier to get the equivalency, although it's always easier to go from Mathematics to anything else than the reverse.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: First, the CAPES and the agrégation are not "exams" in the sense of a final exam that grants a diploma if you get a minimum grade. They are civil service entrance examinations, in the sense that they are a competition between all applicants and the top performers get the job. Putting on your CV that you went to a job interview, got the job, and then refused it, is relatively pointless.
So to answer your question, no, there is no equivalent of the CAPES or the agrégation without the requirement to teach afterwards (if you take the job), because they are literally formalized competitive job interviews to become a teacher at a secondary school.
Second of all, merely getting the certificate/agrégation also does not prove that you are particularly competent, only that you outperformed enough other candidates to be in the pool of candidates selected to get the job. Since the state of the éducation nationale is so bad and the number of applicants so low, for the CAPES it basically means that you showed up and have a basic knowledge of the subject. For the agrégation, it means that you have an undergrad level of proficiency, pretty much.
The CAPES is a complete waste of time if you plan to have an academic career. It used to be that getting a very top ranking (say, top 10-20) at the agrégation in some subjects could give a boost to your early career as an academic. Nowadays, getting an academic job is so competitive that your research output will be enormously more important than some job competition you went to before your PhD. This is especially true since the agrégation (like most civil service jobs) is reserved for EU nationals, but academic job searches are largely international today.
The closest thing to what you want would be to get a license ("bachelor" for American speakers) in your field of choice. But again, I am highly doubtful that this will have any sort of impact on your future academic career. Anything you will do as an undergrad will be dwarfed by what you do during your master's degree and will essentially be forgotten as irrelevant. And what you did during your master's degree will essentially be forgotten after your PhD – only your research output will count. Even if you end up going out of academia, getting a license in a different topic would only be a very small boost to your CV after you get your master's and especially PhD.
The only worthwhile thing I can think of would be if you somehow managed to self-study a topic to the level of getting a master's degree without taking classes. But this is a feat that few can attain. And even then, you would need to prove that your diverse background will enable you to perform research at the interface of two different fields. It's not the kind of things you can learn in self-study books, to be perfectly honest.
Upvotes: 3
|
2020/10/22
| 520
| 2,226
|
<issue_start>username_0: Because of multiple factors including depression, attention deficiency, laziness and immaturity I've managed to accumulate 14 F's during the first two years of my computer science education. I'm finishing a semester late and I'm currently on my last semester. For context, I come from relatively poor European (non-EU) country and my university is considered pretty decent in my country.
Starting from third year I believe I changed myself for the better and so I managed to pass all my classes and more or less catch up to my peers. My GPA is currently 3.0 and I'll most likely graduate with the same GPA. I'm not an exceptional student in any way and I don't have any amazing projects to redeem myself. With my level of (un)success, I am aiming for average universities at best.
While I realize that I've pretty much destroyed my chances of pursuing higher education considering all my failures but I wanted to seek more opinions before I completely give up on it. Thank you.<issue_comment>username_1: While your chances seem pretty slim, perhaps you could work through a sponsor who believes in you and your potential. Perhaps a local professor with whom you have done well and who knows your background would be willing to "go to bat" for you.
Sometimes such people have contacts around the world and are, themselves, respected enough that a colleague, even in a distant place, would believe them enough to take a chance on your success.
But, pursuing advanced work in the normal way is very unlikely to lead to success. People do, however, recognize that others can turn their lives around.
In some places this won't work because of admissions policies, but it might be acceptable in others. Ask locally for advice and help and see what happens. You will, of course, need to be able to assure a "sponsor" that old difficulties won't come back. Good luck.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Your chances might be not that bad. MSc admissions in Germany, specifically in CS, are not highly competitive. In fact, universities have an incentive to admit and keep as many students as possible, since the number of students has an effect on how much money they get.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2020/10/22
| 863
| 3,605
|
<issue_start>username_0: As the title says. To put the contributions (explicitly) on the abstract:
1. Is considered good practice
2. Irrelevant as long as you correctly describe your paper? Source [Research Guides](https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/abstract)
3. No, explicitly mentioning the contributions is not considered good practice and should be avoided.
4. Other?
Here is an [example](https://arxiv.org/abs/2009.08340) of a paper I published on ArXiv. Would you say that the abstract is Ok? Please see I put the main emphasis on the contribution (I use the contribution as an excuse to then explain all the work done).
**NOTE**: Please don't confuse with the contribution of each author to the article! An article should have something new, therefore we can say a [contribution](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09638181003687893) to science.
Some article's have a specific section for that [reference](https://support.jmir.org/hc/en-us/articles/115000525871-What-is-the-Authors-Contributions-section-How-should-I-write-mine-). Others just mention it [reference](https://www.epj.org/images/stories/faq/examples-of-author-contributions.pdf) but my question goes if it is good to mention it in the abstract or not.
---
As this question is somewhat subjective and there might not be a CORRECT response. If after some time I consider fit there is not a precise justification (some indisputable reference for example) I will mark as a solution the response that had more upvotes, supposing the upvotes reflect what the community thinks.<issue_comment>username_1: The abstract is there to let you know what the article is about and entice you to read it. I would want to know what its claimed original contributions are from the start.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Personally, I like abstracts that roughly follow a 'Background and Aims, Methods, Results, Conclusions structure'. Contributions are meant to be implicitly written and I am not a fan of explicitly writing these within the abstract. This is still a personal decision and is therefore completely left to the author.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In light of the example you linked, you should indeed state your contributions, but there is no need to state that these are your contributions. So instead of stating "The contribution in this paper is considering problem A using method B", you should use "We consider problem A using method B". Doing this would have easily saved 20 words in your example without changing any of the meaning. Even more importantly, the useless words are in the beginning, which is the only part of the abstract you can actually be sure that people will read.
The default assumption on a paper is that you are presenting something new and that new thing is why people should be reading your paper, which is why will be prominently mentioned in the abstract. So the default assumption when reading an abstract is that all results mentioned describe scientific contribution. There is thus no need to explicitly mention it.
There are of course things in the abstract that are not new contributions, but they are generally made obvious by phrasing. If your abstract starts with "We survey some recent results in ..." no one expects that the results mentioned afterwards are new. Or if you are (in)directly referencing using "The well known problem of ..." then no one will think you came up with the problem. But if a sentence starts with "We show that ...", then any reader will assume that you claim to be the first one to do so in this context.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2020/10/22
| 3,061
| 12,780
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am contemplating pursuing a bachelor degree in Electronics and Communication Engineering or System Engineering. Not to look for a job with it but just to expand my knowledge. I have a reasonable income as a programmer.
I have a certification in Electrical and Electronics Engineering from City&Guilds 20 years ago but ended up being a self-taught programmer. for the past 15 years, I have been able to win and deliver myriads of projects projects successfully. I'm versatile in various programming languages: C/C++, Java, Python, Rust, Haskell, Lisp (and its derivatives).
I thought of expanding my knowledge in Electronics Engineering either by self-thought or via school. My worry is, I will end up having my degree at 47 if I enroll.
What do you suggest I should consider when making this decision?<issue_comment>username_1: Firstly, to answer the actual question at the top: yes, *absolutely*. There is no age limit on doing a degree. It is not at all unusual for people significantly older than you to complete degrees.
>
> My worry is, I will end up having my degree at 47 if i enroll.
>
>
>
Is that a problem? Most people with degrees have degrees at 47 - they just happen to have had 26 years to forget most of the material in between. Sure, having a degree earlier *might* have been a financial/career advantage, but unless you've got a time machine (in which case present it and collect all the degrees you could ever possibly want) you can't change that, so your choice is, instead, between being a 47 year old without a degree and being a 47 year old with a degree - I can't see any particular disadvantage to the latter, unless the process of doing the degree course is going to cause you problems (via stress, loss of income, cost, work-life balance issues, etc.).
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Many years ago I taught at a university that (in addition to lots of traditional 18 year olds) specifically catered to older, non-traditional students (i.e. had staff decicated to their advising et al). I remember fondly one woman who was well over sixty. She felt frustrated that she dropped out of university when she got married, so she went back to school and got her bachelors degree.
So, if you just want a college degree because you don't have one, and can afford to spend the time and the money - sure, go for it. You'll probably feel very good when you graduate. (I suggest that you look for schools that state specificlly that they welcome non-traditional / returning students, and research what resources they offer.)
If you want to expand your knowledge, then you're probably better off taking specific courses that you're interested in through a non-degree continuing education program. (You can find pretty much anything you like, especially if you're open to distance learning and are willing to pay the tuition. Given your experiences that you list, you may, for example, like some graduate-level course in category theory and functional programming that would not be a part of any undergraduate degree program.) To get a bachelors degree in any major **in the U.S.**, you'd be required to take lots of "fluff" courses (usually called "core curriculum" or something similar) that might not be hard, but would not be useful or interesting either.
If you think that getting a college degree will improve your chances of employment, or that you'd have a good time socializing on campus as portrayed in Hollywood movies like *The Animal House* - sorry, I doubt that very much.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: YES. I have never met someone who lamented having done a degree. And I am in Philosophy, one of the degrees many people think are useless!!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: ### Sure, you could, but you should consider if you really should.
Mature-age students are nothing new; there are plenty of people who get degrees in middle age. There's nothing wrong with that.
In your particular case, though, I'd wonder how much value you'd get from it. Are you planning on transferring into a field of employment where electrical engineering qualifications are required? Will this allow you to get a promotion or a pay raise? Are you just doing this for fun? If the latter, are you prepared to pay tens of thousands of dollars for whatever enjoyment you get out of the course?
Doing some back of the notebook estimations for my university (in Australian dollars), you'd be looking at paying about $1000 to 1500 per class for a domestic student, times four classes per semester, times two semesters per year, times 3-4 years, or about twenty five to fifty thousand dollars total.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I mean as far as age, you can absolutely do it. Let's ask it, why not? You will become 47 anyways, so why not pursuing your interests? However, if you have no plan to actually use your degree in your career, paying university tuition (in case your education is not free) might not be the best idea. There are lots of resources available online that can be acquired for close to nothing (mostly free). When you enroll in a college, you do not just pay for the material you learned, you pay for your degree as well (a huge portion of your money goes to university staff, campus maintenance, funding research grants for grad students, etc). So, it might not make sense to pay for things that you may not need. With classes all going all online in most counties, you do not even get to experience the social aspect of learning and the on-campus resources anyways, so it might even make less sense. Whatever path you choose, it is never too late to become a more knowledgeable person. I understand your fear and it is valid but it is mostly social programming, not something substantiated from reality.
Edit: My answer assumes that the education you take as a university student would put costs on you. Therefore, some parts of my answer might not apply to your case. Would be great if OP clarifies that.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Yes, you can. You know this of course.
The deeper more relevant questions is am I afraid of social biases and norms. Will I stand out/fit in? What if I fail? Or what if I succeed? What if I get recognized as a natural gifted student and I have waited this far in life to do this, what is I did this and that earlier in life..how different my life would be at the present moment?
