date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2021/01/03
| 939
| 3,798
|
<issue_start>username_0: If I have to pick 5 to 6 colleges to apply for a Ph.D. program, how do I go about it?
If I find the work that a CS professor at let's say UC Davis to be interesting. How do I actually know if I have a realistic chance of getting in? I cannot reach out to the professor and ask him if he will let me be a Ph.D. student in his lab because he hasn't seen my transcripts, read my LORs, or doesn't know me at all. If I write him an email, in all likelihood, he will just ignore my email.
At the same time, I cannot ask my recommenders if I have a chance of being accepted at UC Davis. Because (a) They don't know what the other recommenders will write in their letter. (b) They might not know exactly, what sort of profile gets admitted at UC Davis. (c) It's been 3.5 years since I graduated with a Master's degree and 6 years since I graduated with a Bachelors. People might not even recognize who I am, let alone write me a letter of recommendation.
Applying to colleges costs money. Also, people who write me a LOR, have to upload their LOR to each place where I am applying to. If I am applying to colleges way out of my league, I will be wasting my time as well as the time of the people who would write me a LOR.
So my question is, how do you find colleges that are in your league.<issue_comment>username_1: I spoke with a few professors for informational talks and they helped me find professors doing research of interest. One professor I spoke with, I mentioned my research interests and she gave me a list of all the professors who do that research and their schools. That ended up being the list of schools I applied to. The most important thing for acceptance into a PhD program is a professor who wants to work with you (and ideally willing to fund you). I would say base where you apply on the professor(s) in a program you'd like to work with based on topic AND personality. Also, when reaching out to professors for informational meetings please do some research on them. I find it frustrating when I have potential students reach out who clearly haven't done a basic review of my research area. When I was applying I would normally check the website out before writing an email and then read the abtracts of 1-3 papers that interested me before I met with them.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: There are [published rankings](https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-science-schools/physics-rankings) of graduate schools (you'll have to look for the one in your discipline). In general, schools at the top of this list are *extremely* difficult to get into, while schools in the bottom part of the list are *much* less competitive. Some graduate programs post recommended or average GPA/GRE scores on their websites; searching for such statistics may help you determine which part of the list you should be looking at.
Now of course, take these rankings with a huge grain of salt. Perhaps the most important consideration is who you advisor would be, and this is not reflected in the rankings. Some top programs are weak in certain areas, while other "unknown" programs have superstar professors that everyone wants to work with. Further, schools in desirable locations may be more competitive than the rankings would suggest. And if you've been out of academia for four years, different programs may perceive that differently. So, the rankings are a starting place, nothing more.
You will absolutely need some letters of recommendation. Once you identify some letter writers, asking them for a quick sanity check (e.g., "I'm thinking of applying to UC-Davis, do you think that is reasonable?") may be a good idea. They may also be able to recommend less competitive programs that have strong groups in areas you find interesting.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/01/03
| 1,368
| 6,105
|
<issue_start>username_0: My research field is a "hot" one. It is in modeling of additive manufacturing process. Majority of the research being carried out is experimental and some research is theoretical/computational. My research is entirely computational. Publications in my research topic don't go to top journals like nature or science but to applied journals like journal of thermal spray and technology, surface and coatings technology, additive manufacturing or computational materials science.
I read computational papers published by other groups from good universities (in the US and other places) and I often find them quite straightforward (that is, not much novelty in their work). In my research work, I always try to implement something extra (be it a different modeling technique, a different analysis method) to develop a distinctive new knowledge rather than a small incremental knowledge. Nevertheless, my work ultimately gets published in these journals only.
In such scenario, how do I know if I am doing a good work? My experimental collaborators are happy with my work and so is my postdoc advisor. But, how do I know that I am not generating noise? My past entirely computational papers have got just 3 unique citations each in 1-1.5 years. But my collaborative work (with experimentalists) has over 15 citations in same amount of time.<issue_comment>username_1: I think your question has no answer since "good research" is too broad and ill-defined a term. What do you mean by "good research"? Research that gets cited a lot? Research that gets you your next job? Research to be proud of? Research that moves your field ahead?
The answer to your question will depend on YOUR definition of "good research". And since this is really hard to do, I would suggest to reframe the question to something like: Is my research helping me to accomplish my goals xyz?
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree with the [other answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/160788/75368) that "good research" is not in any way objectively well defined, and that ultimately you will have to develop your own standards. If you get published in the best journals where this kind of work is usually published, obviously its standard is good enough for their standards. If you wonder whether you could publish in higher impact more general journals, you can try out to submit there and see what the reviewers/editors make of it. Before I had some top journal publications in my field, I had a number of things rejected there, and the feedback gave me a feel for what is required.
Obviously you can also ask senior colleagues you trust about what they think of the quality of your work, how can it be improved etc., but of course these people don't always have time to read your stuff properly (better they already know some). Ultimately one can never know whether they say all they think, but it could give you an indication.
One final comment about a thing you wrote: "In my research work, I always try to implement something extra (be it a different modeling technique, a different analysis method) to develop a distinctive new knowledge rather than a small incremental knowledge." This of course is good for your learning and experience, however it doesn't necessarily make an applied paper better if the specific application could also be handled with less innovative methods. Doing something nonstandard and new in applied work isn't an aim in itself, it needs to make the application better. Things done only in order to look original in the first place will not benefit an applied paper. If you develop genuinely new models or methodology, or if you are the first to use them in your field, you should consider writing a more general methodological paper about it that colleagues may want to cite because they can take your idea for their own application.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: There are many scales on which you can judge whether your work is "good". On many of them, it seems that the answer from an outsider would be yes.
You are getting published. You are getting citations. You have collaborators (so you are worth working with). Etc.
One that is important in many ways, but easy to dismiss is whether you are happy in your work. Whether you think you are learning anything through it. Even people that don't publish but learn something can have a satisfying professional life. Their work is "good" if only in a personal way. The statement that you like to "add something" suggests that you are happy with the work and enjoy it.
You don't mention whether students like to work with you, at any level from undergraduate to doctoral studies. That can be a measure, as it may indicate that students feel your ideas are worth pursuing.
Do you have new ideas? Even ones that don't work out? Science doesn't plod along. It is fresh and "interesting" ideas that drive it forward. Ideas about "what might be true" but isn't yet known.
But the difference in citation count between your personal and collaborative papers is probably not a good measure since they are different sorts of papers. Some *sorts* of things get more citations than others.
Another important measure is how your career is advancing. Are your colleagues happy with you? Are you on the road to promotion? To higher pay?
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: You say that your work is strictly computational, and not theoretical/computational, and I submit that such work is too limited by the lack of a theoretical basis to get in the top journals. A career in academia requires frequent publication in high quality journals.
You must get into the theoretical aspects of your field, maybe in a collaboration with a theoretician. But don’t let that person do all the theory. You should learn from them to do it yourself.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: Are there computational papers in your field that get published in what you consider top journals ? If yes, then read them and see what is it that they do differently/better than you. At least that's how I would approach it.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/01/03
| 695
| 2,979
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've got invited to a PhD interview in the field of computational physics. In the invitation mail I was told, among other things, that I should present my skills for about 5min. It is my first interview and I'm quite unsure how I design this part of the presentation. I thought about presenting the main skills for the position, where I learned them and where I could use them so far. But I don't know how to design the slides for this part. I would assume that it is pretty boring to simply listing them or shouldn't I do any slide at all for this part?
Thank you for any help and suggestions in advance!<issue_comment>username_1: Perhaps you should organize it around things you have done and then mention the skills it took to accomplish that. Projects undertaken, research done, ...
Some things are more nebulous. Do you read a lot in the field, and take (and organize) notes, for example. What have you written? What sorts of organizational skills were required for that?
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Organize like crazy, five minutes will fly by. You want to leave your audience with a sense of your style and maybe an interesting nugget.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: You should have a slide or a few slides and you should not be worried about a list being boring. They specifically asked for this list! What they want to know is whether you know enough to hit the ground running and complete a project. The *content* is what matters and will be interesting to the audience.
There are ways you can make a "list" slide more visually interesting, if you want to do this. For example, you can have each new bullet appear as a pop up as you advance the slides. A slightly more advanced version is to "blow up" the new bullets so they are larger or "zoomed in", but keep the old bullets on the same slide in a smaller font.
Anyway 5 minutes is a lot less time than you think. I would not focus on "where you got the skills" -- that will take time from describing your skills. But, you should try to be as specific as possible about what your level of experience is. Reread the ad for the position and play up any experience you have that is related to the description (use the same words if you can).
Since it is a computational physics position, here's an example of the bullets I might make for a slide (I am completely making up at the kind of experience you might have)
* Research / problem solving experience
+ Completed project P and produced result R
+ Skilled at debugging and testing my code
+ Independent problem solver and worker [I would include this and the previous bullet in some form, and you do want to give an example for both]
* Computing experience
+ Proficient in X, Y, Z languages
+ Used A, B, C software packages in projects
+ Limited experience with version control
+ Run several jobs on a cluster for a research project
* Relevant courses
+ Computational physics
+ Python programming
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/01/03
| 1,715
| 7,475
|
<issue_start>username_0: On the first page of most papers the authors are listed, as well as their affiliation and email address. The given email address is usually hosted by the university. Now this looks professional and everything, though it is not always a good long-term solution, as researchers join other universities and their email address does no longer work (after a while). In my field (physics/cosmology) I rarely see a different solution, but I thought maybe other fields might have found a better approach. What contact information can be provided that does not get outdated?
* a link to a website that then relinks to an always up-to-date email address?
* a personal email address?
* researchgate profile
* ?
Does anyone work in a field where there is a better solution widely used?
Thank you very much for your thoughts on this topic.<issue_comment>username_1: I think this is a good question with only unsatisfactory answers. In short, I don't think you can bank on any method to identify a person (other than maybe the equivalent to a social security number) that is permanent. Neither professional nor personal email addresses are guaranteed to work forever, nor are professional sites like ResearchGate, LinkedIN, ...
Systems such as ORCID, where each researcher is assigned a unique identifier would work, but they will still require some time to gain broad acceptance. This way the paper could cite the ORCID and the researcher can make sure the profile (including contact info) stays current. This system would also make it easier to find publications authored by an individual (especial by somebody with a common last name such as Wang, Ngyen, Garcia, Smith, ...). Of course, there is no guarantee that the ORCID system will last either.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Approaching this problem from the other end I found that a lot of papers have at least one coauthor who is already a tenured faculty member. These very rarely change their institution and hence there email addresses tend to stay valid for a long time.
Some journals also ask for a corresponding author (that is not necessarily the same as the first author if that is relevant in your field). This would usually be the one with the email address with the longest live expectancy regardless of how much they contributed to the paper.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: The desire to have a permanent way to address authors of a paper is understandable. However, as you ask for best practice: I do not think there is a best practice, just different practices. Using long lasting e-mail addresses is one option, hoping for people to link papers to *e.g.* their ORCID profile and keep it up to date is another.
But those options are based on the premise that authors want to be contacted about their work and/or that they should want to be contacted. I am not convinced that this must be the case. You could create an e-mail address when submitting a manuscript for publication (which might appear on the final paper) only for this purpose and discard it afterwards. You could publish something using a pseudonym. Under certain circumstances, such behavior is necessary and totally acceptable.
In this reasoning, it is up to the authors alone to determine how long it will be possible to contact them by information given in the paper. Finally, each paper must stand for itself as soon as all authors passed away, and it should be able to do so as soon as it is published.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I would say it's more important to maintain a webpage with your current contact information. A reader can use a search engine to find you and get in touch, even if your website and contact info has changed over the years.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: It's not for you to decide unfortunately. The journal decides, and if they're asking for an email address then you will have to supply one. You could use a personal email address (@gmail.com for example) if they don't object, however, as you can with ORCID IDs, ResearchGate profiles, and so on.
Many journals/publishers already support this kind of author identification, [example](https://authorservices.wiley.com/author-resources/Journal-Authors/submission-peer-review/orcid.html), [example](https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/authors/preparing_your_manuscript/orcid).
On an individual level, the solution to this issue is to make yourself easily Google-able. If your name is <NAME> for example you could make a website [www.janedoephysics.com](http://www.janedoephysics.com). You can keep an up-to-date email address on that website. If you include summaries of your work and link to all your arXiv papers, you should be easily Googleable even if you have a common name.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Just ask your institution whether they can provide a stable email address. Many institutions provide you with several email addresses. One of these may be stable: when you leave, emails sent to it will be forwarded to you new institution. The stable address is not always the main address, so it is worth checking in advance.
Three of the four institutions I have been affiliated with propose this.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: The university work at provides an email forwarding service they promise will never be cleaned. It's not the prettiest email, but it does work, and you can forward it to any other email you want. My guess is several other universities offer this as it's a minimal cost and fixes this kind of issue.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: Some professional organisations provide "lifetime" email aliases - for example, for physicists the Institute of Physics provides physics.org addresses. That's the solution I've been using for two decades now. The alias can be set to forward to whatever address you want. I think this also looks more professional/authoritative than a consumer webmail address. Note though that it's a long time since I checked the T's & C's; keeping this service might depend on paying the IoP subscription.
Answers to [What email to use for corresponding author on publications when institution is not permanent?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/96503/what-email-to-use-for-corresponding-author-on-publications-when-institution-is-n) and [E-mail address to use in publications](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2872/e-mail-address-to-use-in-publications) also mention the ACM (computing), AMS (maths) and IEEE (electrical & electronic engineering) as providing such e-mail redirectors. I prefer this option to, say, Gmail as it suggests a long-term commitment to the field on your part, whereas a Gmail address can be disposable (indeed, I associate Gmail with throwaway addresses used by spammers).
Contrary to what some have said: my experience is that you can't trust institutions, especially after you leave. My last university randomly locked my email access without warning, wouldn't set up forwarding, and hasn't passed on snail mail either. (And by the time you find out they're a bad 'un, it's too late.)
The other option is a unique identifier, such as OrcID, though quite how they will pan out in reality remains to be seen. Bear in mind that even if the OrcID organisation disappeared overnight, a web search for the identifier will still come up with material that includes your contact details, so it's worth embedding it in your (relevant) social media profiles.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/03
| 1,701
| 7,496
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was recently invited to a job interview regarding a PhD. I was told to make a short presentation of a few ideas regarding the project topic. I also have received an overview over the project aims, preliminary work etc.. I must admit that I am quite clueless what to present. In this project a new simulation platform should be developed with the help of the methods already implemented by the two participating work groups in their own software. I thought about presenting some methodology, but this would largely consist of implementing methods that these both groups already published and nothing really new. Also I'm new to the simulation method that is used in this project. Do you think that it would be sufficient to list the methods that can be used for the several parts of the simulation and in which order I would plan to implement these?<issue_comment>username_1: I think this is a good question with only unsatisfactory answers. In short, I don't think you can bank on any method to identify a person (other than maybe the equivalent to a social security number) that is permanent. Neither professional nor personal email addresses are guaranteed to work forever, nor are professional sites like ResearchGate, LinkedIN, ...
Systems such as ORCID, where each researcher is assigned a unique identifier would work, but they will still require some time to gain broad acceptance. This way the paper could cite the ORCID and the researcher can make sure the profile (including contact info) stays current. This system would also make it easier to find publications authored by an individual (especial by somebody with a common last name such as Wang, Ngyen, Garcia, Smith, ...). Of course, there is no guarantee that the ORCID system will last either.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Approaching this problem from the other end I found that a lot of papers have at least one coauthor who is already a tenured faculty member. These very rarely change their institution and hence there email addresses tend to stay valid for a long time.
Some journals also ask for a corresponding author (that is not necessarily the same as the first author if that is relevant in your field). This would usually be the one with the email address with the longest live expectancy regardless of how much they contributed to the paper.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: The desire to have a permanent way to address authors of a paper is understandable. However, as you ask for best practice: I do not think there is a best practice, just different practices. Using long lasting e-mail addresses is one option, hoping for people to link papers to *e.g.* their ORCID profile and keep it up to date is another.
But those options are based on the premise that authors want to be contacted about their work and/or that they should want to be contacted. I am not convinced that this must be the case. You could create an e-mail address when submitting a manuscript for publication (which might appear on the final paper) only for this purpose and discard it afterwards. You could publish something using a pseudonym. Under certain circumstances, such behavior is necessary and totally acceptable.
In this reasoning, it is up to the authors alone to determine how long it will be possible to contact them by information given in the paper. Finally, each paper must stand for itself as soon as all authors passed away, and it should be able to do so as soon as it is published.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I would say it's more important to maintain a webpage with your current contact information. A reader can use a search engine to find you and get in touch, even if your website and contact info has changed over the years.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: It's not for you to decide unfortunately. The journal decides, and if they're asking for an email address then you will have to supply one. You could use a personal email address (@gmail.com for example) if they don't object, however, as you can with ORCID IDs, ResearchGate profiles, and so on.
Many journals/publishers already support this kind of author identification, [example](https://authorservices.wiley.com/author-resources/Journal-Authors/submission-peer-review/orcid.html), [example](https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/authors/preparing_your_manuscript/orcid).
On an individual level, the solution to this issue is to make yourself easily Google-able. If your name is <NAME> for example you could make a website [www.janedoephysics.com](http://www.janedoephysics.com). You can keep an up-to-date email address on that website. If you include summaries of your work and link to all your arXiv papers, you should be easily Googleable even if you have a common name.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Just ask your institution whether they can provide a stable email address. Many institutions provide you with several email addresses. One of these may be stable: when you leave, emails sent to it will be forwarded to you new institution. The stable address is not always the main address, so it is worth checking in advance.
Three of the four institutions I have been affiliated with propose this.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: The university work at provides an email forwarding service they promise will never be cleaned. It's not the prettiest email, but it does work, and you can forward it to any other email you want. My guess is several other universities offer this as it's a minimal cost and fixes this kind of issue.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: Some professional organisations provide "lifetime" email aliases - for example, for physicists the Institute of Physics provides physics.org addresses. That's the solution I've been using for two decades now. The alias can be set to forward to whatever address you want. I think this also looks more professional/authoritative than a consumer webmail address. Note though that it's a long time since I checked the T's & C's; keeping this service might depend on paying the IoP subscription.
Answers to [What email to use for corresponding author on publications when institution is not permanent?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/96503/what-email-to-use-for-corresponding-author-on-publications-when-institution-is-n) and [E-mail address to use in publications](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2872/e-mail-address-to-use-in-publications) also mention the ACM (computing), AMS (maths) and IEEE (electrical & electronic engineering) as providing such e-mail redirectors. I prefer this option to, say, Gmail as it suggests a long-term commitment to the field on your part, whereas a Gmail address can be disposable (indeed, I associate Gmail with throwaway addresses used by spammers).
Contrary to what some have said: my experience is that you can't trust institutions, especially after you leave. My last university randomly locked my email access without warning, wouldn't set up forwarding, and hasn't passed on snail mail either. (And by the time you find out they're a bad 'un, it's too late.)
The other option is a unique identifier, such as OrcID, though quite how they will pan out in reality remains to be seen. Bear in mind that even if the OrcID organisation disappeared overnight, a web search for the identifier will still come up with material that includes your contact details, so it's worth embedding it in your (relevant) social media profiles.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/03
| 558
| 2,380
|
<issue_start>username_0: I initially wrote a short manuscript (4 pages) intended for physics journal A and posted this short manuscript on arXiv. After referee feedback from journal A, I am now seeking to instead submit this manuscript to physics journal B but in a longer format (15 pages) with more comprehensive details and additional information/examples included. Given this significant update to the contents of the manuscript, is it all right to simply replace the original short manuscript on arXiv with the new longer manuscript? Or should I create a new entry on arXiv despite the central theme of the two manuscripts being similar?
On this point, if I submit the new longer manuscript to physics journal B, is it unethical if I don't update the original arXiv submission at all? (Namely, the short manuscript on arXiv and long manuscript published in physics journal B will have the same titles but contain differing contents.)<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, update the arxiv preprint with a new version and do not create an entirely new preprint. I don't see how this would be a problem. The previous version remains available. And it would be confusing to have the same material appear as two different preprints.
[Arxiv's policy](https://arxiv.org/help/submit#replace) states:
>
> We encourage authors to update and to make corrections to their articles. **DO NOT** make a new submission for a corrected article or for an erratum. Instead, replace the original submission.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If the new manuscript version supersedes the old one, and includes all of its content, I would suggest replacing it. After all, if, say, PRL would have asked for Supplemental Material which would have added up to another 10 pages, you would also have updated the arxiv version.
An added advantage is that people don't get confused by the fact that there are two different versions of the same result on the arxiv, and they don't know which one to cite. (You would also loose citations this way, except on google scholar, where you might gain some; this could of course be resolved by adding the Journal-Ref field for both of them.)
Finally, if you decide to post two different versions, it would be a good idea to add a corresponding comment field to both publications, informing the reader about their relation.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2021/01/04
| 623
| 2,565
|
<issue_start>username_0: So I have a 2 page unofficial transcripts I would like to send to Universities. One page describes marks, while the other provides the grading system. Now, since I have studied in an Indian University, I have secured 6.4/10 GPA. While this looks bad on paper, I graduated in the top 20% within my batch. My grading system has D as an average.[Here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/XKOZj.png)
As you can see, due to stringent evaluation, its ridiculously impossible to score S+ in everything.
Now what do I mean by supplement? This image that you see above is from my semester marks card. However, if you have noticed the 'levels' column, this is crucial to providing context to my grading system. Problem here is that this is missing from my [unofficial transcripts](https://i.stack.imgur.com/NCwD4.png).
So, I am looking to attach the scale page from my marks card to my 2 page unofficial transcript because I don't think Adcom is going to extensively look up my University to understand the grading scale. Is this move recommended? Am I going to get into trouble for doping my transcripts with additional information? As far as I know, my official transcripts in a sealed envelope will only consist of the first 2 pages without the scale. How should I proceed with this?<issue_comment>username_1: Adding additional information to your transcripts is unlikely to help you. Follow the application instructions. You want to be remembered for the quality of your application, not your failure to follow instructions.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't think there is any rule that would suggest it's bad practice to add the scorecard to your unofficial transcript. However, I would say that it is unlikely to change much. If you think it is important to address the grades, I'd rather find a way to weave this into the letter or any other free text that will accompany your application. This is likely a much better way to put your grades into context. Consider that even the percentages tells you next to nothing. In the US system [see here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_grading_in_the_United_States) a D generally ranges between 60-70%, so in comparison to your table it should be considered better than average? But nevertheless, if you apply will all Ds or even all Cs in the US system you will likely be dismissed out of hand. So in my eyes, a personalized note would be needed to convey the nuances about your grading system.
Of course, I am not sure if your applications offer up space for such a section.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/01/04
| 2,335
| 9,794
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am peer-reviewing an article "A" and I found something interesting. The authors use a mathematical lemma (which is just an inequality) for which they cite article "B". I have used this inequality before for many years, but noticed that "B" is an article from 2019, so evidently this inequality wasn't discovered/derived for the first time in "B". I was curious so I managed to obtain this article "B" and noticed that they use the same inequality by citing article "C". A similar thing happens in "C" by citing "D", and so on until we get to "F". Notice that in this whole "citation tower" no new information is added: the mathematical lemma remained essentially the same.
Moreover, some of the same authors appear in some of the works A,B,...,F but not in all and not consecutively. However, an author of "A" is also an author of "F". Finally, in "F" (which is an article from 2011) the authors provide the mathematical lemma, and provide a proof for it. However, I have seen other works in the literature which uses this result even before 2011, and actually I can track it all the way until I reach a famous (but OLD) book "Z" which provides the same inequality but not necessarily using the same notation.
Do you think this "citation tower" (is there another name for this practice?) is a bad enough practice to point it out in my review? Up to now I am considering the following things to do with my review (regarding this issue only):
1. Do nothing. The authors are using a result from the literature by appropriately citing it.
2. Just suggest them to cite "F" instead of "B".
3. Suggest them to cite "Z" instead of "B".
However, since an author of "A" is also an author of "F", under the assumption that this citation tower is indeed a bad practice, and that the result was given in "F" as if it was discovered there even when this result was known many years before, there is a fourth option:
4. Point them out this issue describing it as a bad practice in order to help preventing it in the future. Moreover, I was thinking in asking the reviewers to cite "F" and adding a note in the final manuscript saying that the result was shown in "F" using modern notation, but it was known to be true since "Z".
**EDIT AFTER SUBMITTING MY REVIEW:** It is very hard to chose a correct answer, since I don't believe there is a single one. There are very nice answers here, but I will mark as correct the one that mostly resembles what I did at the end.<issue_comment>username_1: In your case, the author of A that was also an author of F should have cited F instead of B. It's unlikely that that author forgot the reference F; it's more likely that they wanted more citations for B.
I recommend that you go with your option 4. Tell them to cite Z and F.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I think this requires some nuance. You seem to suggest that citing the earliest usage is preferable, and it might be. But it might also be the case that each subsequent usage adds something to the context. That is to say that the citation appears in the chain for some particular use and the reader of the current paper might find it useful to explore that history. Each of those citations is surrounded by context that can be useful.
If you always cite only the earliest usage, then the reader has no hints about the overall usage context of that thing cited. And the current author might be inviting the exploration.
Of course, it might also be that the author(s) considers the lemma to be a minor point and has used the citation they found without chasing the chain back themself, not seeing any need for it in the *current* context.
Overdone, in mathematics, we just always cite Euclid.
So, I don't think citing a later, rather than an earlier paper is a bad practice necessarily, but could be in a particular instance.
You can always note the other citations in your review and point to the earliest one without making any specific recommendation.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: There are several purposes of citations. The primary one is providing support for a claim; if you don't include a proof of a claim, but cite a paper that does, then that proof is incorporated by reference into your paper. If B doesn't actually include the proof, but rather cites C, then citing B doesn't serve the purpose of incorporating a proof into A. Not citing the original paper makes tracking down the proof more difficult, if not impossible. It can also make it look like there are several papers supporting a claim, when in fact there is only one original source. For instance, someone publishes Paper A claiming that they did a study and found that foobars often commit mopery. Paper B then claims foobars often commit mopery and cites Paper A. Paper C and D then claim that foobars often commit mopery and cites Paper B. Then Paper E claims that foobars often commit mopery and cites Paper C and Paper F claims that foobars often commit mopery and cites Paper D. Now someone comes along and writes a newspaper article and says "There's overwhelming evidence that foobars often commit mopery! Here are six different papers that show this." And if someone tries to factcheck the article, it's going to take them awhile to track down all the citations and realize that there's only one paper that is actually original research. It's also possible for the chain of citations to actually be circular. See [citogenesis](https://xkcd.com/978/).
It's a common phenomenon on Snopes when trying to track down a claim to find this sort of citation chain, and often the claim is distorted in each link of the chain, with the final result being quite different from the original, and often what looks like several different sources are actually from one ultimate source. It also has proliferated on the internet; an article or post will talk about something and post a link, but rather than going to the original source, this link goes to another article or post, and so on.
The second purpose is to give credit. The primary credit gives to the earliest paper, and so that should be the primary citation. If another paper expanded on that, and/or brought it to your attention, then it may merit a citation as well, but it should be in addition, not instead of, the other citation.
The third purpose is to give further reading to those who are interested in learning more. This is where a citation to B is most justified, but a citation to F and/or Z may also be useful.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Vaguely calling something “bad practice” is, well, bad practice. You should be able to articulate precisely what’s bad about it. And it sounds to me like what’s bad about it is that it is *misleading*: it misleads the reader into thinking this lemma is new when it obviously has a long history, and that the credit for it is due to a different set of authors than the people it’s really due to.
With that in mind, I think everyone can agree that misleading readers is indeed “bad practice” and should be avoided, especially when it’s easy to do so. So it seems to me completely appropriate to ask in your review that the authors of “A” should cite the book “Z” either in place of, or in addition to, citing any subset of the papers “B” through “F”. And you can also suggest that they optionally add a brief comment outlining the history of the lemma and pointing out any relevant issues of notation as appropriate, depending on which of these sources they end up citing exactly.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: You did already follow all the chain so you could judge if the references are adequate or not. Did they point to the context specific usage of the lemma, or are there to gives a theoretical ground?