Throw your thoughts to the abyss of nothingness, and let in the mindfulness of the now. Let this moment be your start to the path of your tranquility and may the knowledge of what you seek be bestowed upon thy now. Be free to the transients of time and settle in the comfort of this moment in the awareness that you are in control of the actions you take like you have always been.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: You can, but consider whether the courses or the diploma have more value to you
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In principle, there is nothing wrong with getting a bachelor's degree when you're already in a late stage of your career. However, there is an important difference between you and someone who enters college at an age of 18 or so: they often need a diploma to start their career, while you do not (as you already have a career). As such, the value of a diploma could be negligible for you. It may still be the case that you want to follow a formal program completely, but if you do not need a diploma, you do not have to. So I urge you to explore the possibilities, because maybe taking only half or just a few courses from the full program suits you better. Or maybe you just don't know yet, and want to start at a slower pace than in the normal program. (My advice stay the same in the case that there are no "filler" courses in the full program that have no direct relation to the topic of the degree. Each program has some courses that are essential for any course that follows, but there is always a point where you can stop or sometimes courses you can skip. )
For an example, some of the lectures during the first year of my bachelor (in the Netherlands) where joined by a man who was likely over 40 years old. I haven't spoken with him much, but I gathered (from other students that collaborated with him in projects) that he did not follow any formal program, but took a few key courses from the mathematics and electrical engineering program. I do remember that he was always very enthusiastic during the lectures, always well-prepared, and it seemed he was enjoying his time in the lecture hall. From the perspective of a teacher, older students can be very good students, as they more often have an intrinsic motivation that is more rare among the younger students.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: Yes, absolutely. You have to consider the financial and time-management implications of your choices seriously though.
1. Are you planning on quitting your job to take a full-time course? Will you be absorbed back in your industry in a post-Covid economy after four years? Are you ok with missing income for four years?
2. If you're going to do this part-time then do you have the time to devote to classes after a 40hr work week and family responsibilities?
3. Can you afford tuition?
4. If you only care about knowledge, then could you be better served taking targeted online courses in specific topics?
Also, what exactly is your worry of being 47 when you get your degree? If you were looking to get hired as a fresh electircal engineer at 47 then yes, you have a legitimate worry about ageism. You will find it very difficult to be hired, especially with global economy shrinking so much. But if you wanna stick to your current profession then who cares how old you were when you got your degree?
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: This is perhaps an overgrown comment, but it fits more as an answer, to help align your expectations. You probably don't want the classic student experience anyway, being a bit older, but still, consider how much you want to fit in to the social aspects.
I'll assume you've thought through the financial aspects, and that you can qualify (likely to be no problem). Don't neglect to think through/discuss the effects on any meaningful relationship/family.
I returned to university in my 30s, in a much more settled lifestyle than my peers. I'm also in the UK. The study aspects were fine - I'd forgotten some stuff they knew, but had learnt other things (like how to run projects), and socialising with the students I worked with was easy despite 10-15 years age difference.
Where I did less well was I'd been hoping to get back into university sport (kayaking, but hoping to do some other adventure sports) and maybe some societies. As someone more mature I just couldn't deal with the 18-year-olds' approach to the inherent risks of the activity, and socially I had nothing in common with them - so I gave up on the idea.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: The other answers are fantastic in covering the financial problems and value of a degree.
I want to provide a perspective that I hope will be motivational. I'm a professor at a top-tier US university where most of my students are traditional youngsters. I have, however, had the opportunity to teach three students who were non-traditional. All three had successful technology careers and were looking to expand their knowledge into neighboring domains. Sure, this may just be a small data-set problem, but I think there is something to my experience.
**All three of them were some of the best students I have ever taught.** They were certainly the most fun to have in the classroom, as they were clear-eyed, asked penetrating questions, were able to provide useful examples to the rest of the class, etc. They were in the class because they truly saw the value of the knowledge they could gain in the class, which is somewhat rare in the rest of my students. They also had the confidence of their years and plenty of earned experience to speak from.
It sounds like you would be one of those students. Go for it! I'd love to have you in my class.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: **As part of your decision process, consider the "degree-by-examination" approach.**
Roughly, this is the approach where one self-studies for course tests and then transfers in test results as credits towards a degree at an accredited university.
While this is the most financially and temporally efficient path to a bachelor's degree, it is largely devoid of the other aspects of campus-based learning, which may be valuable to you.
A less extreme alternative could be to test out of some/most courses and reserve a few courses for in-person learning.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/10/22
| 1,527
| 6,093
|
<issue_start>username_0: A large part of the work in writing a paper in my field (theoretical CS and economics) is writing the introduction, the problem description, the motivation, and the related work. A large part of this writeup repeats in different articles studying a similar problem; thus there is a waste of effort. I thought of initiating a journal in which the authors will be instructed to base this part of their papers on relevant Wikipedia pages. Each article would start with a paragraph such as the following:
>
> "This paper extends the Wikipedia article ABC (version from date of submission). Our contributions are as follows: (a) we prove that the ABC theorem is valid not only for $n=2$ but also for $n=3$. (b) We refute the ABC conjecture for $n=4$. (c) We present an efficient algorithm for solving the ABC problem for the case $n=2$.
>
>
>
The authors are responsible for ensuring that the Wikipedia article at the date of submission is uptodate, contains a complete problem statement, and all relevant related work.
The referees will have to verify this. Then, the rest of the paper will be verified as usual.
If the paper is published, then the new contributions will be added to the ABC page.
Advantages:
* The literature survey will be done only once, and it will be kept uptodate.
* The notation will be uniform (based on the Wikipedia article).
Current journals will probably not agree to this scheme. But can it work with a new journal? Is this scheme reasonable?<issue_comment>username_1: There are already three journals very similar to this idea:
* [WikiJournal of Medicine](http://www.wikijmed.org/)
* [WikiJournal of Science](http://www.wikijsci.org/)
* [WikiJournal of Humanities](http://www.wikijhum.org/)
There is even a [UserGroup](https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiJournal_User_Group) in which these are operated.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: No, this will not work. You claim
>
> A large part of this writeup repeats in different articles studying a similar problem; thus there is a waste of effort
>
>
>
but the effort wasted is actually not so big compared to the extra effort required to coordinate publishing with a wiki.
Furthermore, Wikipedia users will be editing the wiki with different goals in mind than the goals of your journal's authors. Wikipedia is not meant for containing problem statements.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: **Yes, this will work.** (If you do it, you will see that this is true.)
Contrary to what the answer above wrote, it's simple and not costly to make it work because anyone can edit Wikipedia. So whatever content you want to put on Wikipedia you are allowed to put it there. Generally, and by design. You are [in fact very welcome](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Be_bold) for **Wikipedia is meant to be edited by anyone** under any personal/selfish goals except those contrary to what is explicitly banned.
Also, notability is a completely gray concept in Wikipedia and is usually enforced this way: if you have budget for a journal you **can expect** your budget to pass `WP:N`'s muster. (since the threshold has been found to be entirely subjective) One might guess that the enforcement follows the rules, but longtime users know it's the other way round. Just today I came across yet another article ("[Phrasal template](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Phrasal_template&oldid=179068568)") that is up (*notable*) and has been up for over 15 years.
One small disadvantage is that someone will come alone and remove/edit your content (because anyone can edit). This is [by design] feature-not-bug as far as Wikipedia is concerned; whether there are *trolls* camping at your particular topic/subject is irrelevant.
It's a small con because typically **every single log is kept**. So all you have to do when there is a (slightest bit of) fork is to incorporate it (aka edit over) which is in fact what a wiki is all about, that is, collaboration with the world. I understand sometimes one simply does not have the time budget to bother incorporating foreign changes and deadlines are yesterday in which case you **can** simply revert it to your wanted version with your new patch on that thus passing the buck to the other side to do "that incorporation work" from the new outstanding version, accepting that they might also be in the same situation which means that new outstanding version may also be reverted tomorrow unincorporated.
Note that one faux pas is to revert a fork while adding no new content (and without prevailing in talkpage discussion that can get incredibly lengthy; you don't have to prevail/bother with discussion btw if you have new content to add, and in fact there are many users/accounts who have a **policy of zero-discussion** (which you might find helpful, depending on your goals) which is completely accepted, and [Wikipedia is really huge](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedians) when contrasted to SE and other forums where user types can be rounded up into 3 or 4 types at most and people/culture is only allowed to think either Left or Right, and contains probably 30 or 40 different cultures of users and more, of which only the [metapedian](https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metapedianism) is the most visible). Note that if you habitually do this you can actually get banned. But this is also not a con since you don't have to do that as **every single log is kept** so if your journal is *that* infrequent that between your edits there is already a fork trying to [survive](https://archive.is/HsiYf#selection-1039.29-1039.35), you can actually just ignore the fork simply by referencing specifically the version you want (thus from the default POV, it is you trying to survive; until your next article update, which *will* come till your journal is dead) and articles are [never complete](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_a_work_in_progress)).
Finally, re "*If the paper is published, then the new contributions will be added [to the page]*"; Win-win !
Upvotes: -1
|
2020/10/23
| 1,094
| 4,562
|
<issue_start>username_0: In my first few years of university I had very uneven grades because traditional classrooms just didn't work for me. My GPA was probably around a 2.8-2.9. I was able to turn my grades around by *not* attending lectures at all. My GPA for these last two years of undergrad was a 3.5, and my GPA in graduate coursework was a 3.8.
Most of my statement of purpose is forward looking, but I feel the need to elaborate on my transcripts a little bit, particularly because I am hoping to switch fields. I also want to also try to amplify the fact that the decision to not attend classes was positive and life-changing; it has benefits for functioning independently as a researcher.
So, my question is: **Would it be perceived negatively if I stated in my SOP that I stopped attending classes?**
I'm not asking for writing help, but I'll include a short snippet just to demonstrate what I have in mind:
>
> I have always been naturally curious, but coming from a family where both parents did not graduate from high school I struggled with developing healthy academic habits and with finding success in traditional classroom environments. My poor habits persisted until the fall of 2015 when I made the decision to stop attending classes so that I could experiment with alternative ways of learning. This risky decision forced me to critically reflect on my weaknesses in a way I never had before, and while I did not realize it at the time, this decision was my first step towards becoming an independent researcher. By initially stepping away from the structured classroom environment I struggled finding success in, I was then able to enter and engage in my graduate classroom discussions with maturity and a recalibrated sense of purpose....
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: I'd shorten and tone it down if I were you. Being a researcher involves a lot of sitting in other people's talks, so we all know that lectures are boring. But we still do it, because those are an excellent chance to socialize. We might just pack a paper to read in case it gets too boring. So your statement makes you look a bit like a loner. And being able to study something without being present in a lecture is a skill I'd assume anyone with a degree has. I don't think anyone ever finished a degree where all lecturers are perfect explainers and there is no need to study something on your own at some point.
So while I would not necessarily view your explanation negatively, I also don't see it as helping you much. So while you should explain your bad initial grades, I'd keep it short and simple. Something like "Coming from a non-academic family background I struggled initially, but then I changed my approach to studying" without going too much into detail.