In one case it could be fine to cite late literature, in the other they should have traced things to the root.
If I would be the referee, I would consider just the above without thinking of bad or good practice. Eventually, asking to add the first, proof giving paper.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: It seems no answer so far makes the following point: if you're reading a paper and decide to follow up a reference for a mathematical statement, it's probably because you want to know the proof. Therefore, from the reader's perspective (the perspective that matters), "F" is the most appropriate citation, since it gives the proof in modern notation.
Therefore, if I was the reviewer, I would recommend that the authors cite paper "F" in addition to "B" (or instead of it, but there's no reason to tell them not to cite "B" unless it's really not relevant). I would also mention "Z" and suggest they mention it, but I'd put less stress on that, since it's likely to be less useful for the reader than "F". Essentially, I think your option 4 is the best one.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: You're assuming the reasons for the citations. Maybe they want more citations to their own work. Maybe they forgot. Maybe they don't know any better.
Your job as a reviewer is to comment on the scientific article. Ask the authors to explain their citations. One way to write a comment along the lines of:
>
> The authors cite A that provides proof for X. However, it's not clear why A is chosen in preference to F or Z. I suggest that the authors add something like: "The proof appeared first in Z, but was rewritten in modern notation in F, and an instructive example of its application to similar problems in given in A."—if that's indeed the case, as I suspect.
>
>
>
This way you are informing the authors that there are citations missing, in your opinion, telling them which ones are missing, not blaming anyone for doing anything, and giving them a concrete example on how to justify their choices.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2021/01/04
| 1,920
| 7,841
|
<issue_start>username_0: From USA universities, Can I request to see a reference about me?
Do they offer the **Right to Information** and request the information provided in a referee report about me to release?
I can have this service from the UK.
I ask this because my current PI congratulate me on an interview for a postdoc position, next time he followed up and asked how did it go. Later I found he sent a negative referee report about me and not to hire me. (long story short, they were my PI's colleagues - so, through the **Right to Information** I got told to request HR to have a copy of all the referee reports)
Still PI doesn't know if I know about his backstabbing, however, I want to make sure this from another place in the USA to confirmed if that was a personal attack or if it was due to I applied to his colleague's group.
If this is genuine backstabbing, what actions I can take through universities / academic level, without going to courts.
I had/have to put this PI as a referee for someplace where they know which lab I am coming from.
PI is famous in the university for this kind of games he plays, however, he has top political power as he has billions of grants, and staff/students afraid to talk in public.
**Edit:**
To answer few of your Qs /comments:
***To **@Jon Custer** : "how do you know the report was "negative" vs "not positive enough given the other applicants"?"***
I am specialized in using a few lab techniques. PI has written in the report, I do not! (Funny enough PI is the one who doesn't know these two techniques - I got trained by a postdoc and a tech at different institutes and attended a workshop).
However, the rest of the world believes PI is an expert in this very field and specialized in this specific technique, as he published dozens of articles. The Truth is, He does not know the technique, all come from a technician and a postdoc (both postdoc and tech left the lab, I have a referral from the tech, that I got trained from the tech)
***To: **user151413**; "Reference letters are an assessment, which can be negative. (Otherwise, what's the point of an assessment?) "***
This would be true if it was an honest assessment. The problem here is deliberate lying, and giving false information in the assessment.<issue_comment>username_1: In the US it would almost certainly be improper for information about you to be released to a third party. But who can say what sort of conversations go on between people who know each other and speak informally?
But the privacy laws here are pretty strong, so a formal request from third parties to see information would be denied. Even the fact that you had applied is almost certainly protected.
---
Here is a [statement from one US university (pdf)](https://www.uah.edu/images/administrative/legal/pdf_files/legal_implications_of_lltrs_of_rec.pdf) on the legal issues around letters of recommendation
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Here is a [link](https://blog.prepscholar.com/should-you-waive-right-to-review-letters-of-recommendation) to some information about the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974 or FERPA for the rules and regulations in the US. In general, you have the right to see any and all records. However, there are two critical caveats with regards to LoR:
>
> you can only access your recommendation letters after you've gotten your admission letter of acceptance and chosen to enroll in a college. If you were rejected from or chose not to go to a certain school, then you won't be able to get your hands on those letters.
>
>
>
>
> Once you add a college to your Common Application, you'll see a tab show up to invite your recommender(s). Before you send those invites, you'll be prompted to read about your waiver of access and select a response.
>
>
>
So letters of recommendations only have to be shared once you join a specific institution and you will be asked in advance of your application if you want to waive this right. This means, in cases of rejection you have no recourse to see the letters. My guess is that this was put in place to protect the writers of the LoR. It is a really challenging situation for you to be in, since the LoR from your current advisor is surely important in landing a new position.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: As a general rule, institutions are very reluctant to give access to letters of reference to anyone and candidates in particular. That's because they know that if they regularly shared these letters with the people being written about, letter writers would stop giving honest assessments.
As a consequence, regardless of matters of law or regulation, you should expect that universities will not give you the letter. You may have a *legal* way to obtain such a letter, but you will likely have to *sue* the university to obtain it. Whether that's worth your time or money is a case you need to evaluate for yourself -- taking into account that *knowing* what is in the letter does not actually change anything. It's not like the university will offer you the position you were seeking just because you know what was in the letter.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: The other answers address the legal and regulatory aspects of the question. You should also consider the cultural aspects: Many American academics expect that applicants will choose not to read their reference letters. If you violate those expectations, they will not trust you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: In the US, the answer is almost certainly **no**, you should not ask to see your reference letters.
Even the most positive letters contain candid descriptions that letter writers do not want to share. If you seek out those letters, you will strain your relationships with the writers, and you are less likely to get detailed letters in the future.
Right now, you want a letter to see whether you're:
1. **Trapped by an abusive PI** who is writing false letters to stop you from getting a job, or
2. **Not as good as you think you are** (at least in the eyes of your PI).
I understand that this is an important question, but you don't *need* the letter to answer it.
**If your PI is trapping you** - and it happens! - you may notice that: (1) You have good luck with applications that benefit your PI, like grants, but terrible luck with applications that help you leave, like jobs; (2) Your job applications are successful up to the point where references are requested, then fail; (3) Other colleagues are startled by your lack of success on the job market.
If this is the case, your relationship with your PI is done (though you'll likely need to stay quiet about it, lest they sabotage you further). Start looking ASAP for a mentor who will actually support you - either a colleague who can write your letters of reference, or a new boss/PI.
**If your PI doesn't think you're very skilled**, you will find that (1) they don't put you forward for anything, even grants and awards that would benefit the lab; (2) Few of your colleagues praise you; and (3) If you ask your PI, they'll bluntly tell you that you need to improve.
This leaves you in a tough spot. As above, you may find that your relationship with your PI is completely broken and you need to find a new mentor ASAP. You'll also need to do some deep reflection, preferably with the help of your most supportive colleagues, on what changes you could make in order to succeed. This may involve improving your skills, communicating your achievements better, switching to a research project that better matches your talents, or leaving research for a more suitable career (and a more supportive boss).
None of these options are easy; the good news is that, in the long run, all of them will leave you better off than you are now.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/04
| 383
| 1,676
|
<issue_start>username_0: One of my papers is now in the proofreading stage. In the revision stage, I didn't add the "equal author contribution" as a foot-note. Is it possible to add that now? Can I put it in the acknowledgment section?
Note: I am not allowed to add any sign beside the authors' names.
Edit:
I was finally able to do that. During the proofreading, I mentioned this issue and they added a footnote. They were very helpful.<issue_comment>username_1: Whether, and what, you can edit at this stage, and what kind of information is allowed in the acknowledgements, likely depends on the journal. You should contact the editor, since they will be able to tell you. (And, needless to say, you need to have the permission of your co-authors to do this change.)
In fact, some journals (Nature comes to mind) even have an "Author contributions" field in which one can (or even has to) describe how the individual authors contributed.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: To add to the previous answer, I would consider that listing `equal contribution` in the acknowledgement section generally does not carry the weight as listing it as part of the front page. However, if it is clear that journal policy does not allow any mentioning of equal contributions on the title page, the acknowledgements may be your best options.
However, I think that you should have a clear discussion about this right away between the senior authors, the co-authors, and the editor. Co-authorship can have significant impact on the career of individuals, so you want to be certain that everybody is clear in what is going to happen and is in agreement with the path chosen.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/01/04
| 1,454
| 6,153
|
<issue_start>username_0: A junior academic in a department I was doing research in once said to me in reference to a senior member of the department that "<NAME> no longer does research, just course design and teaching. He was involved in fascinating fundamental work in the 1960s but had a research blow-out some years ago."
At the time I must admit I read this as a euphemism for research idleness on the part of Prof X. To me then nothing could be more exciting than going further and further in research, one thing always leading to another - even if one had some teaching to do or had to write an occasional textbook.
About a year later during a conversation with Prof X (temporarily acting HoD till a new chap was appointed) on what really constituted the essence of a PhD, I was shown Prof X's own thesis from the late 1950s. He offered this as an example of a study with no industrial application whatever, performed on a material one might almost describe as a domestic material but which nonetheless illuminated some of the fundamental processes involved in dislocation movement and plastic flow. I took his point.
Till lately - when Google Scholar and UK Theses Online allowed it - I could not readily validate the claims for Prof X's early research distinction. Now I can and see that it was substantial till the late 1970s. Then a complete stop in his publications bar course related textbooks.
Is there such a thing as research blow-out ? Or is it a term for mental/emotional strain leading to a more detached or disinterested attitude to research - or something else entirely different ?<issue_comment>username_1: Actually, there are two possible, but opposite, meanings, though I think the second one is what is intended here.
But a blow out could actually mean an especially important advance in a field. Einstein-like.
The other meaning is probably an extreme form of burn out where someone just decides that there was enough pressure for a long enough time and they just want to do something else. But that something else could also be important in the wider scheme of things. Course design and teaching, especially by people with distinguished careers in research can be valuable both personally and to the institution and its students.
And, a burn out scenario immediately following a vast and intense advance in the field would be pretty natural. So, one of the meanings might apply and be immediately followed by the other.
Doctoral students also have a tendency to burn out at some point, just due to the pressure. Research isn't like cutting grass.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: A "blow-out" in this context is either:
1. a (I think primarily NA English) reference to a severe conflict, usually used to describe an argument escalated to the point where one or both parties are shouting or yelling at the other. It can also refer to
2. a mechanical failure involving a pressure release, like failure of a tire or oil well.
In either case, the use of the phrase in the context you refer to seems to be a metaphor referring to these uses of the term: either they had a strong conflict with their research (not necessarily an interpersonal one, but with the "research" itself standing as the other party), or some mechanical failure that blocked progress.
I don't think there is any *euphemism* here, which would suggest hiding or covering up some darker sin. To say an academic has had a blow-out with their research is to say they've had a major conflict or hit a major stumbling block. The nature of that conflict is unclear - maybe they got burnt out on a particular problem they could not solve, maybe they worked hard on a solution they were confident in only to find that an error some time back made all subsequent work flawed, maybe they just reevaluated and decided they weren't enjoying it.
In this case, they've responded by completely backing away from research and focusing on other areas. "Idleness" implies laziness; there's nothing lazy about making a decision to stop pursuing research. Yes, this may be somewhat unusual at a research-focused academic institution, but some people simply choose to move on but still like other parts of the academic experience like educating others.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Let's not focus on the exact meaning of "blow out" (which can be interpreted as an explosion, but also as in "blowing out a candle") and instead what might lead to people's research fizzling out. There are many reasons I've seen among my colleagues:
* They discover what they really like: Maybe writing textbooks is your colleague's true passion and something they are good at. So they focus on that.
* They have a difficult family life -- say, a disabled child, or caring for aging parents -- and make the decision (voluntary or not) that they need to spend more time on that than on their research.
* They are very good at a small area of research but that area dies over time. For example, they may have been very good at building better vacuum tubes in the 1950s to 1970s and may continue to be very good at that, but the invention of the transistor led to their area to be more and more of a niche area with fewer and fewer publication and funding options.
* They turn out to be good administrators and organizers, and so focus on running the faculty council, the graduate program of the department, or be department head, to the detriment of their research.
* They decided that their current salary is good and that they really enjoy playing tennis. So they do what's strictly necessary for keeping their job (teach, do some administration) for 30 or 35 hours a week, play tennis, and other than that accept that their pay raises will be lower than they could be if they spent an extra 20 hours a week on research.
That last point could be interpreted as "laziness", but in the end, I think it's worthwhile keeping in mind that to run a university/the research enterprise as a whole, it takes all sorts of people. Not everyone has to be a crack researcher and it is not useful to measure every professor by the standard template you seem to have in mind.
Upvotes: 4
|
2021/01/04
| 445
| 1,811
|
<issue_start>username_0: Hypothetically, if I had an idea to improve an algorithm/theorem but
1. I wasn't sure it was correct, or
2. I wasn't sure it was significant or meaningful or hasn't already been published in a different form/somewhere else already or wasn't sure where to submit something like this .
is there somewhere I could submit a manuscript first privately to secure any intellectual property rights while I think about whether it is worth submitting or trying to do some more work on this and try to understand the field a bit better?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, [Open Science Framework (OSF)](https://osf.io/) allows you to save any kind of research ouput to obtain a timestamp. You can [change the privacy setting](https://help.osf.io/hc/en-us/articles/360018981414-Control-Your-Privacy-Settings) so that your research output becomes a 'private project', invisible to the public.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Please note that this does not substitute proper legal advice. In the US, I believe that patent protection falls under the 'first inventor to file' rule. So it is not relevant who the first inventor is, but who the first inventor is who files for patent protection. So if you want to claim IP protection in the US then the only relevant place to file is at the USPTO. This is indeed private at first, since patents are made public a year after filing.
Also, please note the publishing your data before filing for a patent may constitute 'prior art', which could mean that any future attempt at filing a patent in the US would be denied.