Finally I think there is also a bit of an "I am very different"-undertone in what you write. It makes you seem aloof and possibly difficult to work with. This is again minor, but in direct comparison with a similar candidate it could tip the scales against you.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: First, I am sympathetic to your dislike of sitting in classrooms, at scheduled times, for artificially limited intervals, and too-often lecturers/teachers who add little to the textbook, or even to their own notes... and are possibly non-interactive as well. Or, as in k-12 in the U.S., often far more concerned with crowd control (not their own fault) than course content.
So, when I got to college, I rarely went to class, but/and read assiduously outside of class. My repeated experiments with class attendance mostly confirmed my skepticism of the value of such attendance, with a few notable exceptions. And, from a pragmatic viewpoint, some instructors are very offended if one does not attend...
Thinking of the latter point especially, it would be hugely unwise to make a blanket declaration about the worthlessness of classes. It would also be wildly premature to claim that your viewpoint on that somehow validates your "research skills".
So, as in @username_1's answer, I'd recommend just saying that, due to being a first-gen college student, it took you some time to figure out how to successfully navigate the system, but/and now you are indeed succeeding.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Did your GPA improve as a direct result of **not attending class**?
Or did it improve as a direct result of you using the time you *would* have spent in class to do **more study** by yourself?
If so, the fact you didn't go to class is irrelevant.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/23
| 1,299
| 5,466
|
<issue_start>username_0: This is my first post in this community, which stems from desperation and what I could only refer to as a state of hopelessness.
I completed my PhD in August and have been looking for postdoctoral positions in my field of research ever since. I have obtained my PhD from a top UK university (not quite Oxbridge, ICL or LSE, rather one tier lower than the said universities) and my supervisor is very well known in the field. Unfortunately, there are currently very few postdocs on the job market in my field and I had to resort to applying for projects that only loosely overlap with my field of research.
It may also be worth noting that in my field, it generally takes time to publish. Most people, including my PhD supervisor, as well as some renowned scholars in the said field, have published their thesis chapters sometimes as long as 2-3 years after graduation, after heavy editing and polishing.
My intent is to secure a decent postdoc at a respectable institution, but that dream seems dead. I have had 4 interviews so far and was offered a position at a random institution, which did not particularly publish well; so I declined that offer with the hope of securing a better one. One of the said interviews was with a very reputable Italian university, which I have yet to hear the outcome of, but I have little hope in securing that postdoc. The competition was fierce, with one candidate already having 4 years of postdoc experience under his belt and numerous publications in top journals, whereas I have none! Additionally, I have been invited for my 5th interview next week at a yet another reputable university, but having looked at the list of the applicants and their CVs for that position, the situation is not much different: for some of the candidates, this would be their 2nd postdocs and most have publications under their belt. Additionally, there is a Columbia University graduate in the list of applicants whose work is more related to the advertised position than mine - these are the people I will be competing against.
To say that I am feeling low is an understatement. If this is the sort of competition that I will be facing at interviews at each relatively respectable institution, I do not stand a chance in securing a decent position. I am incredibly motivated and was looking forward to get on board a project, publish, and also polish my thesis chapters in the process. But at this rate, it doesn't seem that I will be given the opportunity.
I was hoping to get the views and the experiences of more senior members. Is the situation as dire as I think, or am I blowing it out of proportion?
Thank you in advance.<issue_comment>username_1: I'd shorten and tone it down if I were you. Being a researcher involves a lot of sitting in other people's talks, so we all know that lectures are boring. But we still do it, because those are an excellent chance to socialize. We might just pack a paper to read in case it gets too boring. So your statement makes you look a bit like a loner. And being able to study something without being present in a lecture is a skill I'd assume anyone with a degree has. I don't think anyone ever finished a degree where all lecturers are perfect explainers and there is no need to study something on your own at some point.
So while I would not necessarily view your explanation negatively, I also don't see it as helping you much. So while you should explain your bad initial grades, I'd keep it short and simple. Something like "Coming from a non-academic family background I struggled initially, but then I changed my approach to studying" without going too much into detail.
Finally I think there is also a bit of an "I am very different"-undertone in what you write. It makes you seem aloof and possibly difficult to work with. This is again minor, but in direct comparison with a similar candidate it could tip the scales against you.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: First, I am sympathetic to your dislike of sitting in classrooms, at scheduled times, for artificially limited intervals, and too-often lecturers/teachers who add little to the textbook, or even to their own notes... and are possibly non-interactive as well. Or, as in k-12 in the U.S., often far more concerned with crowd control (not their own fault) than course content.
So, when I got to college, I rarely went to class, but/and read assiduously outside of class. My repeated experiments with class attendance mostly confirmed my skepticism of the value of such attendance, with a few notable exceptions. And, from a pragmatic viewpoint, some instructors are very offended if one does not attend...
Thinking of the latter point especially, it would be hugely unwise to make a blanket declaration about the worthlessness of classes. It would also be wildly premature to claim that your viewpoint on that somehow validates your "research skills".
So, as in @username_1's answer, I'd recommend just saying that, due to being a first-gen college student, it took you some time to figure out how to successfully navigate the system, but/and now you are indeed succeeding.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Did your GPA improve as a direct result of **not attending class**?
Or did it improve as a direct result of you using the time you *would* have spent in class to do **more study** by yourself?
If so, the fact you didn't go to class is irrelevant.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/24
| 228
| 828
|
<issue_start>username_0: In certain postdoc positions, the eligibility criteria says, "candidate's PhD has received their PhD within last 4 years."
So, if I defended on December 2019 and got my degree (convocation) on May 2020. Started postdoc from June 2020. So will my 4 years from now will be calculated on the basis of May 2020 or December 2019?<issue_comment>username_1: It only depends on the date on your degree, not the date you defended. So if your degree was awarded May 2020, that's the date which counts.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Major competitions for postdoctoral fellowships have detailed rules which answer this question, but in different ways. Some use the date the degree was awarded. Others use the date of the defense or viva.
If it is not specified, assume the later date is used.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/10/24
| 383
| 1,448
|
<issue_start>username_0: A few days ago I saw an advertisement that claimed that they could write and publish Q1-Q4 (Q: Quartile) Research paper (with various prices e.g. 200$-500$) in less than 6 months and sell it to anyone (as the author of that paper) who wants a Research paper like last year PhD students, academic peoples, M.Sc. students, etc.
**Q1:** I wonder how it is possible that they are so confident that their paper will be published in less than 3-6 months?
**Q2:** How it is possible to buy and publish a Q1 Research paper?
**Q3:** Does this count as plagiarism?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, certainly it would be plagiarism. And no one can guarantee publishing in a quality journal. So it is just false advertising. Let the buyer beware.
I also suspect that any buyer would be caught out.
But you can try to sell most things, whether it is ethical or not. Few laws would counter it.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: 1. This sounds like a scam, so I doubt you'll get whatever they promise
2. It's possible (though unlikely and unethical) for anyone capable of producing the research to exchange money for an edited author list, but the problem of finding a buyer in the same area of your expertise is not trivial and probably doesn't make for a profitable strategy unless... See above
3. Absolutely yes. It's plagiarism to claim someone else's work as your own, even if you pay them for it.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2020/10/25
| 1,084
| 4,803
|
<issue_start>username_0: A friend of mine is an experienced researcher in early career. We are surprised to learn that she never get invited to referee for any journal. I once rejected a referee request and referred the editor to her because the manuscript matches better with her expertise, but still, she did not get invited. I recently learned that this happens more than once: some one else also recommended her for referee but the editor did not take the advice. It becomes a little bit concerning: is she somehow blacklisted or what? What is really happening here?<issue_comment>username_1: It's quite possible the editor never read the recommendations. Some journals invite more reviews than they need. If some reviewers decline, but enough reviewers return reviews for the editor to make a decision, then the editor will not consider inviting more reviewers. If the decision is to reject, it may be made after only one review is returned.
*Never* getting invited is a bit odd, but could occur by chance. I only get 33% of my fair share of invitations, even though my reviews are faster and more detailed than the other reviewers. Most journals in my field have never asked me, other very similar journals ask repeatedly. I have received no invitations for many months, and then gotten two from different publishers on the same day. Don't overanalyze it; don't be concerned.
Most publishers have a form you can fill out indicating your research fields. If you complete this it might increase your chances of getting papers to review. In my experience, it is not necessary to publish with a journal or publisher in order to get asked to review.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I kinda depends very much; journals/publishers usually keep a list of referees and their fields of expertise, so the first step of the editor may often be to query the database of people who have already refereed for the journal. Thus, the system is designed to give the refereeing jobs to those who have refereed before.
If you are “on the list” of go-to referees, you get asked all the time. It can take a while to make it to this list, but if you’re there and do a decent job, the non-linearity of the system can easily overwhelm you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Just a single aspect to respond to a part of the question. The only reason why as editor I'd ever "blacklist" anybody would be that there's something wrong with their reviews, either unfair and useless, or promised but never sent. In general I'm happy to have an as large choice of reviewers as possible, so surely nobody who has never made a bad impression reviewing (see above) would ever be "blacklisted".
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Your friend might be on a specific editor's blacklist, if she has engaged in poor reviewer behavior with that editor (submitted very short or low-quality reviews; accepted reviews for which she has a conflict of interest; leaked ideas under review before the authors have publicly posted a preprint of their paper; etc). But it's unlikely that she's on any kind of journal-wide blacklist (in some systems like Elsevier, editors have the ability to assign reviewers "scores" visible to other editors, but almost nobody bothers doing this) and *extremely* unlikely that she's on a field-wide blacklist---these things don't formally exist, and she wouldn't be shunned by her research community unless she is infamous for a history of gross misconduct.
I can't speak to sexism as a potential cause as I don't know the statistics---I wouldn't be surprised though if women are asked to do *more* than their fair share of reviewing (it's behind-the-scenes service work, with no recognition or prestige, after all).
The most likely explanation, I think, is that she's not yet visible enough in her field to receive a lot of reviews (the OP mentions she is early-career). Even if you suggested her as an alternate reviewer for some papers, perhaps the editor already had enough alternate reviewers in mind whose expertise more closely aligned with the topic of the paper, or with whom they already have an established relationship of trust.
I don't think your friend should worry too much, but she of course should think about ways of increasing her visibility, so that her name naturally comes to the mind of any editor handling papers in her area of expertise. In addition to making sure she is easily findable by editors (setting up a personal web page with list of recent publications, Google Scholar profile, etc) she could also volunteer to serve on papers committees for conferences in her area. Obviously, she should also just keep publishing: being prominently cited by a paper under review greatly increases the chance of being asked to review that paper.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2020/10/25
| 482
| 2,060
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am interested in submitting an article to a journal that has previously identified misconduct from me. The misconduct occurred several years ago and was caused by a disability.
How should I proceed if I am to submit an article to this journal?<issue_comment>username_1: If you have done things to repair your reputation, there might not be an issue. But you can always submit and then see what happens. If you have been banned by the journal you are likely to get a terse reply.
How you would react to a summary rejection is another issue. You might try to assure the editors that things are different now and hope that people will understand, in your case, that people can learn and change. If you have a respected colleague who can serve as your advocate in such an exchange with an editor it might help.
Apologies and assurance that you are producing valid and valuable stuff is more likely to be effective, I think, than excuses. Accept what you did and hope people can accept that you can (and have) changed.
Ideally, the focus will be on the work you produce and not on you. But it is hard to guarantee that, depending on the nature of the past transgression. Expect people to be wary, at least.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Many journals provide an option to add a *cover letter* as an [optional] part of the submission process. I would suggest using it to [also] address the issue of the previous misconduct.
In the letter, you might briefly mention the background and reasons why this particular submission is valuable ([username_1's answer talks well about the focus](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/158078/56594)).
If the work is outstanding and speaks for itself, that will certainly help. Thus, it is certainly the time to polish the initial submission as much as possible, not letting any known detail slide (template, reference style, spelling/grammar, limits, quality of figures).
Anyway, if desk rejection happens, you should be ready for it, and submit your work in another journal.
Upvotes: 3
|
2020/10/25
| 1,739
| 7,270
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am half way thorough my second year as a posdoc and I have a reasonable production (4 published papers in good journals and two other under review). I also have several ongoing/potential research projects and I am finding it hard to figure out how to manage my time and energy regarding them.
Here is the problem: among these projects, there are some that are fairly secure in terms of publication, meaning that I feel confident that within reasonable time and with reasonable effort those projects will lead to papers published in good journals (let us simplify assuming that "good" means Q1). However, these are not particularly motivating problems/proposals (for me). The main issue is their lack of motivation, mathematically in particular and scientifically in general. It is not that they are not good problems at all, or uninteresting in their entirety, they just don't seem to have an underlying mathematical or scientific question to them.
On the other hand, there is a handful of potential projects that I find motivating, some of them proposed to me by other mathematicians (tenured professors with solid careers) and some of them my own, but whose perspective of success is much less clear. These are interesting questions and/or research directions but there is no certainty that I will be able to get something out of them. And on top of that, they require an important time investment.
I am tempted to follow a strategy based on working on the "publishable" projects just the amount of time required to move forward with them and dedicate the rest of the time to the other projects, but I would appreciate points of view, comments or suggestions on the matter.
I could not find a question to which I would say that this is a duplicate, although I do think that these issues ought to be common for people at my stage of the career.<issue_comment>username_1: I guess my advice would be, first, to get a permanent position, say on the tenure path and then get tenure. Do what you need to do to set a baseline.
Second, there is no reason why you need to make a final decision now and never review it. In the short term you could (probably should) work on stuff that gets you to tenure primarily, filling in with ideas on more interesting topics. Then, as the world becomes more secure you can morph into a situation that seems more satisfying.
Just keep notebooks of ideas as you go along, so that when you think of something "interesting" that might be pursued, you don't lose track of it later.
Stay flexible. Establish a base. Then move on.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Personally I have always gone for what I was motivated to do, and in that way I think I built up a rather unique view and understanding of things that later served me well achieving some top publications. I was wondering for quite some time whether my publication record is good enough, but now I know my publication record is quite strong (although it wasn't for some time), so it paid off. I should say that it was clear to me from pretty early that although many researchers are stronger than me in many respects, I am original, and I was always motivated to follow my own agenda. The good thing about this regarding publications is that I never had any worry (and rightly so, although of course I didn't have any guarantee) that somebody else will achieve the same thing and get it published before me, because even if somebody else would approach the same problem, chances are my take would be different enough (actually once I and a "competing" group came out with major work on the same problem at the same time but our solutions were so different without being directly contradicting that we could co-exist peacefully). Not sure whether this could be a problem with your "secure publications"; I know some worry about this, and good ideas of some were in fact published by somebody else shortly before they could finish.
That said, I'm not sure whether I should recommend this approach to others. One reason is that I grew up in a "slow" environment without much pressure, and was given enough time (6 years plus 2 abroad) to build something up before actually having to compete for a permanent position. In a different system my approach may not have worked. Another reason is that I had some confidence in my originality as well as exit strategies in place in case this wouldn't have worked out. I was basically prepared to leave rather than adapting in case I couldn't do my work how I wanted to do it. I have always tried to be realistic. I wouldn't just blindly trust that it works, I would have some ideas in case it wouldn't. And to be honest, maybe I was a bit lucky with the people I met and the positions I got, and it could've gone wrong.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: At the suggestion of @paulgarrett, what Wikipedia narrates for [Luitzen Egbertus Jan Brouwer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L._E._J._Brouwer) provides a historical aura (to say the least...) to the sensible advise of user @username_1:
<<...*Brouwer then "embarked on a self-righteous campaign to reconstruct mathematical practice from the ground up so as to satisfy his philosophical convictions"; indeed his thesis advisor refused to accept his Chapter II "as it stands, ... all interwoven with some kind of pessimism and mystical attitude to life which is not mathematics, nor has anything to do with the foundations of mathematics" (Davis, p. 94 quoting van Stigt, p. 41). Nevertheless, in 1908:*
>
> "... Brouwer, in a paper entitled 'The untrustworthiness of the
> principles of logic', challenged the belief that the rules of the
> classical logic, which have come down to us essentially from Aristotle
> (384--322 B.C.) have an absolute validity, independent of the subject
> matter to which they are applied" (Kleene (1952), p. 46).
>
>
>
*"After completing his dissertation, Brouwer made a conscious decision to temporarily keep his contentious ideas under wraps and to concentrate on demonstrating his mathematical prowess" (Davis (2000), p. 95); by 1910 he had published a number of important papers, in particular the Fixed Point Theorem. Hilbert—the formalist with whom the intuitionist Brouwer would ultimately spend years in conflict—admired the young man and helped him receive a regular academic appointment (1912) at the University of Amsterdam (Davis, p. 96). It was then that "Brouwer felt free to return to his revolutionary project which he was now calling intuitionism " (ibid).* >>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Hedge your bets. See the topics you work on as an investment portfolio. You certainly don't want to put everything into something risky, but to have a shot at making it big, you might want to take one or two more speculative investments with your time. So dedicate some time to the grander, motivating topics.
Think also about the time-scales: you'll probably want to have a mixture of short- and long-term investments. For example, some papers I make I know won't be overnight successes. There just aren't enough other people working directly on those topics for me to see that much activity related to my work that soon. But I'm confident that over time they'll be read and cited.
Upvotes: 3
|
2020/10/26
| 1,454
| 5,887
|
<issue_start>username_0: For a research paper in my course we had to come up with a topic proposal.
When I talked with my professor about my topic he did not seem interested in my proposal and only talked about a topic of his interest, in which I am totally inexperienced and not really interested in. He didn´t even comment on my research proposal.
The problem is, that my professor is really into this topic. How could I politely ask him to discuss my proposal instead of only his proposal?<issue_comment>username_1: I guess my advice would be, first, to get a permanent position, say on the tenure path and then get tenure. Do what you need to do to set a baseline.
Second, there is no reason why you need to make a final decision now and never review it. In the short term you could (probably should) work on stuff that gets you to tenure primarily, filling in with ideas on more interesting topics. Then, as the world becomes more secure you can morph into a situation that seems more satisfying.
Just keep notebooks of ideas as you go along, so that when you think of something "interesting" that might be pursued, you don't lose track of it later.
Stay flexible. Establish a base. Then move on.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Personally I have always gone for what I was motivated to do, and in that way I think I built up a rather unique view and understanding of things that later served me well achieving some top publications. I was wondering for quite some time whether my publication record is good enough, but now I know my publication record is quite strong (although it wasn't for some time), so it paid off. I should say that it was clear to me from pretty early that although many researchers are stronger than me in many respects, I am original, and I was always motivated to follow my own agenda. The good thing about this regarding publications is that I never had any worry (and rightly so, although of course I didn't have any guarantee) that somebody else will achieve the same thing and get it published before me, because even if somebody else would approach the same problem, chances are my take would be different enough (actually once I and a "competing" group came out with major work on the same problem at the same time but our solutions were so different without being directly contradicting that we could co-exist peacefully). Not sure whether this could be a problem with your "secure publications"; I know some worry about this, and good ideas of some were in fact published by somebody else shortly before they could finish.
That said, I'm not sure whether I should recommend this approach to others. One reason is that I grew up in a "slow" environment without much pressure, and was given enough time (6 years plus 2 abroad) to build something up before actually having to compete for a permanent position. In a different system my approach may not have worked. Another reason is that I had some confidence in my originality as well as exit strategies in place in case this wouldn't have worked out. I was basically prepared to leave rather than adapting in case I couldn't do my work how I wanted to do it. I have always tried to be realistic. I wouldn't just blindly trust that it works, I would have some ideas in case it wouldn't. And to be honest, maybe I was a bit lucky with the people I met and the positions I got, and it could've gone wrong.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: At the suggestion of @paulgarrett, what Wikipedia narrates for [Luitzen Egbertus Jan Brouwer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L._E._J._Brouwer) provides a historical aura (to say the least...) to the sensible advise of user @username_1:
<<...*Brouwer then "embarked on a self-righteous campaign to reconstruct mathematical practice from the ground up so as to satisfy his philosophical convictions"; indeed his thesis advisor refused to accept his Chapter II "as it stands, ... all interwoven with some kind of pessimism and mystical attitude to life which is not mathematics, nor has anything to do with the foundations of mathematics" (Davis, p. 94 quoting van Stigt, p. 41). Nevertheless, in 1908:*
>
> "... Brouwer, in a paper entitled 'The untrustworthiness of the
> principles of logic', challenged the belief that the rules of the
> classical logic, which have come down to us essentially from Aristotle
> (384--322 B.C.) have an absolute validity, independent of the subject
> matter to which they are applied" (Kleene (1952), p. 46).
>
>
>
*"After completing his dissertation, Brouwer made a conscious decision to temporarily keep his contentious ideas under wraps and to concentrate on demonstrating his mathematical prowess" (Davis (2000), p. 95); by 1910 he had published a number of important papers, in particular the Fixed Point Theorem. Hilbert—the formalist with whom the intuitionist Brouwer would ultimately spend years in conflict—admired the young man and helped him receive a regular academic appointment (1912) at the University of Amsterdam (Davis, p. 96). It was then that "Brouwer felt free to return to his revolutionary project which he was now calling intuitionism " (ibid).* >>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Hedge your bets. See the topics you work on as an investment portfolio. You certainly don't want to put everything into something risky, but to have a shot at making it big, you might want to take one or two more speculative investments with your time. So dedicate some time to the grander, motivating topics.
Think also about the time-scales: you'll probably want to have a mixture of short- and long-term investments. For example, some papers I make I know won't be overnight successes. There just aren't enough other people working directly on those topics for me to see that much activity related to my work that soon. But I'm confident that over time they'll be read and cited.