The safest (and possibly only) option for you to protect the IP for your idea is to file for (and get awarded) a patent.
Renewed disclaimer: This constitutes my personal opinion and should not be taken as legal advice.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/01/04
| 1,065
| 4,611
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am curious: what steps do generalist journals follow to try to ensure that every subfield (e.g., number theory, differential geometry, combinatorics, etc. for pure mathematics) is adequately represented, as the journal deems suitable?
To ask the question in a different way: a generalist journal will typically publish many more papers in one subfield compared to another subfield (in an absolute sense and/or relative to total volume of papers in that field). How does this "publication rate by subfield" come to be? My personal interest is in mathematics, though the question applies to any academic field.
There are two sub-questions here: one for high-volume, "good" journals (e.g. *Proceedings* or *Transactions of the American Mathematical Society*) and one for low-volume, "top" journals (e.g. *Annals of Mathematics*, *Acta Mathematica*). It is a given that such a journal would have a diverse editorial board (in some cases, subject to constraints such as university affiliation), which is already a partial answer to the question. So the question is whether journals conscientiously or systematically do more than this.
My understanding is that for a journal like *Proceedings* or *Transactions*, each subject editor has a certain page quota of articles that they can recommend for publication. What I don't know is whether such a page quota is the same for each editor, or whether this varies by subfield. Or how they decide how many editors per subject. Presumably one subfield may be significantly larger than another, or a single editor might end up being the contact point for various subfields. I also don't know how final decisions are made based on the recommendations of subject editors.
For the very top journals, the discretion of the editors would presumably be a more important factor. But is "we've already published in this field recently" or "we haven't published in this field recently" often a consideration?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> what steps do generalist journals follow to try to ensure that every subfield (e.g., number theory, differential geometry, combinatorics, etc. for pure mathematics) is adequately represented, as the journal deems suitable?
>
>
>
I think it is important to consider what the goal of the journal is in determining what is 'suitable'. If you have a for-profit journal, then this is an economic decision: The journal wants to get readers/subscribers so it can sell ads. Therefore, the journal will try to select articles that will achieve this goal. Maybe representing many subfields equally is part of their strategy to attract readers and quality submissions, but maybe not. It could be that just a small set of subfields generates the majority of readers, so those would likely be emphasized.
Things may be different for 'society' journals, which may have different agenda. But this agenda is likely not generalizable from one journal to the next, so I do not think there will be any coherent answer for 'generalist journals' in general.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I think you are suggesting that there might be some sort of quota system and I doubt that such a thing is done, or even viable. You are interested in fairly broad areas of specialization within mathematics and, while I'm not in the game anymore, I have to guess that there are plenty of papers submitted in each of the categories (or they would be dropped or coalesced).
But the editors, and especially the editor in chief, is most interested in publishing the highest quality papers. Those that are interesting. Those that make serious advances. Those that suggest new ways of approaching mathematical questions. The "balance" will come naturally, due to the sheer number of papers.
But, if I'm the editor in chief (as I'm not), and I have two papers, one in a recently popular field and one in a less popular one, I'm going to choose the better paper. The other consideration would be far down my list of criteria. If I have a *great* paper and an *ok but not earth shattering* one, it is an easy choice.
And if there is some imbalance between the number of papers published in a subfield, I'll have to guess that it is related to the number of practitioners and the current state of the art in that field. Some fields have fewer researchers, and some threads of research get "stuck" for a time. Publishing "extra" papers in that field seems counterproductive at the moment decisions need to be made.
---
For the specific technical questions about quotas and such, you should ask the EiC of TransAMS, for example.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/04
| 1,230
| 5,298
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently in a PhD program wherein I like my advisers, but unfortunately due to the following issues I have found that I might be happier applying to another university:
1. The university charges a $1200 fee during the fall and spring semesters which does not come out of our paychecks, and that they charge monthly interest on. There is also 2 months of the 9 month period of our stipend that we receive half our monthly pay. Thus we are effectively expected to make 6.5 months worth of pay work for 9. I have needed to find additional ways to make ends meet which cuts into the time I could be studying and doing research.
2. The university does not have a method of testing out of classes without needing to take them. As a result I am forced to take classes which I am already proficient in when I could be taking classes more relevant to research.
3. The workload for being a GTA this semester was far more than what is reasonable, and cut into my time to do research. I have been informed that this is somewhat common here.
I am applying to other PhD programs at the moment and I am currently wondering what is a way I can both explain my situation in a manner so that people understand why I am applying out without sounding like I am badmouthing my current university? (A professor I know mentioned that the above explanation might be too specific and perceived as badmouthing them). I don't want to be too vague so that it seems like I am just making excuses to apply somewhere else because without 1-3 above I would be happy here.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: Actually, I don't see how "inadequate financial support to allow me to continue" would seem rude. You don't have an issue with the professors or what you are learning so I think you are safe enough discussing your decision with them. Maybe knowing your situation would encourage them to free up any available funds.
Probably many of your professors had to struggle themselves with finances in their own education. It isn't uncommon. Maybe they will have some suggestions, both locally and to expedite a change.
But they can't help you if they don't know. Ask.
I'm surprised, actually, that your doctoral program doesn't cover all fees. That is pretty unusual, unless you are at a private institution.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: **Concision is your friend here.** You do not need to explain all your reasons in detail, and giving multiple reasons will indeed sound negative. Instead, choose the most significant, straightforward reason, and explain it as concisely as possible. In your case, this would be "funding" (#1 and #3 in your list). The issue with coursework, while annoying, does not seem like sufficient reason to transfer (especially when you have presumably already finished many of the duplicate classes).
The challenge with "I want to transfer for better funding" is that grad students are never paid much, and it's a little difficult to believe that the small pay difference between programs is enough to justify starting over, moving, etc., especially when you are otherwise happy with your current program. So, you should provide enough detail to overcome this objection. Note, there is no need to explain the intricacies of your school's internal accounting, just the bottom line (annual salary vs. hours worked). For example:
>
> I am currently paid $15K per year, which barely covers rent in [your expensive city]. So, I have had to work in a grocery story 15 hrs/week just to make ends meet. Further, my colleagues and I are averaging 35 hrs/week in teaching responsibilities. This arrangement leaves little time for research.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Speaking as a doctoral coordinator, I would encourage you to focus your efforts on seeking a better program fit for your research interests and career aspirations. No one wants to admit a doctoral student that was a "problem" from someone else's program. Focus on the positive. This year will be very competitive for most doctoral programs - what do you bring to the table compared to a new applicant with no prior history?
You should have known all about the fees and financial support before starting in your current program. In my opinion that is not a valid complaint. I would not cite this at all.
If you really are being asked to work each week more than the amount of time specified by your GA contract, that is against university policy and the law. It should be reported to the Department Chair, Dean's Office, and ultimately the Provost at your school (if it is not adequately addressed inside the college). It puts the university at financial and legal risk if individual faculty are abusing graduate students.
If you are simply being asked by your assigned advisor to put in more work than your peers who are assigned to other faculty, but not an amount of time that is specified by the
GA contract, that is a different case. Again, that to me is not a valid complaint. You could request a different assignment, but as long as you are not being asked to perform work that exceeds your GA commitment (20 hours, I'm guessing), you really don't have a good case to complain.
I hope that helps. Good luck!
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/04
| 1,759
| 6,541
|
<issue_start>username_0: I believe Tenure offers strong protections for speech in the United States (and I think Canada as well). As I understand, the UK and Europe don't have "tenure" but have something very similar, where a position is made permanent, typically after a 5-year review (as with tenure).
However, it seems that these permanent positions do not have quite as much job security as tenure provides in the US, based on answers to this question: [What is the difference between permanent faculty positions in the UK and tenured faculty positions in the US/Canada?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/45243/what-is-the-difference-between-permanent-faculty-positions-in-the-uk-and-tenured).
My question is specifically about the free speech protections of tenure. Are similar protections common in Europe/UK/Canada?
EtA: I was conflating academic freedom and free speech, as noted by other users. However, I've also found [this article](https://theconversation.com/dont-expect-professors-to-get-fired-when-they-say-something-you-dont-like-95984) that says: "In cases brought by professors in North Carolina and Washington, federal courts have given greater free speech protection to college faculty than ordinary government employees would enjoy." Note that this only applies to public universities.<issue_comment>username_1: **Tenure does not protect free speech, but academic freedoms**
Professors can be fired for [free speech issues](https://www.thefire.org/fired-for-his-views-unt-math-professor-brings-free-speech-lawsuit/) separately. Tenure in the U.S. system means you've completed a tenure package and been awarded tenure by a panel of tenured professors.
Tenure isn't a free pass to do whatever you want. It just means as long as you continue doing your job (teaching + research), you won't be fired. Not getting tenure usually means leaving the university.
There are A LOT of advantages to Tenure (see [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/74960/what-are-the-perks-of-being-a-tenured-professor-at-u-s-universities-besides-ha?rq=1)). It generally means your job is secure, and you have much more freedom to research things others might see as silly or moonshot ideas that may not pan-out for a while.
Free speech isn't protected by tenure. The university may be more tolerant of a tenured professor stating an unpopular view, but that has nothing to do with academic freedom. A quick google search will show you if a tenured professor causes enough problems they will be fired.
**[relevant XKCD](https://xkcd.com/1357/)**
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/eP04Q.png)
**EDIT in response to comments**
It's uncommon to fire a tenured professor, but it does happen. Usually after repeated warnings or obvious abuse of power.
[<NAME> was fired from MSU](https://statenews.com/article/2020/06/a-look-into-what-led-a-well-standing-tenured-professor-to-be-fired-by-msu?ct=content_open&cv=cbox_featured) for refusing to teach an undergrad class.
[<NAME>](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/rick-mehta-acadia-university-1.4819220) was fired for controversial statements.
[<NAME>](https://www.macleans.ca/education/uniandcollege/controversial-physics-prof-rancourt-fired/) was fired for teaching his political views instead of physics.
All were found in a few minutes using Google.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: [Free Speech](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech) and [Academic Freedom](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_freedom) are two separate things. The first is a legal concept and the second, while there may be laws in some places, it is usually more of a contractual matter.
I can't comment on the relative balance between Europe and the US (or other places), but the purposes of the two are quite distinct, philosophically. The first is a political matter, encouraging a robust "marketplace" of ideas in which, hopefully, the best ideas come to the fore and drive policy, while still permitting dissent. This is, or should be, the right of every person, regardless of their political system. Sadly it is not universally recognized.
Academic Freedom, on the other hand, is intended to permit certain academics to pursue ideas, even unpopular ones, in a research and teaching context without (much) interference from authorities. But the "authorities" are usually those within the academy, not the wider public. It is therefore supposed to permit the *development* of ideas, rather than just their dissemination. There may not be a lot of controversy about most mathematics, but there is in the world of philosophy, social science, and other, more human, domains. There are some people who would much rather that some ideas not be developed or even considered. Academic freedom works in this space, if imperfectly.
However, there are abuses of both. The reference article on academic freedom notes a few of the cases in which academic freedom protected statements that were not really germane to the research of the speaker. Both [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Shockley) and [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Lee_Moore) were noted racists who were permitted to continue work while espousing some pretty evil ideas. But part of that was just that their professional work was exceptional and people didn't want to interfere with it.
But the opposite thing has also happened. The mathematician <NAME> was fired from a tenured slot at Tulane (about 1969) for speaking out against the Vietnam War. It caused a stink in the wider mathematical circles and he had a lot of help to continue his career. That was a free speech issue, however, but tenure and academic freedom didn't provide any protection whatever.
The world is messy. Protections are imperfect.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: "In France, even the janitor has tenure."
This quote is from an American mathematician (born/raised in US) who was a maitre des conferences in France earlier in his career.
In most of Europe, it is illegal to dismiss an employee without a legitimate reason, the employee's views on matters irrelevant to job performance is not a legitimate reason, and any attempts to dismiss an employee on some pretext can and will be challenged before some administrative body. This means all employees, not just professors, enjoy most of the protections that come under the umbrella of ``academic freedom'' in the US.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/05
| 1,620
| 6,375
|
<issue_start>username_0: I heard a lot of tips for (upcoming) researchers from top professors and researchers.
Almost all of them told that the **passion** of a candidate is one of the qualities that drive her research life.
All of them told the same fact in different ways. Some say that the **element of surprise or shock** is necessary in order to lead a research life.
It is true that anticipation/passion/element of surprise etc. may lead to great research life. But, I am thinking the other way round.
Suppose there is a professor named *dispassion*. She won't get surprised or excited by the results of great researches of researchers. She is neither passionate nor dispassionate towards research or results. She does it as a routine task without any excitement or surprise.
Is it possible for her to survive as a *productive* researcher in academics?
**Note**: Dispassionate here does not refer to the unwillingness towards work. She feels that whatever results that can be obtained by research are normal or ordinary and hence she is not excited or influenced by them. As a lecturer has [anxiety](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/84604/lecturer-with-anxiety-how-to-survive-in-academia?noredirect=1&lq=1), the researcher is dispassionate here.<issue_comment>username_1: No, not for longer than 10/15 years.
The amount of overwork and the necessary submission to hidden power games and the extremely laborious task of writing proposals only to see them rejected will provide ample dissatisfaction to the dispassionated person to get out of research.
However, a non-negligible quota of research&teaching workforce of the academia will root its motivation in egoistic and selfish feelings, which makes academia a terrible world, where people are "happy" and are actaully enjoying and passionate about the progress and research, but at the expense of other people feelings and in a rather absurd competition mood, with the constant need of proving themselves better than the others by constant overworking (forcing the other to overwork themselves, in a constant downward spiral) as well as by smearing other colleagues and research groups, building closely knitted comunities and "how you dare" leave them.
So, no, you need a lot of self fuelled passion to survive in such a world.
Disclaimer: yes, I am very **bitter**, been there done that, in the academia for 11 years, since 3 years I left the Academia and I found that in the corporate world the human nature is more streamlined, at least people try to s\*\*\*w you just because of profit/career and not because they dream they are helping a superior good (which they think they are entrusted to).