Upvotes: 3
|
2020/10/26
| 392
| 1,773
|
<issue_start>username_0: I had submitted a paper in a journal, and had got a request for major revision. The changes are mostly related to the experiments, and some language issues. However, while trying to fix those, I stumbled a much better (theoretical) solution to the same problem. Should I include this improved solution in the revised version? Or is it better to write this improved solution as an additional note, and let this paper go as is?<issue_comment>username_1: *Make the improvement*
The review process is there to improve the paper. If there are things that you can do to improve the paper without the reviewers help that's great! Making the changes is helpful to everyone.
From the reviewer's point of view - there will always be comments from other reviewers which I didn't think of. I wouldn't expect all improvements to come from my comments.
From the editor's point of view - they way to publish high quality papers. The review process is one (very important) aspect of this.
From your point of view - you want your papers to be as good as possible.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I don't exactly disagree with @TomR, but - I'd say this depends on how deep the revision is, and how far along the process you are. If its fundamental enough, and the review process has been long and involved, then your new idea is essentially a different piece of research. In that situation, I would perhaps consult with the editors (or reviewers directly if relevant) about whether or not to introduce the change; or perhaps decide from the get-go that it's material for another paper, and mention the alternative method in a concluding remark, e.g. something like "The authors believe that XYZ can be improved upon using ABC."
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/26
| 484
| 2,079
|
<issue_start>username_0: Some entities, when carrying out research, do not strictly require Institutional review board (IRB) approval (or may be doing the whole thing in a place where IRB does not exist).
If we believe that a piece of contribution has ethical concerns that may fail an IRB inspection but see no IRB requirements on both where they are from (where they work) and where they are going to (where they publish),
1. Is it OK
* to endorse this work?
* to use this work in another research (without ethical concerns)?
* to use this work in another research that requires IRB approval?
2. What should we do?<issue_comment>username_1: It is (or should be) a principle that any research involving human (and some animal) subjects should be subject to prior *independent* ethics review, such as is done by IRB structures. If you are reviewing for a reputable journal, I would expect (or at least hope) that the journal has such a requirement on anything they would consider publishing.
Whether they have such a requirement or not, you would be wise to note the lack of a statement of ethical review in anything that you examine. Let the editor know that there is a missing, ethically required, piece.
If you seem sure that no review was ever done, rather than just a missing statement, then you would probably also be advised not to review the paper further. Ethical constraints on such research isn't something that can be patched up after the fact. People have died. People have died horrible deaths after long illnesses. Doing such research without independent prior review is not ok.
Note, of course, that there are some kinds of research that don't require IRB approval. But it is usually an ethical board that makes that determination. See [this](https://www.irb.northwestern.edu/exempt-review/) for example.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If you are asked to peer-review human subjects research, and the paper does not state that the research was approved by an ethics board, you must recommend that the paper be rejected.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/26
| 521
| 2,031
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've undertaken some novel work as part of my undergraduate thesis and have been advised that this work goes sufficiently beyond the brief of an undergrad thesis and is novel enough to submit for publication. Since this will be my first paper and my supervisor is a subject matter expert, we've decided that we will coauthor an article based upon this research.
The most relevant fields are Quantum Electronics and Quantum Optics, so the logical place to publish this would seem to be Physical Review X's new spinoff PRX Quantum, launched last month.
However, I've been unable to find a LaTex template for articles in this new journal.
Would anyone know where I could find this? If not, would it be inappropriate to email the editor and ask if one exists?<issue_comment>username_1: I suggest you use the prx option included in [REVTeX-4.2](https://journals.aps.org/revtex), e.g. using
`\documentclass[prx,twocolumn,english,superscriptaddress,floatfix,longbibliography]{revtex4-2}` (Without having compared too closely, the style used by PRX Quantum seems to be the same as in PRX.) If you have an earlier version of REVTeX that doesn't support prx, just use the preset for another APS journal. Either way, they'll handle the minutiae of formatting should the manuscript be accepted.
It's not inappropriate to ask journal staff about templates, but [they state](https://journals.aps.org/prxquantum/authors#submission) that submissions in REVTeX or MS Word are preferred, and I think using prx is the closest you can get using REVTeX at the moment.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The [*Information for Authors*](https://journals.aps.org/prxquantum/authors) page of PRX quantum links to the [*Physical Review Style and Notation Guide*](https://cdn.journals.aps.org/files/styleguide-pr.pdf), which is common to all APS journals.
You can see from that guide that it recommends the usage of [REVTeX](https://journals.aps.org/revtex) for the preparation of the manuscript.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/10/26
| 1,852
| 7,543
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am enrolled in an upper level STEM class.
My teacher has recently announced that we have a "downloadable" midterm. The midterm is not officially timed, and we have a week to submit it, and there is no way the teacher can track how much time we have used. Now, in class and in a clarification request, it was stated that we have a total time to "work on it" for 3 hours tops, even though we can "look at it" for longer.
I have no clue how to deal with this. A good number of my (normally obsessive/honor code) friends have already told me that they will use more time than what is officially allowed to work on the exam. Based on the sample I've conducted with the people in my year in the class, I would say its highly likely at ***least*** 50% are planning on using more time than allowed.
Ngl [not going to lie], I've had to deal with "other people using more than they should be" for at least two of my classes (all of which are online) this semester and I don't want to deal with it in a third. I'm frustrated.
Is there anything I can do?
---
**Solutions I consider:**
1. Students protesting — I don't think anyone is being obsessive about
this mess apart from me.
2. Confronting the teacher myself — for one thing, I'm not sure if I
am liked by this person (LOL) but I'm *guessing* if I say "yo there
are students planning on cheating", this person will simply send out
an email stating "don't cheat" to the class.
---
**Notes:**
1. The people in the class of my year already know about all this mess of a situation because I discussed the strange rules in our group chat, so I suspect if the professor sends out an email I can be immediately linked as "the person who prompted the kerfuffle". also I'll be known as the rat. I don't care too much about my reputation, but nonetheless this isn't super pleasant. I probably shouldn't have done this, I see now that it is kind of coming back to bite.
2. Certain details have been changed or obfuscated to avoid identification.
3. I'm estimating likelihood of cheating based on an informal "poll" I gave in a high-effort group chat; to get a picture of this group, its a bunch of overachieving underclassmen who I don't think would ever cheat in normal circumstances. I have evidence of intention to cheat, I am not willing to submit it to my teacher.
4. *What I would hope from my teacher would be that the "time cap" of 3 hours would be removed; this obviously is going to get violated anyway.*
5. I specifically asked the professor whether we "must not" spend more than 3 hours on the test; he confirmed that 3 hours is a hard limit.
6. The class is graded on a curve.
---
**What I'm probably gonna do:**
I don't think I should contact the professor directly, mostly because I think this person doesn't like me that much. I think my solution is just going to be to email this person anonymously and express that I have concretely seen evidence of people intending to cheat, *though I'm not ratting out any fellow students,* and I'll request that the time limit is lifted.<issue_comment>username_1: You’re in an unenviable position and I don’t have clear suggestions how to proceed. But at the very least, it’s worth calling attention to the fact that
1. your instructor is neglecting their duty to maintain an acceptable level of academic integrity, and
2. this may rise to the level of being more than just a “feeling” but an actual violation of university policy.
For example, at my university, our [guidelines about faculty responsibilities in connection with academic honesty](https://registrar.ucdavis.edu/faculty-staff/faculty/academic-honesty) state (emphasis mine):
>
> Academic honesty is an integral part of the University's educational mission. According to the UC Davis Code of Academic Conduct, **all members of the academic community are responsible for the academic integrity of the UC Davis campus**.
>
>
> [...]
>
>
> Faculty are encouraged to promote an atmosphere of honesty in the classroom. For example.
>
>
> [...]
>
>
> * **Use exam and assignment formats that discourage academic misconduct.**
>
>
>
Now, to be clear, I’m not suggesting that this is grounds for an official complaint or to ask for the instructor to be punished or anything like that. But the point is, if and when you choose to complain either to the instructor or to other campus authorities (department chair, office of academic integrity etc), citing relevant university guidelines or policies can be a good way of strengthening your case and reminding people that academic honesty is a two-way street in which both students and teachers have responsibilities. When the teachers are neglecting their own responsibiltiies by creating such obvious opportunities for a “thought crime” form of cheating that cannot possibly be detected, they can’t very well expect students to fulfill their side of the bargain.
Good luck! Sorry you have to deal with this nonsense.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I would presume the teacher took this course of action because they know the exam will take less than three hours. Probably the there is no benefit to spending more than three hours on it. In my experience, students who take the longest to complete an exam are not doing anything to improve their grades during the later part of the exam.
What should you do? You should follow your honor code (we do not know what it says), just as with any other exam. If you are required to report other people telling you they will cheat, report it. Otherwise, spend your time studying.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: Most of my graduate exams were take home and pretty much everyone talked to each other. I mean even the professor knew it was going to happen.
Exams were basically there to force you to keep up with the course, projects had as much or more grade.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: I would consider the possibility that your professor phrased the rules more strict than they intented to. That is the 3 hours are a recommendation and they would not consider it cheating if students where to take much longer. It is also possible that the professor just didn't think about this too much beforehand and if you point out the mess they will just retreat to this recommendation because it makes life much easier for them. I don't know whether this covers your situation but consider that this is how it could play out.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: I recommend you comply with the exam instructions yourself, and inform your professor that others intend to bypass the instructions (you can report this anonymously if you wish). With regard to the first piece of advice, university is a good time to develop good character by learning to avoid doing things that are unethical, even in situations where you are incentivised to do so. This is more important than getting a few extra point on an exam and it will pay dividends in your life. With regard to the second piece of advice, it is good feedback for your lecturer to know that their examination process is flawed, and that it is unfair for students who comply with the exam instructions. You can let your lecturer know that you are aware of other students who have said that they intend to take additional unreported time on the exam. (Feel free to report this anonymously if you wish, and/or to omit the names of the students in question; the important thing here is feedback on the process, not reporting of students intending to cheat that process.)
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/26
| 783
| 3,354
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an international student and I received admit from X university (USA) for PhD in computer science.
I reached out to all the professors who match my research interest and only one of them responded. Now when I am supposed to fly in a month he has notified me that he doesn’t want to commit to new students.
None of the other professors are replying to my mails. I have got my visa and I am left with no funding.
What should I do now? Should I drop my plan or should I simply go for a masters or anything else?<issue_comment>username_1: In the US a CS student entering a doctoral program with only a bachelors seldom actually starts out with their dissertation advisor. There is plenty of time to meet people, see what they do, and impress them. The program is normally heavy on coursework initially. You might wait until your third year or so to actually wind up with the professor who will guide you.
This can be different in other fields and certainly is in other countries, but I wouldn't be a bit concerned about the situation.
The other professors aren't replying because it is too early for them to even think of considering you. Your situation is completely normal here.
The required classwork can be quite extensive since most programs require that you obtain a broad education in your field as well as a deep knowledge of some part of it. Almost all programs have comprehensive exams (maybe three or four) that must be passed before you get too deep into specific dissertation research. These assure the broad knowledge expected of any PhD.
Also, most students in such programs have either a TA or an RA that supports them financially in return for various activities that also prepare you for a career in academia (primarily). And such students don't pay fees, though they have living expenses, of course. But that would be the case anyway.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: It sounds like you've been admitted to a US PhD program in computer science without guaranteed funding.
While you will have to decide for yourself what to do, to me this seems like an unusual circumstance. As username_1's answer mentions, it's common for students to not have an advisor right away in US PhD programs. However, it is not common to be completely unfunded.
I don't know what led you to being in this position, maybe there was a miscommunication between you and the program you applied to. Did they think you would have some sort of funding from your home country? Did they think an advisor had already committed to taking you on (in my grad program this would have been referred to as a 'direct admit' student)? Did you not have any conversations about funding during the application process?
I would not recommend moving to another country for an unfunded PhD unless you are independently wealthy and the cost is no concern. If you can arrange for a TA or RA position before the semester starts then that's fine. It seems like you're out of luck for now on the RA front, so find out from your program what the steps are to get a TAship.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I did an unfunded MS, but I was getting in state tuition and lived with my parents. I then entered a funded PhD program at the same university.
I wouldn't pay out of state tuition for a PhD where I had to rent an apartment.
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/26
| 774
| 3,389
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm in the second year of a post-doc, and currently participating in my first experience as a peer-reviewer (my lab PI recommended me to the editor because he's too busy to do it right now). I noticed a section of the Methods that seems to be completely out of place. It describes statistical analysis of data that were neither generated nor reported in the manuscript, and is generally a source of confusion for me as a reviewer. So I did what I would have done grading papers in grad school, and pasted that section into a free online [plagiarism detector](https://plagiarismdetector.net/). It came back with a 100% match for the full paragraph from an article published earlier this year. My suspicion is that this wasn't any sort of intentional plagiarism or research misconduct, but rather a case of someone using another text as a guide for how to structure that section of the text and simply forgetting to make the necessary changes, or possibly even submitting the wrong version.
I should mention, for context, that it's not uncommon to follow the methods of another paper exactly in experimental biology, but that's clearly not what happened in this case. My primary concern is that I can't properly review the reported results and conclusions without information that should be provided in this section of manuscript, which I've already discussed in my review comments. I'm just wondering if I would also be expected to point out the possibility of unintentional plagiarism, or if that's considered outside the scope of my responsibilities as a peer reviewer.<issue_comment>username_1: I would immediately communicate your findings to the editor and do no further reviewing until you hear back from them.
In the best case, like you say, they forgot to edit it, and can resubmit. Communicating to the editor will let them stop the other reviewers so they don't waste their time either.
In the worst case, it's poorly executed plagiarism and you would have to contact the editor anyway.
To answer the title question, of course there's no issue looking for plagiarism, and you seem familiar enough with the field to understand the implications of your results.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I'd probably contact the editor and point out the paper version submitted isn't ready to review without a relevant methods section, and hopefully they will reach out to the authors to remedy. Your call on whether to mention plagiarism - but if the section is truly irrelevant and from another paper and was a placeholder, it could be a mistake.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: To answer your question: yes, it is completely appropriate to check for plagiarism or any other type of scientific misconduct when reviewing an article. This is what the peer review process is for.
If you would not check for it, chances are nobody will, and a flawed paper would be published.
Once detected, it should be communicated in a fitting way to both the editor and the authors.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: It may be that the authors of the published paper are the same of the current under review. I would say no to plagiarism, yes to "reusing the same <.doc or .tex template> because who has time to go through setting up all that editorial formats crap even if we pay the journal something in the range 500-5000usd/eur/gbp/chf/cad/aud?"
Upvotes: -1
|
2020/10/27
| 425
| 1,734
|
<issue_start>username_0: I handed in my masters dissertation a few weeks ago and I’ve now discovered a referencing mistake in my literature review. A medical publication I’d been citing has had a number of updates over the years and instead of citing the earlier year (2009) I’ve cited 2018. I could kick myself. I’m very anxious about this and not sure if I should just wait it out or speak to my advisor? I had mentioned to him that I couldn’t stop re reading it (before I realised about the year thing and he told me stop it and I wish I had listened. I realise that nothing can be done to rectify it and I’m willing to accept I’ll lose marks if found but I’m worried something more serious will happen. I’m so mortified and hoped to apply for a PhD next year ( I was on track for a first) I honestly can’t believe I’ve made such a careless mistake. Marks are due out at the end of Nov.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't have enough reputation to comment but we are all human and we make mistakes, you could ask your advisor about submitting an erratum but it is generally done only for peer-reviewed publications.
Personally, I wouldn't worry too much about a typo in my citations. Unless the entire conclusions of a section really depended on the results from this particular reference.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Your school may have a procedure for submitting updates/corrections to your dissertation. This will probably require contacting the committee who reviewed the original work, and also the library that archives copies of the dissertation.
This citation error, however, is pretty minor, and while you reference a newer copy instead of the old, most researchers may figure it out from context.
Upvotes: -1
|
2020/10/27
| 204
| 830
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a graduate student considering tutoring another student in a challenging graduate level statistics course. What is a reasonable hourly rate to charge? This is a public university in the United States.
Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: Personally, under such a circumstance, I think it is fair to charge at least $30/hour. Going over this really depends on the student's ability to pay higher rates.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Any rate you can get the student you're tutoring to agree to is a fair hourly rate. I've charged up to $80/hr for tutoring students in the US in the past (usually that rate paid for by a small group). I've also tutored friends for just dinner or some beers. Just make sure both parties agree, probably best over email or something with a paper trail.
Upvotes: 2
|
2020/10/27
| 2,694
| 11,067
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was wondering if it would be okay for a full-time PhD student (in biology) to pursue a part-time degree in an unrelated subject.
I had an undergrad experience that was pretty "focused", which was great in that it gave me decent training for graduate school, but also meant I never really got to experience certain subjects as much as I would've liked.
I came across a mostly-online degree programme in liberal arts from an accredited university and it got me thinking. Classes are mostly-online and I would be able to work at my own pace; I could spread the whole thing out across, say, 5 years. Any synchronous online sessions would take place in the evening/night, or during the weekend.
Do I absolutely have to enroll in a programme like this to fill out the "gaps" in my education? Admittedly no. I could just read books. But I feel like I want to. I would prefer the structure, engagement and feedback/advising that comes with formalized instruction, especially since I understand self-study is not exactly the best approach to subjects like Philosophy.
I do think the exposure to liberal arts subjects would develop me personally (different ways of thinking, better articulation). It's something I regret not having touched while an undergrad.
I don't mean to sound ungrateful or uninterested in my graduate study. I genuinely am. I just also genuinely want to enrich myself in this particular way, on the side. I know what little free time I have would become even less, but my heart is telling me it would be worth it. And I *do* have an interest in Philosophy I would like to explore. If things go south, I will pause or drop it.
If it *doesn't interfere with my progress in my PhD*, do you guys think it would be a good idea? I would have to tell my advisor, right (would I?)? I don't wish to upset him or give him a wrong idea.
Sorry for the long post, thank you for any advice.<issue_comment>username_1: If it does not interfere with your graduate studies, then no one could possibly object. People should have hobbies outside their PhDs, and if you a Physics student has an interest in Classic Philosophy, then so be it.
But you need to be sure it won't interfere. There is a world of difference between taking the odd evening class in something and enrolling in a degree, even part time. Think about how much time you have: Our full-time undergraduate degrees are designed to require 37 hours a week of study. Even doing such a degree over 5 years, rather than 3, you would still be talking about 23 hours a week. Are you going to manage to be working at peak performance if you are doing this on top of 40-50 hours a week of graduate study?
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I know people who did multiple second BS and MS degrees while doing a PhD. Mainly business.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Many PhD programmes allow you to enrol in undergraduate classes from other parts of the university (I know mine did). I would explore this as an option, it would seem to retain almost all the benefits of your plan without such a large risk of overcommitment. Missing out on the actual undergraduate certificate seems not a big deal if you are already getting a PhD.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: I find it a bit sad that a question like this even needs to be asked. Yes, of course it’s okay. You are a PhD student not an indentured servant (though too often people confuse the two...), and anything that you choose to do with your spare time is your private business. This is no different than someone who goes home at the end of the day and writes poetry, or plays guitar or board games or does any number of other things that graduate students (and people in general) do outside of work. Of course, I’m assuming that your study activities will in fact take place in the off-work period as you indicated. If you are worried about any appearance of impropriety, remember that it’ll be your responsibility to maintain a healthy separation between your work and your philosophy “hobby”.
As for telling your advisor: you can, but you are under no obligation to tell them. And if you do decide to discuss it, make sure that you *tell* them as opposed to *ask* them. It’s not something that you need permission or approval to do, and (re: your “*I don't mean to sound ungrateful*” comment) certainly not something to apologize for.
Finally, for what it’s worth, if you were my student I’d be totally supportive and encouraging of pursuing this idea (to the extent that my support is required, which as I said it isn’t really), while cautioning you that you may be putting some money at risk and that graduate school is for many people a very demanding pursuit that leaves less time than they expect for other activities, especially intellectually demanding ones.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: I went through the same dilemma during my PhD in engineering and solved the same problem by taking some courses for credit and auditing others--Introduction to Wines, Existentialism or Marxism, Latin, and Religion and Reason. In my university we also have to take two minors when getting a PhD, and I was able to squeeze some classes I was interested in in one of my minors--Project Finance and Business Strategy. My adviser was not much of a fan of the idea, so I had to compensate for it by working harder.
Something else to keep in mind is your funding situation. In certain departments students have funding almost guaranteed for almost whatever time they need to graduate. If that is your case, why not just take an extra semester or so to graduate and take a few more classes? Otherwise, just try to gauge what your adviser would let you do and how much you would be able to get done. I do think it is worth it sacrificing a bit of the production work to become a more well-rounded person, even because being a good thinker, good communicator, and more empathetic person, all of which you can improve by taking philosophy and other classes, will definitely help you in your future profession.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I got a Master's degree in astrophysics while completing my PhD in math. When I asked my supervisor about it, he said "As long as you finish your dissertation on time, it's fine by me. Go for it!" and was very enthusiastic about the idea.
You might have to take some time off to pass exams for the degree you want to get on the side, so you would want to talk to your PhD advisor about it. But as long as you do the work for your PhD, there is no reason you can't get another degree on the side.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: My vision:
* Costs are money and time.
* Risks are 1) Fail your PhD 2) Fail your other diploma 3) Fail both. Its implications are loss of money, time, career perspectives and maybe some self-esteem.
* Expected benefits are 1) Intellectual stimulation 2) No regrets 3) The small possibility to completely change your job domain.
For the record, a friend of mine was in a similar situation: He was in its last year of business bachelor and started a part time history degree. He ended up failing his final exams in his business bachelor and completely gave up the history classes. He re-tried the bachelor business next year and succeeded. In other words it was a complete fail for him and he was not lazy or stupid, but any human has their limits.