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: The "passion" thing is a myth and a shoddy cliche.
Your true feelings need not have any effect on your career. You just need to do the job. In academia, there is lots of competition, so "doing the job" means doing it very well - among the best in the world. But this requires actions, not feelings.
It can be handy to have the skill of making others believe you have certain emotions, though.
If you dislike academia, don't be an academic. Especially don't teach if you dislike it. There are better paying and easier jobs that are no more dislikable than teaching, but where you cannot harm students.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I’ll try to analyze what’s hiding behind this “passion” meme and, as a helpful exercise, rephrase the same message without using the word “passion” even once.
The key point is that academia is full of people who work very hard, *and* are very smart. If you want to be a successful researcher, you need to think how you could be competitive in such an environment. The possibilities for doing that are fairly limited. They are, roughly speaking:
1. You could be just as smart, and just as hardworking, as the typical researcher in your discipline.
2. You could be a bit less smart than the typical researcher in your discipline, but be more hardworking than the average.
3. You could be much smarter than the (typically already very smart) average worker in your discipline, which would allow you to work less hard than the norm in academia.
Individuals who can adopt strategy number 3 are very rare, so let’s assume that’s not a viable option. That leaves options 1 and 2, which means that, depending on how smart you are, to be successful you’ll either need to be very hardworking (the norm in academia) or *very very* hardworking — I’m talking about pretty extreme, workaholic levels of being hardworking here.
Now comes the part related to that word I said I wasn’t going to use. Ask yourself: how do all those hardworking people manage to be so hardworking consistently over many years? What’s their secret? And what is the chance that you can replicate such a performance?
The answer is simple. These people *enjoy* doing research. They enjoy it so much that it doesn’t feel like work. To them, going to the office or lab to work on research is as much fun as doing your favorite hobby. They don’t do it to get paid or in anticipation of the next promotion. They are a bit baffled whenever they hear someone talking of “work-life balance” (as if those two things are distinct and belong in separate compartments). Basically to such a person the whole concept of “work” and the connotations around it are quite different from what a lot of people (most people, I’m afraid) think of when they hear the word “work”.
So that’s all it is really. That word we were talking about is just a code name for enjoying something and wanting to do it out of intrinsic motivation and not because you are paid or out of a sense of duty. If you have it, it will not be a struggle to “work hard” because you wouldn’t be “working”, rather it will feel like you are playing a sort of fun game that you really enjoy.
And if you don’t have it... well, I’m not a psychologist but I think human nature being what it is, it will be an uphill struggle to maintain that level of hard work that others find effortless over more than a few years. At the very least, you’ll be at a serious competitive disadvantage, so you need to think what advantages you do have (being unusually smart, unusually creative, unusually good at collaborations etc) that could offset that disadvantage and allow you to still be successful.
Upvotes: 4
|
2021/01/05
| 442
| 1,849
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am writing a research paper in which I mention Moroccan explorer [Estaban](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mustafa_Azemmouri) quite often. In the books I have, his name is spelled in different ways; the Wikipedia article linked above lists even more variants, though I never saw a single scholarly source use the name "<NAME>". The problem I get when researching is, every scholar uses different spelling/variations on the name, so I have to search the 5 or 6 different spellings for articles and books to come up in my searches in ProQuest. How do I pick which name/spelling/variation to use?<issue_comment>username_1: You cannot make the different spelling variants disappear. So if there is no "official" spelling, all you can do is to pick one of the variants and use it consistently throughout your work. You might choose the most abundant version, or a version used by the person in question, or the most modern version, or the version used in your group...
If this is a critical aspect in your work, you could also include a short discussion of the different spellings of the name and why you picked a specific version. This way, you can also add some context, so the person can be identified more accurately.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Actually, I'm surprised that you would use his slave name rather than his known actual name. I would recommend his real name, <NAME>, for use in you paper with a footnote (or similar) pointing out the other names he was known by. That will make searches possible. A footnote would also make it clear who is being referred to when you quote older sources that use the slave name.
I would treat the history of the (mis)use of his name as being a racist artifact that should be dropped in modern usage. Honor the man. Use his real name.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/05
| 888
| 3,813
|
<issue_start>username_0: Asking this question for a friend (also motivated by this [PhD thesis: novelty at the time of proposal but not submission](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/160631/phd-thesis-novelty-at-the-time-of-proposal-but-not-submission)). Field: Neuroscience.
Initially, when the paper was written up, there was no other paper that showed that XYZ could happen. It got rejected by the first journal (edited suggested submitting to more specialized journal). Now, at the second journal, the paper has been under review for a while (~7 months). All in all about a year or so has passed between when the work was done and the current peer review process.
Now that the reviews have come, I see that the reviewers say that there is no novelty in the paper because a recent paper (published two months ago) has shown the exact same thing. The editor has marked it as major revision and said that we should address the novelty issue.
My question is: is there anyway to argue that the novelty is supposedly missing because the journal took forever and that its not the authors fault? In general, is there anything to be done in case of getting scooped except for swallow your pride, do more work, submit to pre-print server next time, and hope for the best?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> My question is: is there anyway to argue that the novelty is supposedly missing because the journal took forever and that its not the authors fault? In general, is there anything to be done in case of getting scooped except for swallow your pride, do more work, submit to pre-print server next time, and hope for the best?
>
>
>
The reason why a paper may not get published because a similar story was published elsewhere is not necessarily related to not being recognized as having the work done first. So arguing about whose fault it was or whether you were first to submit to a preprint server will not change anything. (For-profit) journals are not there to report unpublished scientific advances. They are a commercial enterprise trying to make money by selling ads and subscriptions.
If the editor believes that a) the paper in question still will bring readership and b) there is no chance that it was the result of plagiarism they will still publish it. In general, no two papers, even when ostensibly showing the same findings are truly identical. And often journals publish back-to-back papers from different authors on the same topic in the same issue or competing journals do so.
However, if the editor does no longer believe the paper will attract readers then they will pass. The only recourse is to either extend the findings to generate renewed interest or go to a different journal where a different editor might reach a different conclusion. In my view this is likely something that could be ascertained with an inquiry to an editor before reformatting the manuscript for submission to a specific journal. In the meantime, since novelty is lost, I would also publish it on a pre-print server--but that's a personal decision to make.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I would respond to the editor that:
>
> Our paper was submitted on DATE. Paper A was published on DATE. Both works show that XYZ. The publication of A in the well-known Journal of W is evidence that our work is important.
>
>
>
Most editors are decent people and will realize that the prior publication of A is not within your control, nor is it something you overlooked.
Do revise your manuscript to clearly compare your work with A. In the manuscript, you can state that the paper A was published after your initial submission, if you wish.
Publishing multiple papers that independently get the same result is *good for science* and should be rewarded with publication.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2021/01/05
| 1,320
| 5,639
|
<issue_start>username_0: Imagine that I make a post in which I propose a new theory or idea, but I don't write any paper about it.
Then, some years later, a researcher independently and completely unaware of my post, proposes the same theory/idea in a peer-reviewed paper.
In what circumstances could I claim co-authorship of that theory/idea and how could I handle that?
EDIT: As suggested, I rephrased this question. I kept the original question below, for future reference. The context of how this question arose was maybe idiotic, and that was making the answers to drift away from a general view of the problem. As I said in the comments, I was not realistically considering to claim any authorship for the idea or act on it in any way - it is a genuine curiosity of how things could be handled in a generic way. At least, I'm glad to see that this community can engage in a controversial question like this without being disrespectful (no sarcasm).
Some years ago I made [this question](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Kr5Mp.jpg) which was closed soon after.
I was basically suggesting that sleeping could be an evolution advantage as they allow dreams to happen, which in turn allow you to simulate different situations in a safe environment, thus being more well prepared to react in new situations in real life.
Recently, a researcher [proposed](https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg24833073-600-how-the-strangeness-of-our-dreams-reveals-their-true-purpose/) the same (similar?) idea.
Now, I honestly don't think he stole the idea from my post. It's perfectly reasonable that someone in this field could come to the same hypothesis.
However, I am creature with an ego bigger than one could consider healthy, and this feeling of "I also had that idea before, and I think I deserve some acknowledgment for that" is lurking on the back of my head. I'm sure that with it will go away, but what I would like to ask here is: do I have any reason/right to claim co-authorship of such theory?
I know that history of science has many cases of independent researchers doing the same discover, and I'm sure all around the world there are people who already experienced this "ah! but I had that idea before!".
So, even though this really doesn't matter and it's just food to the ego, I am curious to know how this type of situations can be handled.<issue_comment>username_1: Posting an idea on stackexchange does not count as prior publication when thinking about coauthorship or some other way to establish priority. The scientist in the post you link to seems to have done some actual work on the hypothesis in question. I don't think what you have done amounts to "discovery" or calls for any acknowledgment.
In your situation I might consider a polite email to the author, saying that you had a similar idea several years ago. If you actually followed up on your idea you might try to engage with them to see if your thoughts ran along similar lines. Your goal should be to advance the science, not to get some credit.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: No, you have no reason/right to claim co-authorship, or I believe any acknowledgement at all.
For those curious about the paper a preprint is here: <https://arxiv.org/abs/2007.09560>
I have skimmed through the paper and have some background in AI, but even ignoring the fact that the topic of the paper is different to what you wrote about, what you have linked to is no more then a random thought. Any contributions from you can be summed up in the following hypothesis:
>
> Dreaming can be a significant advantage since it allows you to experience a virtual world, simulated situations and reactions, without taking any risks. In this way specimens who could dream were better prepared to face new situations and how to react.
>
>
>
This statement is very vague and doesn't actually specify anything. How are dreams simulating a virtual world? Why are dreams better than being able to run simulations while awake? How does the specimen decide upon which simulations to run? Possibly a good starting point to develop a more specific research question but not a research question by itself. The statement was also after you asking if anyone else had ever looked at this kind of idea.
Even if the author had read your statement and that had inspired him to start thinking more about the subject I don't believe there would be any ethical issues by not referencing you since the statement above feels lacking in substance to me (just like you wouldn't reference a handwaved/madeup science fact from some sci-fi book if it had inspired you to look into a topic).
Now considering the actual paper, and based on my skim of the paper a few months ago, the topic is actually different to what you suggested. The paper proposes that dreaming solves the problem of over-fitting. This occurs in reinforcement learning (AI) where the algorithm is trained on a data-set and can perform very well on classifying/responding to that data-set, but when input that it wasn't trained on comes in the algorithm does something stupid.
So instead of simulating the situations and reactions that the creature may run into, the paper suggests that dreams are the result of training yourself from your daily experiences, but with added random noise to the input training set (your daily observations). This means that you won't assume that everything will occur exactly the same as what you observed today, and that will be beneficial. Specifically it balances against the innumerable number of variables that you couldn't have been aware of which impacted your daily experience.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/01/05
| 3,602
| 15,791
|
<issue_start>username_0: **Is there any good way to determine when it appropriate to reject a manuscript versus merely recommending major revisions?** I.e., at what point do you declare a manuscript a lost cause? I understand there are some situations where the decision is very clear. For example, if a paper has methodology problems but is otherwise solid "major revisions" is an easy decision, as is the case if the manuscript presents clear examples of plagiarism or results that do not advance the field.
However, there are cases where the proper decision to make for a manuscript is not clear. As an example, I was recently asked to review a manuscript on this topic. Originally, I thought the paper was a straightforward "major revisions", but the more I look at the more I am not sure. Specifically...
* **The paper is poorly written and has a large number of grammatical and syntax errors.** The journal is an English journal but I know authors are ESL speakers (they are from Argentina and France). In general, I have a strict policy as a reviewer *not* to reject papers for spelling/grammar/wording issues if English is likely not their first language since the issues could be out of unfamiliarity, but merely make suggestions as to how the syntax could be improved. So this is a minor issue from my standpoint but combined with the other issues it starts to add up.
* **The data are incorrectly formatted and input into their analyzing program of choice, which is likely causing bias in the data** (and at the very least raise questions as to its results). Specifically, the data's formatting contradicts what was described in the methods. The methods state the values were based on the published values for the data points but the actual data corresponds to broader (and much less precise) categorical bins used in my field. They authors claim the data was compiled from the previously published literature but it is clear they merely got it from an online database, as it contains errors that are only in that particular database's version of the data.
* **Their definition of terms contradicts that of all previous studies, and they do not justify this change.** They find a non-significant result but this is almost certainly because their data are nonsense because of noise introduced by their different definition of the term
* **Inconsistencies in reporting of the data.** I.e., in some places the authors say two variables are negatively correlated and in others they are positively correlated.
* **The authors make claims in the discussion that they say are "evident" but provide no support for this either in their own results or via citation of the previously published literature**
* **The authors do not sufficiently cite the previously published literature.** Specifically, the authors appear to be avoiding citing papers from my research group. In their manuscript when reviewing the previous literature and in the discussion they bring up some of the exact same results obtained by previous papers by myself and my lab group, but do not cite them once. Checking through the references they cite pretty much every major research group working on this topic except ours. Discussions with other colleagues in the field suggest this may not be an honest oversight, but may be personally influenced. My concern is that leaving a highly critical review would result in academic retaliation or being blackballed by the authors, and our field is small enough it would be hard to leave an anonymous review.
* **The lead author is a graduate student (approximately my age), but the others are my senior by at least 10 years** (I am a PhD student) I suspect the paper was primarily written by the graduate student based on literature errors that suggest a lack of familiarity with the subject. People have told me that if reviewing a manuscript from someone that is my senior I should be very lenient because they have power over me. There's is also the whole aspect of not being too hard on a very young researcher.
* **The paper is also scooping research that at least two other groups**, one by myself and other colleagues and the other a third party, presented at the main conference for our field last year. The abstracts of these presentations were publicly accessible. I have no problems with this fact, I want to see this group's paper accepted. However, examining the data in detail suggests that they may have just thrown the dataset together using previously published databases without critical review.
**EDIT:** Based on the comment by @Buffy I thought I should add a bit more clarification. Our research group was actually planning to scrap our project because we weren't making much progress on the manuscript and it wasn't high priority, and this will likely be the nail in the coffin. The issue is more the fact that our lab group presented on this same topic is publicly accessible knowledge.