If you really hesitating try to do your own list of positive vs negative aspects, it might help.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: Some others say this is entirely your own choice and you needn't tell anyone.
I disagree. This is not like playing sport or being part of the university drama troupe. There *is* serious time and head-space demand accompanying this activity. A supervisor has a right to know this, I think, as there is a risk of distraction from your own work. There is also a risk of disaffection among others in the research group if they sense a lack of commitment to the work in hand.
I don't think any decent supervisor will impede you if there's no bad impact on your work - in which case you stand to even benefit mentally/socially from it. But be aware that philosophy is not about ideas alone: it's a strict mental discipline and you have to clearly and rationally explore these ideas. It's not for nothing that Phil graduates quickly master other (and very competitive) professions like law, accountancy, business management, etc. Having met one or two Phils in transfer courses to software eng, I was always stunned at the strength of their logical faculty.
I'd be more worried about attitudes of other PhD students in your group. Maybe you could ask your supervisor to keep this between yourselves but not deny it if someone twigs.
Finally, if it needs to be said, don't wall out too much of your spare time so that there's no time to relax and try and keep a normal social life for someone of your age - i.e. *unstructured and mutually discretionary* engagement between people. We all need to engage with someone on a purely human level. While this may not enhance our rational mind in any way, it will enlighten our appreciation of the human context of our work and this in turn feeds into our motivation to work creatively and pleasure in such achievement. Studentship grant allowing, of course!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: When it does not interfere with your graduate studies, then there cannot be any objection on it . Hobbies or other related study on related streams can be done in along with the PhDs. Chemist can show interests in Classical Chemistry and Earth Science, All the more the growth rate and the Performance will be high . so it can be as it is .
As long as you can manage there wont be a problem in facing both the test related to once subject .
But make sure it won't interfere. Difference between taking the odd evening class in something and enrolling in a degree, even part time. Hence Time Management will play key roles. Think about how much time you have and the time left and keep it on track.
Finally, at the end of the day , it’s worth it, if you were my student I’d be totally supportive and encouraging of pursuing this idea , is for many people a very demanding pursuit and unencouraged on various level which will lead to less time than they expect for other activities, be it curriculum and many more .
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_10: Your primary advisor, if an apprenticeship, has tacit reason to believe that all of your work efforts (outside of free time) are spent towards completing your biology PhD. To pursue another degree otherwise suggests: 1) your dedication to your current PhD is lacking or waning and 2) you are potentially going to split your interests, which is not to the benefit of your primary PI.
While I recognize and appreciate your wide-ranging interests and skills, this is likely not going to be met with acceptance from your peers. You should have a very frank discussion with your advisor and try to come up with a mutually acceptable plan, if any.
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/27
| 839
| 3,617
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a sophomore undergraduate studying CS and I look forward to getting into research in future. Is there any advantage of being a student member of societies like ACM, IEEE, etc? I think it might help me expose myself more in the area of Computer Science and research in general but I'm still not sure. I realised that I already have access to digital library through my uni. How can I maximise the benefits I derive from my membership if I choose to become one?
For example, the yearly student membership cost of ACM where I study (India) is ~$25. It says:
* Access to the full ACM Digital Library
* Access to online courses, ebooks and training videos,
* Electronic subscription to Communications of the ACM magazine
* Access to ACM's highly targeted Career and Job Center
-Subscription to XRDS, ACM's all new student magazine
* Electronic subscription to ACM CareerNews (twice monthly)
* ACM e-news digest TechNews (tri-weekly)
* ACM's monthly online newsletter MemberNet
* Free "acm.org" email forwarding address plus filtering
I don't know how much these subscriptions really benefit me.<issue_comment>username_1: I can only address ACM. I would think that for an undergraduate, the benefits are small, though the fees are also very small. However, if you don't otherwise have access to the ACM digital library, a membership can come with a subscription (costs a bit more, though).
The digital library has just about everything published by ACM and its special interest groups, so is pretty valuable for research and some kinds of learning.
However, it is also likely that you university library can give you access for free, though it will be a bit less convenient as you have to go through a librarian.
There might be additional advantages if your university has a local student chapter depending on how active it is.
You can read more: <https://www.acm.org/membership/membership-benefits>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It depends on your local access. It sounds from comments like your library gives you access to the Digital Library, in which case that is not an additional benefit.
However, the "online courses, ebooks, and training videos" includes access to O'Reilly's learning platform. There is a wealth of useful books and materials in there, including most (if not all) O'Reilly books, as well as many from Manning and other publishers. That alone may make it worth the fee (and I am increasingly adopting books available on this platform as the textbooks for my courses, so students can access them for the flat fee of an ACM student membership). You should check if you can get a membership without the DL - US students can, and the digital library is the only difference (non-DL memberships still include the O'Reilly platform, for instance). In my opinion, O'Reilly alone makes it worth the fee.
As you progress in your research, the discount for conference attendance also becomes useful. Many ACM-sponsored conferences require students to be ACM members in order to get the student discount (in part because asking the ACM "is this person a student member?" is a lot easier than verifying individual proofs of student status).
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: It helps me with conference registration. For my accepted research papers, conferences do care if you have a membership or not. I publish several research papers every year so this kind of membership saves some of my chair money. For example:
**Registration Categories**:
**IEEE Member including** (IEEE Student Member)
GBP 250
**Non-IEEE Member**
GBP 300
Upvotes: 0
|
2020/10/27
| 1,695
| 7,136
|
<issue_start>username_0: I just received an email from a lecturer I do not know and have never had contact with, asking for my course materials.
On the one hand, sharing my course materials has almost no cost for me, and I have shared them before either "in house" (with lecturers in my department) or with close colleagues (coauthors/community friends etc.). This is the first time I'm encountering a request from a truly random stranger.
I am inclined to refuse this request.
I put in a lot of effort into my course material, and take pride in my work. Handing it over to some other person (who may or may not credit me) feels like I'm cheapening my efforts.
I am I just being prudish? Is this common practice that I just never happened to encounter? Is there a potential ethical issue with sharing materials that I am missing here?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I am I just being prudish?
>
>
>
You or your university own the copyright to your course material, protecting your copyright is perfectly reasonable.
>
> Is this common practice that I just never happened to encounter?
>
>
>
It certainly happens; I don't know of any statistics on the frequency, so can't comment on whether it's common practice.
>
> Is
> there a potential ethical issue with sharing materials that I am
> missing here?
>
>
>
If your university owns the copyright, then you'd need permission to share.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Whether to share-or-not (assuming that you yourself, not your university, own the rights to what you've created) is strongly a matter of personal preference... I don't see a universal mandate.
Many years ago, I did pay careful attention to copyright control, and so on, but eventually I got the impression that it was simply not the case that people were clamoring to get their hands on stuff I'd written. :)
So, for some years now, I've put everything on-line with a Creative Commons license, and whenever anyone is polite enough to ask permission for use, I give it, without any negotiations. In fact, if one of my goals were to maximize the impact I have on ... for example, graduate curriculum in mathematics... unrestricted dissemination seems the obvious choice. True, I may not "get all the credit I deserve", but I already have "enough credit" to survive, so that'd not be a tragedy.
A situation where one should be more careful is when one's institution attempts to use-and-discard people who develop course material. In such cases, "getting credit" probably matters much more. Luckily, till now anyway, that kind of thing has not been toooooo much of an issue at my university, although arising sporadically over the years. (I'm not optimistic about the future...)
In summary: if you don't want to share the fruits of your labors, don't. You may change your mind later, and that's fine, too.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: >
> Is this common practice that I just never happened to encounter?
>
>
>
What I have seen increasingly is that associations ask their members to contribute their course material to an online repository. Furthering the discipline by sharing best practice and avoiding duplication of effort is the kind of service that fits well with such organizations.
Being in a repository ensures that the contributor gets some "credit" just by the fact that the name is on the website next to your materials. Anytime a member of the association (often established academics in your discipline) peruses the repository to see if there is anything (s)he can use they will see your name next to the material you contributed.
However, my feeling is that such repositories are initially filled by people who really care about the discipline and the association. If it takes of, then people start adding because they benefited from it, and want to give back to keep it going. So getting credit does not seem to be the main driver of these repositories.
Regardless, you could see if such a repository exists for your (sub-(sub-))discipline, submit your material there, and give that link.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I would also refuse a request for my teaching materials from a random stranger, especially one not in my department.
Many faculty I'm aware of devalue teaching. The "real" part of being faculty is doing research, and teaching is just a burden that occasionally has to be carried. I've always detested this attitude, and personally think teaching is the highest impact thing most faculty will ever do.
The fact that a random stranger asked for your material is a clear symptom of that. If this was research in progress, not yet published to the public, and a random researcher emailed you and asked for all your research materials, you would immediately say no. Actually you would probably ignore the email as predatory. Because creating original research and publishing it is your job.
If teaching is also important, I don't see how the request you received is any different. Your job is to create it and then present it to your students.
Of course such a request coming from a coworker, or a trusted collaborator, could be a different thing. But **you have just as much right to protect the hard work you put into your teaching as any researcher has to protect the hard work they put into as-yet unpublished research.**
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: In general, I feel that if *some* of the material is openly available (and can be found using search engines), then it's ok to ask but if I were to receive such a request for material that is not openly available I would be a lot more careful.
I fact I have actually done basically this: I find some chapter of course notes and I will on occasions email the instructor asking if there is more material openly available.
>
> Dear Prof. Friend,
>
>
> I discovered the wonderful Chapter 8 of your course notes on basket weaving and would like to know if additional material is openly available elsewhere. I myself will be teaching this topic come next term and your material would be helpful in my own preparation.
>
>
>
I've usually had generous response when I send this from my professional email.
I certainly would have no issues with sharing my own material with someone who would send me such an email (I've done this once) although I would add the caveats that my notes contain copyrighted material (figures pilfered from textbooks etc) and would kindly ask they not be distributed as they are not in finalized form, may contain errors etc.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Assuming you have a legal right to share the materials, as is common in US universities:
* Sharing teaching materials is a good way to improve the quality of instruction. It is the right thing to do to benefit students.
* If you can get teaching materials you have created used widely, this will help you make a case for promotion. Some universities require faculty to be "world leaders" in teaching in order to get promoted to the highest rank. Getting other people to adopt your teaching materials is one of a very few ways to meet that criterion.
Upvotes: 3
|
2020/10/27
| 674
| 2,748
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently taking an online course (at a university in the US) in which once a week I am in the same virtual meeting room as two professors, one male and one female, with the same last name. I am unsure in how I should go about directly addressing one of them when I typically address all my professors as "Professor " . As a second-year undergraduate student, I have been told it is inappropriate to address both professors by their first name if they have not stated this is okay (e.g. my past professors have typically said "you can call me " on the first day of class). Additionally, when I took a course with one of these professors last year, I (and all other students) addressed them as "Professor ". If addressing them by first name is inappropriate in this context, how would I selectively address one when both professors are in the room?
With the exception of myself and another undergraduate, all other students in this course are graduate students, and address the professors on a first-name basis. So this has not a common cause of confusion in the course.<issue_comment>username_1: edit: as the OP points out in the comments, the following answer only makes sense in an in-person, non-Covid-19 setting. I'm leaving it up for the case the pandemic is resolved at some point.
Address them as Professor Lastname while looking the person you're addressing in the eye. The non-addressed person should take the hint from you not looking at them, that you mean the other person. If this indeed leads to confusion, count on the professors to suggest a way out.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: There are few things you can do.
1. Call each by their full name like '<NAME>' or 'Prof<NAME>'.
2. Ask whether you can call them by 'Professor first-name' like '<NAME>' or '<NAME>'.
3. Continue to use 'Professor last-name'. They'll either decide who will answer or ask you to clarify which person you wanted.
4. And the easiest, as pointed out by Buffy, ask the professors if there's an alternate, unique name you can use so you can differentiate between them.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: At my school, there are several married professor couples who we refer to as "Dr. Mr. Last Name" and "Dr. Mrs. Last Name". This would probably be less appropriate if they are unrelated, and is informal enough that you would need their approval first, but it is both unambiguous and obvious in meaning.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: In addition to the other great suggestions, you can address them as "Professor <NAME>" and "Professor <NAME>". That's so over the top formal that they might cringe and tell you to use their first names.
Upvotes: 4
|
2020/10/28
| 1,967
| 8,776
|
<issue_start>username_0: As a postdoc in a theoretical STEM field, I have had many wonderful collaborations where all authors contribute non-trivially to the final product. However, there was also many "unbalanced" collaborations: where one author does 90% of the work for example. I am not talking about a situation in which a senior professor is automatically given authorship because of politics. For this question, let's say that we talk about collaborations between researchers of the same academic age/position (e.g. all postdocs).
These unbalanced collaborations are often not a problem per se but can be draining and time-consuming in the long run. To give an example, I have had collaborations where I was almost feeling like a PhD advisor to my collaborator, having to explain/redo everything. In contrast, the balanced collaborations that I experienced were always extremely enriching and efficient in comparison.
As a young and inexperienced researcher, my question is: **what is the best approach to choose collaborators?**
I see two extreme options:
* Don't worry about it. Accept and nurture every collaboration as they come. If your collaborators are not useful, take the time to help them and make them grow, even at the expense of your own growth. At some point, you might also be the "useless" collaborator and you will be thankful to having been accepted in the collaboration.
* Avoid unbalanced collaborations by seeking only collaborators you can benefit from. This is probably the best approach career-wise. However, I feel like it can lead to toxic behaviors which might do more harm than good in the long run.
Even though there is probably not a right answer to the question, this is something that has been bothering me lately, and I would benefit a lot from insights of more experienced researchers.
Many thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: I am dealing with this exact problem right now. It's really annoying, especially in fields where authors are alphabetized.
I think in general you should avoid bad collaborations, both where toxic behavior runs rampant AND where collaborators are unhelpful. Sometimes there's a "fun" combination of both in which a collaborator is doing very little work very slowly, exploits your helpfulness, then takes credit for your work in meetings with senior collaborators. I suggest finishing the projects you have with people like this as quickly as possible (or bowing out/reprioritizing your time to more promising projects if you think it will be too draining) and then not working with them again in the future.
There are a ton of good collaborators out there, and as you grow your network you really shouldn't waste your time on toxic collaborations or bad collaborators. This doesn't have to be toxic in and of itself: if you find people you work well with and collaborations where everyone brings something useful to the table and pulls their weight, you'll generally have better experiences and produce better research. In a sense that's looking for people who will benefit your career, but hopefully the benefits are mutual and overall you have a good time doing science together.
I also think what goes around comes around, especially in author-alphabetized fields. Maybe people who do 10% of the work will get their name on a lot of papers as postdocs, but when it comes to faculty hiring, reputations are more established and faculty really pay attention to any comments about work distributions from your coauthors. People will take pity on a weak researcher and give them a postdoc sometimes if they have networking reasons to do so, but they are not going to extend the same charity when it comes to permanent positions.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In any collaboration, some degree of imbalance is inevitable. I've been on both sides of the matter, and the question I've always used to guide my collaboration decision is:
"Are all of the collaborating parties benefiting from the relationship?"
There are a lot of ways to evaluate this question, some very pragmatic and some very personal. Here are some factors one might consider: joy or lack thereof, how the relationship affects future job prospects, impact of the work, access to interesting future projects, opportunity cost for working on the project. It sounds from your description like your answer right now is no, so you should probably stop working with the person in question. Before doing so, ask yourself: "what would change this working relationship for me? Is there a way to make that change happen?" You might find some reasonable requests that encourage continuation, but more importantly this will help you wrap things up better. You do have an ethical obligation to bow out gracefully, though nothing is forcing you to and this may not be possible.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Consider a PhD student collaborating with his/her advisor, which is obviously imbalanced. Although the advisor must teach the student, and it takes the student more time to complete a task than it would the advisor, the advisor is often reducing his/her workload by teaching the student instead of performing the work on their own. For collaborating with your peers, you could think of it similarly - you may have to teach them some technical skills, but if it saves you time, that can still be a beneficial collaboration for you.
As an advisor, teaching a student can be a separate reward in addition to doing research. As you said, there can be other benefits in fostering collaborations besides completing papers quickly.
**Ultimately, I think the choice is yours to make and depends on your goals and priorities.** There's no obligation for you to perform 90% of the work in a collaboration. If your collaborator isn't pulling his/her weight, you could choose to do most of the work to obtain a publication, or instead focus on other research topics.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: **This is not a zero-sum game.** Including someone as a co-author is almost always mutually beneficial, as long as the person contributes *something*. Who cares whether it's only a few paragraphs in the discussion and a few comments or a bit of software? They did improve the paper a little bit. In the end, **the credit you receive for the paper isn't reduced by including someone else** - maybe even on the contrary: intuitively, I value papers with many authors higher, because that means that more knowledgeable people put their thought into it. It will also be useful for future collaborations. So I find it's not helpful to be picky about co-authors, *as long as they actually help.*
Thus, I would argue that **an imbalance regarding the amount of work put into a paper is not a problem at all. What *is* a problem of course is when someone does not actually contribute or, worse, is slowing down progress.** In that case, you should be honest with yourself and the collaborators and quickly find a way to improve the working mode, or get rid of the collaboration (which can also mean simply not actively pursuing it anymore). Note that I'm all *for* helping collaborators grow! [Find canvases for other people to paint on; make them look good.](https://ryanholiday.net/the-canvas-strategy/) However, these people should also bring something to the table; otherwise, the collaboration is simply not a good fit for the two of you.
In my experience, the **checklist for a successful collaboration** goes something like this:
* All collaborators have an intrinsic motivation to actively work on the project. This motivation must be significant enough to bring people to work on this instead of the 856 other interesting projects they have on their desk!
* There is a clear and mutually agreed-upon assignment of work packages to collaborators. This should (roughly) be clear from the start. Ideally, the collaborators have complementary expertise, making the task distribution obvious.
* Everybody gets along well with everybody else, and the working relationship is productive. There's no sense in collaborating with people who are stubborn, lazy, arrogant, or simply not fun to be around - even if they are highly respected experts. Interacting with your collaborators should not leave you with a bad feeling.
A caveat regarding "not a zero-sum game": I'm in a STEM/engineering field; this may differ in other fields.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Unbalanced is the norm so they are best to be avoided.
Never write with anyone else unless you know for sure that they have something critical you need to use.
If you do collaborate write a contract that spells out who will do what and how much of the total effort. If they come up short then they forfeit all rights to have their name on the paper.
Upvotes: -1
|
2020/10/28
| 463
| 1,981
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have written a new paper where I am proposing methodological improvements to neural network training. I have simulation data and empirical results in financial markets to back up my algorithm. I am now looking for a journal to which to submit my paper. Initially, I have thought of submitting to a finance journal and have tried *Quantitative Finance* but it was rejected there.
The nature of the comments from one of the reviewers suggest to me that perhaps he/she did **not** understand my paper. Where should I try next? Should I try other computational/empirical finance journals or should I target an application-heavy machine learning journal?<issue_comment>username_1: Regardless of your specific context, there are tools that may help you with finding appropriate journals based on your paper's Title and Abstract.
For instance, if you want to publish in an Open Access (OA) journal, you can paste your Abstract here and to get recommendations for topically suitable OA journals: <https://ojm.ocert.at/>
Publishers likewise provide similar tools, such as:
* Elsevier's Journal Finder: <https://journalfinder.elsevier.com/>
* Wiley's Journal Finder:
<https://journalfinder.wiley.com/search?type=match>
* Springer's Journal Suggester: <https://journalsuggester.springer.com/>
Upvotes: 1 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You may not like this answer but if you do not know which journals are relevant for your work you have not read enough literature and your paper is probably not ready to be published.
You need to inform yourself about what other reasearchers have done already, what the current state of the art is for the neural networks and in the financial market of interest, and add references to relevant articles to place your research in this context.
If it turns out that, for example, 10 out of the 30 references you found are from the same journal than that journal could be a good candidate to submit to.
Upvotes: 1
|
2020/10/28
| 564
| 2,356
|
<issue_start>username_0: I understand that applying to competitive pure math PhD programs in mathematics in the US/UK definitely requires good grades (A or above) in most math courses - but I'm wondering how **bad is it** if I have one or two B's or C's? Are there other factors that can help me shadow my *not-so-good* grades while applying? (of course, only in 1 or 2 courses).
In particular, the course that didn't go so well for me this fall is a *second course in Linear Algebra*, and I ask this since I am a little worried about the situation.<issue_comment>username_1: A single bad grade is unlikely to matter much. A history of bad grades is worrisome. Your application to a doctoral program needs to show that you have high likelihood of success in (math) research. This implies that you can demonstrate insight into areas of math that you want to specialize in.
But insight in mathematics isn't uniform over sub-fields and mathematicians understand that (I hope, anyway).
In the US, there are many things taken into account besides GPA and even individual grades. So, you are right to be "a little worried", but not to panic.
But, for some people, even a poor academic history (not like yours, I think) can be overcome by other factors.
But you might want to be ready to answer a question or two about why you got lower grades in a few courses. Lack of insight is only one possibility. Taking too many courses in a term is sometimes a factor.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The issue is most often not what happened a few years ago, but what has happened most recently. That is, what is the shape of the arc of your grades?
Many people take some semesters to get in sync with math programs, and early troubles are not surprising.
Grades of relatively recent, relatively basic courses matter quite a bit, though still not perhaps completely critical. But/and people will start to wonder (relevant to the typical U.S. math grad program set-ups) how you'd fare in grad-level courses if you've had recent difficulties in their prerequisites. Indeed, I'd think some self-examination about that question might be warranted, insofar as even most "advanced" undergrad math is very, very standard, not "specialized", and really pretty necessary no matter what kind of specialization one might eventually take up.
Upvotes: 2
|