The paper might be salvageable and contains results that would be worthwhile if they stand up to scrutiny after the data has been fixed, but at the same time it shows extreme sloppiness that would not be acceptable for any scientific publication. I suppose, more broadly the question could be formulated as if there is any point where comparatively minor issues are so numerous that rejection becomes a better option than major revisions, or is it always better to choose major revisions over rejection? As you can see, this is a pretty complicated situation that makes it difficult to determine whether major revisions or outright rejection is the better course. Personally, I'd *like* to recommend major revisions for this manuscript, but I'm not sure if it's the right thing to do. I usually don't like to reject a paper unless there is something fundamentally wrong with it that cannot be fixed with revisions.
I've talked about this with some colleagues, and I've had some who say I should not only *not* reject the paper, but I should also *not* bring up the issues as to improper data formulation, definition, and citation issues and give a recommendation of minor revisions at worst so as to avoid getting blackballed by the other researchers. But I'm not sure if this is the right choice.<issue_comment>username_1: Many of the issues you raise are not relevant. Who wrote it, for example. Likewise scooping isn't relevant, though you may need to withdraw due to a conflict of interest. If the research is really parallel, not plagiarized, then scooping is fine.
But for the main question, ask yourself, what would be the quality and impact of the paper if the errors are (mostly) corrected? Is it innovative? Are the main results important? Is it "interesting". If the answer is no, then the paper should be rejected. Otherwise suggest major edits and let the authors see what they can do.
But I think the conflict of interest issue is especially important in your case. If it is eventually rejected and it is learned that you were a reviewer but later published something similar it won't help your career. You will be open to a plagiarism charge whether warranted or not.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If you think the issues with the manuscript can be fixed, the authors should be given the chance to do a revision - if those are major issues, or a large number of issues, then a major revision.
If you think the issues cannot be fixed (or after fixing it would be in essence a new manuscript), then the manuscript should be rejected.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: **Age, and scooping are NOT reasons to reject a paper. Poor grammar and syntax, incoherent data reporting, and "that's evident" are.**
Multiple uses of "It's trivial to show" or "It's evident that" were enough to make me reject a paper on those grounds alone (references to proofs should be included). Combine that with poor English and poor proof-reading it's likely the right call to reject the paper.
You cannot evaluate the contributions, importance, or correctness of the paper if proofs are left as an exercise to the reader.
You cannot evaluate the correctness if there are contradictory statements, such as claiming negative correlation and positive correlation.
Poor English skills alone shouldn't disqualify a paper, but if there are several it should be corrected before approval.
>
> People have told me that if reviewing a manuscript from someone that is my senior I should be very lenient because they have power over me.
>
>
>
This is journal dependant, but most journals anonymized peer-reviewer feedback for this reason. You should give an honest assessment of the paper. Are you reviewing papers from your university (you should not do this)?
If you feel like minor corrections would fix this paper, then you can do a "reject with revision (aka soft reject)." It sounds like there would need to be significant changes, like added proofs. Be sure to write up these issues in the rejection reason. Point them towards existing work, and explain why the notations they used were confusing.
The reject review should stick to issues with the paper, like missing proofs and poor editing and English. Do not bring up age. Only cite the "scooping" if the results were already available to the community at large (otherwise this isn't an issue).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: None of these reasons are reasons to outright reject a paper. Those that are relevant are possible to fix.
* **The paper is poorly written and has a large number of grammatical and
syntax errors.**
This can be fixed by copy editing.
* **The data are incorrectly formatted and input into their analyzing
program of choice, which is likely causing bias in the data**
If the data are genuninely incorrectly formatted, rather than just not formatted to your taste, then, again you can ask them to fix this and rerun the analysis.
* **Their definition of terms contradicts that of all previous studies,
and they do not justify this change.**
I'm not sure I understand how the definition of a term can add noise to an analysis, but irrespective, ask them to change there definition and rerun or justify their change.
* **Inconsistencies in reporting of the data.**
Ask them to clear up the inconsistancy. If they say positively correlated in one place, but negatively in another, ask them which it is.
* **The authors make claims in the discussion that they say are "evident"
but provide no support for this either in their own results or via
citation of the previously published literature**
Ask them to provide support for this claim or claims.
* **The authors do not sufficiently cite the previously published
literature.**
Ask them to cite the missing papers.
* **The lead author is a graduate student (approximately my age), but the
others are my senior by at least 10 years**
Irrelevant.
* **The paper is also scooping research that at least two other groups**
If you are worried about scooping then this is not relevant. If you are saying that they are plagerising, then that is relevant, and is the only thing here that is a reasonable reason to reject. But you should have solid proof its intentional plagiarism.
In general I only reject papers that have problems that are not fixable. All of the problems you have raised with this paper are fixable. Now the authors may decide they can't be bothered with all the issues you've raised, or the editor might decide that this amount of revision cannot be accomplished within the journals revision period, or they might fix the problems and their results, evaporate, but that's not something you can tell right now.
However, you say this:
>
> and give a recommendation of minor revisions at worst so as to avoid getting blackballed by the other researchers.
>
>
>
If the paper is flawed, you cannot return a review saying it is not. But you do have the option of withdrawing from the review process if you do not feel able to give an honest assessment.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: If there were an objective way to answer this, peer review would not be so random. Unfortunately there isn't. Still, the standard guideline is that if the issues are fixable, recommend revision; if the paper is fatally flawed, recommend rejection. Alternatively, if the issues are (relatively easily) fixable, recommend revision; if they will take a lot of effort, recommend rejection.
Examples of issues to recommend revision:
* Poor (but still comprehensible) English.
* Paper does not cite X, Y, Z, but it should.
* Paper does not clearly define [term] even though it uses [term] extensively.
* Paper does not perform [cheap experiment] to verify [claim], but [claim] is plausible - recommend they do the experiment instead.
* Paper has a curious feature in the data that could refute the paper's thesis, and the authors do not treat it - recommend they examine the feature instead.
Examples of issues to recommend rejection:
* Incomprehensible English.
* Paper is provably wrong.
* Paper is provably inferior, e.g. a paper proposes a new method to do X with 80% effectiveness, but another known method is already capable of doing X with 85% effectiveness.
* Paper is plagiarized / violates academic ethics (e.g. it is submitted without the consent of all authors).
* The paper, even if correct, is not interesting enough for the journal (or not within its scope).
* Paper's central thesis is [claim], which is not supported by the analysis conducted. For example, if the paper says people prefer X to Y, but the sample of people it used is clearly biased, and there is no analysis of how the sampling bias might affect the results.
* Paper lacks basic features, e.g. it analyzes the effect of X on Y, but doesn't have a control sample even though they really should have designed the experiment with one.
All that said, not everyone will agree with all of the above, e.g. some might recommend the authors repeat an experiment with the control. So you'll have to exercise judgement.
Based on your description of the paper you are reviewing, it reads to me like it's more reject than revise. The most problematic points are points #2, #3, #4 and the last one. A paper that contradicts itself is a clear problem that should never have arrived at you in the first place (assuming you didn't misunderstand). Scooping is not so much a problem as it is the fact that the data was thrown together without critical review. If as you describe it the data is nonsense, then the results are in jeopardy and could be completely wrong.
If you are still concerned, you could recommend revision and give the authors a chance to improve their work. If the revised manuscript is still terrible, then recommend rejection.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: >
> Is there any good way to determine when it appropriate to reject a manuscript versus merely recommending major revisions?
>
>
>
You list a number of arbitrary specifics—those are irrelevant. When making this decision, do not look at what the problems are with the paper. Look at what it would take to correct them, and be fair to the authors.
Put yourself in the authors' shoes. Would you be able to make the changes you think are *necessary* (is it at all possible)? Would you be willing to? Would it take a reasonably small amount of time compared to what the original work took?
If yes, do give them the chance to fix the work, and *make it very clear what exactly needs to be fixed*.
If not, recommend rejection.
What you should avoid doing is repeatedly asking for major revisions when you believe that they won't happen (to a reasonable standard) anyway. That creates false expectations and just wastes everyone's time. Suggest rejection—there's always the possibility of resubmission.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/01/06
| 939
| 3,933
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is there a way to match content
* of an article from a podcast source,
* of a podcast from an article source or
* of a podcast from another podcast source?
I haven't heard of any tool that can check plagiarism from/in an audio source. If such a tool does exist, how efficient and reliable is it?
EDIT: There is no specific purpose for asking this question. It is just out of curiosity, since I am listening to a lot of podcasts nowadays.<issue_comment>username_1: **TL;DR Google already provides a transcript for all YouTube videos. Getting them to give it to you might be difficult. Even with it, you may have to role your own since transcripts aren't student essays.**
**You could if you are willing to get transcriptions of every podcast**
Just like with written plagiarism detectors like Turnitin, the database of existing work, which is always growing, would need to be very large.
If the Podcast is on YouTube, Google does an automatic speech-to-text on anything uploaded, so you could at least compare between YouTube influencers, assuming Google is ok with you downloaded thousands on thousands of transcripts.
You can also pay Google cloud 0.6 cents per 15 minutes to do as many transcriptions as you want.
The hardest part will be getting high-quality transcripts. The transcripts won't have punctuation, so off-the-shelf checkers, like Turnitin may not like them.
[The algorithm is pretty simple](https://www.algonquincollege.com/blackboard/how-does-turnitins-originality-check-work/), compare word list in the student's work with your existing database and see how many word list overlap.
Just like with Turnitin, it's not proof the student plagiarized, you'll still have to have a human in the loop.
**EDIT in response to comments**
Whatever you do, a human will have to listen to both podcasts and determine if the student podcast either said exactly what another podcast said (obvious plagiarism) **or** simply restated what was already said without adding new information or analysis.
No computer program (like Turnitin) can measure the contribution of work. No contribution = plagiarism.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I doubt that anything currently exists. I don't, however, think the problem is infeasible. But it is very hard.
First, plagiarism is about ideas, not words. One can plagiarize without using any of the original words. Second, plagiarism is about the creation of the ideas and claiming them as your own. Both of these are difficult problems.
First, one would probably need both things to be in a common format, probably written language. This part currently has solutions that mostly work, but it is the easiest part. Second, the actual meaning of the words would need to be extracted and probably also structured in some way.
Finally, the system would need to watch out that the ideas weren't just being *expressed* but were being claimed. I can certainly speak and write about relativity without plagiarizing Einstein.
I think it would be an interesting research problem, but I also think that it would be pretty far in the future before such a system could eliminate most of the false positives and false negatives.
A data driven AI system might be the way to attack it, but these are still subject to many false decisions.
But it needs to be an *intelligent* agent to make the call. A person can use transcripts and understand the meaning and the intent. A sufficiently sophisticated AI might also be able to do it, but it is still a bit beyond where were are, especially if you require a low fault rate.
---
Copyright is easier, since it *is* about words (pictures, sounds, etc).
Likewise, students copying things to cheat is generally easier since they will most likely be copying words rather than extracting the ideas/semantics from the words and there is an implicit assumption that the intent is that the ideas are their own.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/06
| 2,467
| 9,926
|
<issue_start>username_0: When colleagues that don't co-author with me and are in separate projects, writing different papers, I've noticed they don't congratulate me, when I give them exciting progress. They're around for the gossip, and are always willing to listen to gossip or bad news. But when I have exciting news to report, e.g. a new paper, they are silent.
I do try to cheer my colleagues on, but I realize I cannot force them to do the same.
How could I deal with this mentally?<issue_comment>username_1: I think this is just the way academics normally behave. We tend to work in silos. Those in different silos don't understand our work. Those in the same silo just take success for granted.
Win the Nobel in Chemistry or Economics and you will get congratulated, but not for much less than that. Win a local award and people will cheer you on (Teacher of the Year, say). But generally they are just happy (or not) to be working with you.
I worked in academia for about 40 years and don't remember any instances of congratulations except for the few times I won an award, sometimes a shared award. You might be congratulated, actually, when you turn out a new doctoral student who has written a nice thesis, but the work was mostly theirs, not yours.
We are quiet, generally, and just get on with it.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: What do you need the felicitations for?
If you do good work, at some point you will be collecting best papers awards, perhaps even lifetime awards or the like and even that gets stale at some point, as far as ego is concerned. They are very useful to boost a career, no question, so one certainly should not scoff at them, but one should not make oneself dependent on them.
I find a quiet "interesting paper" comment accompanied by a small nod (i.e. without sarcasm) by a respected colleague to be one of the greatest compliments possible. Your work being cited by good researchers another one; however, do not expect these.
In the end, you should know yourself best whether you do a good job. The exciting part is not the new paper, but the new insight and that does not depend on acclamation by others. **A new truth or insight, that is the ultimate prize, after all**.
If you absolutely need external motivational feedback, find fellow enthusiasts in the field and exchange with them. Usually they will be scattered around the globe rather than at your location, but today that really does not matter anymore.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: You're right that many academics (and I suppose not only academics) somehow systematically fail to encourage their colleagues, and do not congratulate their successes.
Ideally, yes, at least "mentors" would do so, all the more in light of the general failure. But, in my experience, mentorship is not to be reliably expected. Sadly. Let's not bother to talk about certain tendencies to "keep people down"...
So your situation doesn't surprise me, and I wouldn't expect much change anytime soon. If you can find a situation where people give you positive feedback, cherish it. And, as I've been thinking about more and more, you might remind yourself to be sure to give other people positive feedback, when you are in a relatively senior position at least!
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: **Try to start a cultural shift in your area**
Others seem to be implying that this is just "how things are" in academia and you should accept it and move on. It's easier to say that when you have reached a high, respected position in your field, have published countless papers, received awards, given keynote presentations, etc. At that point, for the most part, you know you are doing well, and a single rejection or acceptance doesn't have as great an impact on you. You don't mention what stage you have reached in your career, but for those in PhD or postdoc positions, this stuff is often a big deal, and there is nothing wrong with hoping that you might get congratulated when you get a bit of success.
So what can you do? Step one is to make a point of congratulating others. Ask about their progress, and show enthusiasm for their achievements. Doesn't matter where they are in the academic hierarchy, almost everyone likes talking about themselves and being appreciated.
Then you can try to do this in a slightly more formal context. Make a time every week or two when you and a bunch of your colleagues will meet up to share news, some coffee and a cake/pack of biscuits. Make a point of going round the room and asking who has achievements they would like to mention e.g. papers published, grants accepted (even small ones), presentations given, or whatever. And given them a round of applause or a "well done". If no one has anything to celebrate, which will happen plenty of weeks, then commiserate. There's bound to be someone with a paper sitting in its 4th month of review, or who's just heard back from the dreaded Reviewer 3.
It's not going to change your local culture overnight. And you may find that some just aren't interested. So pick the easiest targets first - your friends, closest colleagues, those at the same career stage as you, the friendliest lecturers/professors. Hopefully if it catches on it might gather a bit of momentum. Note the value of cake/biscuits/doughnuts in tempting people out of their offices - make a rota for who brings the tasty snacks. If you really can't persuade those in your immediate vicinity, perhaps you can do something similar online, looking for groups on social media who are all studying in the same area.
Sure, don't rely on praise entirely. If it's not forthcoming, that absolutely does not diminish your success. Be proud of your work regardless. But there's nothing wrong with wanting to hear "well done", and equally plenty to be gained from saying it to others.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: You are working in a group with a cultural problem.
The best things you can do is to do it better than them, which means to actually congratulate others for their achievements honestly. Be happy for others if they do progress and reach their goals.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: **Who is likely to congratulate you?**
Close friends
Romantic partners
Family members
Crawlers who want something from you
Suitors who want to get to know you by using flattery
Generous people who are just like that naturally
People who think it is the right thing to do
Con artists (watch your wallet)
Admirers/fans if you are famous
Sycophants if you are powerful
---
The rest of us are so worried about our own careers/relationships/health/utility bills that we hardly notice the successes or failures of others. We may even be envious of others' good fortune.
Once you make a few real friends in the research community, stick with them and value them.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: The trick is to have a high self-esteem, that way you don't have to rely on validation from others.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: This is a common issue in academia, which I've discussed with numerous colleagues.
The answers that suggest you develop your own self-esteem are, bluntly, wrong. This subject has been studied extensively by management and productivity experts, who have found that celebrating small wins increases productivity, and is especially important in research and innovation. [Here's a good summary in the Harvard Business Review](https://www.discoveryinaction.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/The-Power-of-Small-Wins-R1105C-PDF-ENG-2016.pdf).
Unfortunately, there are systematic reasons why academics rarely congratulate each other:
* **Research achievements are stretched out in time**. Paper acceptances often come in on random Wednesdays months after submission, when you're already focused on something else. It's harder to celebrate when you don't get a break from work to do it.
* **Most research achievements are individual**. The big milestones that will make your career, like a best paper award, probably won't even show up on your team-mates' CVs. It's harder for them to drop everything for to celebrate something that doesn't directly affect them.
* **Academia is a competitive culture**. Sometimes, your achievements may hurt your peers. In some fields, there are more PhD students and post-docs in a single university than there are faculty job openings in the world. It's really hard for people to celebrate your success when they're worried about their own scientific survival. In some institutions this competitiveness gets deeply ingrained and is perpetuated by established researchers.
With that said, you can still try to change the cultivate the habit of celebrating small successes.
To avoid the problems above, start with a group of people who either collaborate closely, or at least don't have to compete with one another. Find a meeting time when everyone is relaxed and open-minded. Tell them you'd like to try an experiment to make the group happier. Cite the literature (there's lots!) on the productivity benefits of celebrating small wins.
It might help if you make a systematic plan for when and how to celebrate, e.g. "If any of us gets a paper acceptance, award, or job offer during the week, we all go out for lunch on Friday", or, "Once a month, we set aside a group meeting (with cookies) to share the things we want to work on and the things we're proud of." There are some great options in other answers as well. If you want to change the culture, be the person who organizes the lunches and brings the cookies; eventually others will follow.
If you can't get your research group on board, the next best thing is to celebrate outside of work with friends or family. Take all the little milestones - the paper reviews handled, the applications submitted, the experiments that ran just right - and leave work early, get a fancy dinner, and mark your own success.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/01/07
| 501
| 2,039
|
<issue_start>username_0: I will be applying for math PhD, and was wondering if there is any way to find the amount of stipend I can get for each program (already checked each school's website, without avail). Are top 50 math PhD programs generally fully funded, that I shouldn't be worried about it too much?<issue_comment>username_1: In the US almost all doctoral students in math are eligible for either a TA or an RA position, but mostly TA. The universities require a large number of TAs to manage the undergraduate program so as to free up professors for research and doctoral advising. Funding is modest, and 1/3 or so of your time might be spent on TA duties. Tuition is also normally waived for TAs.
Some professors might have funding for an RA or two, but there would still be duties.
But for those wishing a career in academia, starting out as a TA gives you some experience on the teaching side, if only (initially) grading and holding small tutorial sessions. An RA would be more valuable for someone wanting to go into industry, but they are not as common, and likely much more competitive.
There are relatively few positions that have no duties attached. At one time there were widely available federal scholarships under the [National Defense Education Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_Education_Act) but those ended long ago. A few, more tailored, programs remain.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'm a math PhD student in the US. Programs in the US are almost always fully funded (including tuition & fees waived) for at least four or five years. That being said, the *amount* of the yearly stipend can fluctuate wildly from school to school (especially when you account for different costs of living in different cities), and there's no way to get an actual number until you've been accepted to the program and received an offer. It's also worth noting that the amount of the stipend is not necessarily correlated with the prestige of the university or department.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/07
| 656
| 2,462
|
<issue_start>username_0: An article I'm reading references another article as:
>
> [6] <NAME> and <NAME>, CERN preprint TH 1857 (1974), Nucl. Phys. B, to be published
>
>
>
It is explained in the article I'm reading that "all unexplained notation in the present paper can be found in ref. [6]", so it is quite an important reference. The problem is that I can't find it anywhere. Neither in *Nuclear Physics B*, nor on the [CERN document server](https://cds.cern.ch/collection/Preprints?ln=en). The [elsevier page](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0370269374903104) of the article I'm reading is also no help.
How am I supposed to find this article? Is it possible that it was never published after all?<issue_comment>username_1: In the US almost all doctoral students in math are eligible for either a TA or an RA position, but mostly TA. The universities require a large number of TAs to manage the undergraduate program so as to free up professors for research and doctoral advising. Funding is modest, and 1/3 or so of your time might be spent on TA duties. Tuition is also normally waived for TAs.
Some professors might have funding for an RA or two, but there would still be duties.
But for those wishing a career in academia, starting out as a TA gives you some experience on the teaching side, if only (initially) grading and holding small tutorial sessions. An RA would be more valuable for someone wanting to go into industry, but they are not as common, and likely much more competitive.
There are relatively few positions that have no duties attached. At one time there were widely available federal scholarships under the [National Defense Education Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_Education_Act) but those ended long ago. A few, more tailored, programs remain.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'm a math PhD student in the US. Programs in the US are almost always fully funded (including tuition & fees waived) for at least four or five years. That being said, the *amount* of the yearly stipend can fluctuate wildly from school to school (especially when you account for different costs of living in different cities), and there's no way to get an actual number until you've been accepted to the program and received an offer. It's also worth noting that the amount of the stipend is not necessarily correlated with the prestige of the university or department.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/07
| 702
| 2,995
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been working in the industry of software engineering for 5 years so far. Lately, I am planning to take a PHD, I am interested in software architecture and quality, something that started fascinating me after experiencing failing/successful projects because of bad/good architecture mainly.
After doing some search about the matter, I see that most of PHD positions demand some publications so my plan B is to get something published to have the courage to email some possible advisors, especially that my master thesis was done in artificial intelligence, something that would be funny to tell a software-architecture-advisor about.
My question is, would an academic conference accept a paper written by me, alone, no advisor and no university to belong to?
Thank you all.<issue_comment>username_1: There is no requirement that a person be employed in academia to publish papers or submit them to academic venues, including conferences. Papers are supposed to be reviewed for their own qualities and insights, not the position or reputation of the authors (though some abuses occur).
But before submitting to any venue, you should spend some effort looking at the sorts of things that get published there, so that you style isn't too different and the quality of your results is at a similar level as that of successful submissions. There is no real bar, but, like most things, first attempts aren't always successful.
You don't even need to associate yourself with your employer for this. *Independent Researcher* is fine as an "affiliation".
---
You should, however, also explore whether your assumptions about how to get accepted are valid. It would probably be worth the effort to talk to some potential advisors and see if your current qualifications are sufficient.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> My question is, would an academic conference accept a paper written by me, alone, no advisor and no university to belong to?
>
>
>
All conferences I am aware of accept papers based on their scholarly content, without any (explicit) considerations regarding the authors, their networks, or affiliations.
There are, indeed, thousands of scholarly publications (in journals and conference proceedings) from authors [whose affiliation reads "In<NAME>" or "Independent Scholar"](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/159416/how-to-submit-a-paper-without-being-backed-up-by-my-employer/159426#159426). See also the tag [`independent-researcher`](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/independent-researcher).
According to my own experience, publishing in journals and attending conferences as an independent researcher is unproblematic as long as the content you produce is acceptable. However, obtaining funding might be a different issue - many funders require you to be affiliated with a research institution (including for minor travel grants for conference participations).
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/01/07
| 1,784
| 7,182
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student sponsored by a company and considering leaving after three months.
This is an opportunity offered by my supervisor because he has a good relationship with the company and the company started a meaningful project. Right after I graduated my master degree, my supervisor suggested the company to offer my a three month pre-PhD summer job that I could start the project earlier while waiting the start date of my PhD.
To be honest, I found myself under pressure during the three months summer job because I was assigned heavy workload and something I’m not familiar with. This is a tiny size company (less than 10 people), I would say it is very not organised too. The development team has only one full time employee but he’s also working like a part time on this project. Even the project manager is a part time employee. Thus, everything relied on me. I did consider not starting the PhD and just let go the “golden” opportunity.
I thought that I would be protected by the uni once I officially started my PhD. But I am afraid this is not correct. After I started, things even got worse, the company lost 2 managers in a very short period. As I am a full time PhD student working on the research part of the company’s project, I don’t think I’m supposed to be assigned operational work. I was happy to accept this kind of workload as I think the company is paying real money for sponsoring my PhD. They requested 40% of my work time, which means 2 work days to focus on the company work. They kept adding workload, sudden meetings and very tight deadlines, I was under great pressure and that ruined my schedule.
I have been keeping weekly reports and have reported issues to my academic supervisors. I am very surprised that I have raised the same issue three times within the first three months of my PhD. We have a big meeting every after I “complain”. The CEO (my industrial supervisor) of the company agreed he would change the situation, and promised that I have the right to say no to the non research related work. From my experience, he forgets what’s been agreed after two weeks and just keeps asking for 40% of my work time.
I had the third meeting regarding the same issue with them this afternoon. From my point of view, what the CEO said today was pretty much the same as the last 2 times. What I remember the most from the chat today is the CEO mentioned even the tight deadline could be changed when needed, we have to keep both internal and external communication running. However, this is a little bit different comparing to his actions. Last month, he didn’t even consider pushing back the deadline but requested me to finish the limited demo in 2 days, which put me under great pressure and ruined my schedule, I had no time to prepare the conference presentation. He told my supervisor things are flexible and not seeing me as a developer. But what I’m feeling is he treats me like a full time product developer, leave me no time for research, and nothing can be changed after he decided.
For my academic supervisor, he is 50% helpful in this case to be fair. He guides me how to exploit the company’s project to finish my PhD. He also listens to me carefully when I need help. However, it seems that he doesn’t want to touch the internal issues of the company, I feel like he has no such power to change the situation I’m facing.
Let me know what you guys think.
Cheers<issue_comment>username_1: Your meetings haven't served their purpose, follow-up with an email clarifying some specifics, e.g.,
>
> Dear CEO,
>
>
> Thank you for listening to my concerns during our meetings X XXX XXXX, Y YYY YYYY, and Z ZZZ ZZZZ. I appreciate the company's needs for ABC and, as discussed, I can commit 17% of my time to this. I suggest that my contributions be conducted on Fridays, between the hours of X and Y. My university employment makes further commitment infeasible.
>
>
>
One day a week (20%) may be too high, 17% too low, adapt accordingly. My personal preference would be to commit Friday, your preference may vary.
You could offer the CEO a solution:
>
> Nonetheless, I foresee a scaling opportunity: I am willing to supervise one or more interns/researchers/developers to help us achieve ABC.
>
>
>
Other details can of course be added.
Conclude with something along the lines of:
>
> I trust we are in agreement, please do not hesitate to offer clarification if we are not.
>
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
>
> researchxyz
>
>
>
Such a conclusion forces the CEO to stick to their word, or break a written agreement.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I can't figure out what the formal relationship between you and this company is. Do you still have some contract with them, as well as with the University?
It seems to me that asking your advisor about the situation regarding say IPR or liability insurance may give you a lever you can use to get out of doing the company's work. E.g. "*... requested me to finish the limited demo ...*" so if that was done as part of a full-time PhD then is it you or the University that owns the code, and not the company at all?
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: This is a little hard to follow, but I would break it into two pieces:
>
> Working more than 40%
>
>
>
**You need to turn the tables.** Right now, the company is "playing by its own rules," and you are stuck impotently chasing after them with the useless contract. You seem to think this is deliberate on the company's part, while I suspect that it might be unintentional -- but either way, it will be fixed when you become the one who "plays by your own rules." For example, perhaps you are willing to work one hour per day M/T/W and all day Thursday and Friday. Anything that cannot get done during that time simply does not get done. You don't check e-mail outside of that time window, and you are unconcerned about missing deadlines.
This will have two possible outcomes.
* One is that they try to complain, but your advisor supports you, and after all, you are working 40% as agreed. So, this complaint goes nowhere, and they eventually do a better job of managing your tasking (or they just learn to accept that work assigned to you will move slowly). They might even respect you more.
* The other is that they complain very angrily, your advisor does not (or cannot) successfully support you, and you are eventually forced to return to your current workflow. In this case, you will probably end up leaving both the company and the PhD (which seems to be what you are considering now in any case).
>
> Doing operational work rather than R&D
>
>
>
So far you are only 3 months in, so getting familiarity with the company's operational work may not be a bad thing. Especially if you want to stay in industry, this sort of knowledge may be quite valuable to you. So I am less concerned about this, especially since you are working 60% time at the university.
Sure, this is still a problem and it will need to be addressed -- but I would focus on the 40% issue for now and then after that converges, you can start to slowly shift your responsibilities.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/01/07
| 1,141
| 4,363
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD graduate from department of CS. I might get an offer to join as an assistant professor at a different department (industrial design) to work in a multidisciplinary project. My question is that if I change my department or even my institution in future would it affect my rank? Will my researching effort being counted in future?
**EDIT**
I need to clarify that after the end of my contract, I will be evaluated to be promoted as an associated professor. My question is that since I might work for industrial department, the rank given to me would be valid if I join, say, CS department?<issue_comment>username_1: Your meetings haven't served their purpose, follow-up with an email clarifying some specifics, e.g.,
>
> Dear CEO,
>
>
> Thank you for listening to my concerns during our meetings X XXX XXXX, Y YYY YYYY, and Z ZZZ ZZZZ. I appreciate the company's needs for ABC and, as discussed, I can commit 17% of my time to this. I suggest that my contributions be conducted on Fridays, between the hours of X and Y. My university employment makes further commitment infeasible.
>
>
>
One day a week (20%) may be too high, 17% too low, adapt accordingly. My personal preference would be to commit Friday, your preference may vary.
You could offer the CEO a solution:
>
> Nonetheless, I foresee a scaling opportunity: I am willing to supervise one or more interns/researchers/developers to help us achieve ABC.
>
>
>
Other details can of course be added.
Conclude with something along the lines of:
>
> I trust we are in agreement, please do not hesitate to offer clarification if we are not.
>
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
>
> researchxyz
>
>
>
Such a conclusion forces the CEO to stick to their word, or break a written agreement.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I can't figure out what the formal relationship between you and this company is. Do you still have some contract with them, as well as with the University?
It seems to me that asking your advisor about the situation regarding say IPR or liability insurance may give you a lever you can use to get out of doing the company's work. E.g. "*... requested me to finish the limited demo ...*" so if that was done as part of a full-time PhD then is it you or the University that owns the code, and not the company at all?
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: This is a little hard to follow, but I would break it into two pieces:
>
> Working more than 40%
>
>
>
**You need to turn the tables.** Right now, the company is "playing by its own rules," and you are stuck impotently chasing after them with the useless contract. You seem to think this is deliberate on the company's part, while I suspect that it might be unintentional -- but either way, it will be fixed when you become the one who "plays by your own rules." For example, perhaps you are willing to work one hour per day M/T/W and all day Thursday and Friday. Anything that cannot get done during that time simply does not get done. You don't check e-mail outside of that time window, and you are unconcerned about missing deadlines.
This will have two possible outcomes.
* One is that they try to complain, but your advisor supports you, and after all, you are working 40% as agreed. So, this complaint goes nowhere, and they eventually do a better job of managing your tasking (or they just learn to accept that work assigned to you will move slowly). They might even respect you more.
* The other is that they complain very angrily, your advisor does not (or cannot) successfully support you, and you are eventually forced to return to your current workflow. In this case, you will probably end up leaving both the company and the PhD (which seems to be what you are considering now in any case).
>
> Doing operational work rather than R&D
>
>
>
So far you are only 3 months in, so getting familiarity with the company's operational work may not be a bad thing. Especially if you want to stay in industry, this sort of knowledge may be quite valuable to you. So I am less concerned about this, especially since you are working 60% time at the university.
Sure, this is still a problem and it will need to be addressed -- but I would focus on the 40% issue for now and then after that converges, you can start to slowly shift your responsibilities.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/01/07
| 1,608
| 6,293
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm asking about this in StackExchange Academia rather than a software-recommendation site because I have conversion problems specific to the layout of academic publications. I'm helping a student who has problems with their eyesight. They find it hard to read academic papers and books on screen, when distributed as PDF. They prefer to have these converted to Word, then read that on screen. **This helps them because they can change the font of any part that's hard to read, as well as highlighting section headings and other cues to help them navigate.** There are many PDF-to-Word converters, but all the ones I've tried (see below) have defects. Can anyone recommend something better than those I've listed? The converter must not mangle tables, diagrams, footnotes, formulae, subscripts and superscripts, or other complicated content typical of academic publications.
The student does not like to read printed text, and only has an A4 printer, so blowing up the text and printing that isn't feasible. The pandemic introduces its own constraints, since they don't want to venture from their flat to use University computers. So they're restricted to what I think is a 22-inch screen, Windows 10, and their A4 printer. I only mention these because commenters suggested them. The student is comfortable reading Word files, and I want to help them do that, rather than force them to do something outside their preferences.
Getting back to PDF-to-Word converters, so far, we have tried:
* [Kofax Power PDF](https://www.kofax.com/Products/power-pdf), but it's very erratic, though. For example, when I converted an archaeological report which I had to ask Power PDF to OCR, it "thought" it had found characters in the thin lines indicating boundaries in a diagram of the archaeological site. Power PDF also mangles structural chemical formulae, even when told not to OCR. Footnotes and tables cause even more problems, as do in-line chemical formulae, and subscripts and superscripts.
* [SmallPDF](https://smallpdf.com/). This claims to be "the platform that makes it super easy to convert and edit all your PDF files". It is not. It converts some so they work better than those done by Power PDF, but crashes on others.
* [PDF24](https://en.pdf24.org/). This probably does a better job than either Power PDF or SmallPDF, when it works. But on some PDFs that need OCR'ing, it just emits the original page-images. This may well be a bug, and I've reported it, but I've not had any reply.
Does anyone have any recommendations?<issue_comment>username_1: Your meetings haven't served their purpose, follow-up with an email clarifying some specifics, e.g.,
>
> Dear CEO,
>
>
> Thank you for listening to my concerns during our meetings X XXX XXXX, Y YYY YYYY, and Z ZZZ ZZZZ. I appreciate the company's needs for ABC and, as discussed, I can commit 17% of my time to this. I suggest that my contributions be conducted on Fridays, between the hours of X and Y. My university employment makes further commitment infeasible.
>
>
>
One day a week (20%) may be too high, 17% too low, adapt accordingly. My personal preference would be to commit Friday, your preference may vary.
You could offer the CEO a solution:
>
> Nonetheless, I foresee a scaling opportunity: I am willing to supervise one or more interns/researchers/developers to help us achieve ABC.
>
>
>
Other details can of course be added.
Conclude with something along the lines of:
>
> I trust we are in agreement, please do not hesitate to offer clarification if we are not.
>
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
>
> researchxyz
>
>
>
Such a conclusion forces the CEO to stick to their word, or break a written agreement.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I can't figure out what the formal relationship between you and this company is. Do you still have some contract with them, as well as with the University?
It seems to me that asking your advisor about the situation regarding say IPR or liability insurance may give you a lever you can use to get out of doing the company's work. E.g. "*... requested me to finish the limited demo ...*" so if that was done as part of a full-time PhD then is it you or the University that owns the code, and not the company at all?
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: This is a little hard to follow, but I would break it into two pieces:
>
> Working more than 40%
>
>
>
**You need to turn the tables.** Right now, the company is "playing by its own rules," and you are stuck impotently chasing after them with the useless contract. You seem to think this is deliberate on the company's part, while I suspect that it might be unintentional -- but either way, it will be fixed when you become the one who "plays by your own rules." For example, perhaps you are willing to work one hour per day M/T/W and all day Thursday and Friday. Anything that cannot get done during that time simply does not get done. You don't check e-mail outside of that time window, and you are unconcerned about missing deadlines.
This will have two possible outcomes.
* One is that they try to complain, but your advisor supports you, and after all, you are working 40% as agreed. So, this complaint goes nowhere, and they eventually do a better job of managing your tasking (or they just learn to accept that work assigned to you will move slowly). They might even respect you more.
* The other is that they complain very angrily, your advisor does not (or cannot) successfully support you, and you are eventually forced to return to your current workflow. In this case, you will probably end up leaving both the company and the PhD (which seems to be what you are considering now in any case).
>
> Doing operational work rather than R&D
>
>
>
So far you are only 3 months in, so getting familiarity with the company's operational work may not be a bad thing. Especially if you want to stay in industry, this sort of knowledge may be quite valuable to you. So I am less concerned about this, especially since you are working 60% time at the university.
Sure, this is still a problem and it will need to be addressed -- but I would focus on the 40% issue for now and then after that converges, you can start to slowly shift your responsibilities.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/01/07
| 660
| 2,912
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have an interview for a postdoc position next week. The project was running for 9 months or so and they already have some preprints out. This specific position says that the researcher will work closely with the 3 PIs, so it broadens the area for me a little bit since each one has different research areas. Do I need to know in detail the papers that are out in this project? I'm asking this because I've noticed that people say "do your research and look at the latest publications of your future lab".<issue_comment>username_1: The advice "look at the latest..." is good advice. Whether it is necessary to do depends entirely on the views of the PI. They may care deeply, or not at all. Certainly it is better to be as prepared as possible, even if their main concerns are elsewhere.
If the position is competitive, then it is likely that other candidates will be as prepared as they can. Due diligence, I guess.
Even if you only bring questions about those papers to the interview you will be better off than being completely unprepared.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In an interview for a postdoc, you should be able to explain two things:
First, what your future research plans are (and why this topic is right for you, due to your past work or other background).
And, second, why you chose to apply for this position, and why you think you are a good fit (or rather, *the* fit) for the position. This implies that you know what is going on research-wise in this place, and that you can explain how you both will be able to add to the research performed there, and how the topics researched there will help you to form your research profile (first point).
To this end, it is essential that you know what is going on in the place, and what your potential future PI and their group are working on. However, this does not mean that you have to study the most recent papers - it is more important that you have the big picture of where their research is heading. Of course, knowing their most recent papers in more detail does not hurt, but a PI will usually not expect you to impress on specific details of one paper. And it might well be that the last 3 papers, for some reason or the other, *don't* accurately reflect on their primary research interest. In that case, saying how interesting you find [topic of the paper] could even be counterproductive.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: You can flip it around and ask: ‘Is it reasonable to apply to a post doc position without doing some basic research on your future boss and workplace?’ I would think not.
That said, for none of my post doc interviews any detailed knowledge of the papers from the lab was unnecessary. It was much more important to have a big picture idea about the general topic and to be able to follow any contribute to a conversation about that research area.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/01/07
| 625
| 2,736
|
<issue_start>username_0: A grant-funded researcher wrote a manuscript that they were first author on. All co-authors were awarded time to make edits. Before getting departmental approval for submitting to publication, the grant-funded researcher started a new job. Considerable time passed before departmental approval was awarded.
The original first author has expressed concern that they will not have time to work on the old manuscript because they started a new job. However, the PI for the grant (and co-author on the paper) wishes to publish the manuscript. The PI has stated if minimal to no edits are required, the authorship order would remain the same. If the slightly outdated paper comes back from review with a decent amount of edits to be made, potentially new portions of analysis, while the first author states that they do not have time to work on the old manuscript, can one of the co-authors potentially take over as first author? Does the original first author have to give consent? Keep in mind that the manuscript is already written up.
In the field which the manuscript is written, it is generally accepted that authorship order is determined by amount of effort involved for each author.<issue_comment>username_1: You need the permission of every author to publish something. If someone withdraws before publication and doesn't continue contributing, you still need their permission. The order of authors also needs to be agreed upon within the set of authors.
I suggest that you get preliminary permission to continue and to submit and then deal with issues as the arise *when* they arise, not assuming that there will be problems. The rest of you may need to leave the author order unchanged even though the "first" no longer participates.
In my opinion "effort" is a poor measure. Who contributes key ideas is much better and that may already be set. If someone works 12 hours a day and another works five, it is pretty hard to say that the one with more hours has contributed more to *ideas*. But your mileage may differ.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> If the slightly outdated paper comes back from review with a decent amount of edits to be made, potentially new portions of analysis, while the first author states that they do not have time to work on the old manuscript, can one of the co-authors **potentially** take over as first author?
>
>
>
**Potentially,** yes. Far from a guarantee. Probably the old first author would become second or co-first, depending on norms in your field.
>
> Does the original first author have to give consent?
>
>
>
Yes. In fact, everyone has to agree to the new order, even if their relative position is unchanged.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2021/01/07
| 1,504
| 6,528
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am interested in pursuing an area of computer security that is very likely already being studied by security professionals in industry and perhaps the military as well. Some of it is published, but I imagine some of it could also be unpublished work that companies and the military might not want to share with the public.
I could see my research group independently developing some unpublished techniques that probably are already in use in some form or another by existing companies who don't wish to share those to the public. In this case, is it acceptable for me to publish this as my own research, given that I have no affiliation to the company in question (assuming such a company does exist, which could very well be the case)? If I do publish, can I be in trouble for publishing work which these companies/military don't want the public to be aware of (but which I developed independently)?<issue_comment>username_1: What can be published is up to the journal editors and reviewers, though in some instances (national security...) the government will step in and put an embargo on publishing.
But the same thing is largely true for such things as trade secret internal things in commerce. As long as you work independently, you can write your papers and submit them. But it is up to others whether they are published.
If something "seems" innovative since all "known" uses are actually unknown then publishers will proceed as usual.
It would, however, probably be a mistake if you try to publish something that you know because of some relationships or employment but that hasn't been revealed publicly. You will probably be talking to a lot of lawyers in that case. <NAME> is an extreme case, of course.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It is fully acceptable to work on, and to publish, results on topics als researched in secret by companies or security agencies. From an academic point of view, there is nothing wrong with that, and neither from the point of view of stealing intellectual property. (But I'm not a lawyer!) Whether those companies or agencies would be unhappy with you publishing some great new technique for breaking cryptosystems - probably not, but unless you believe in conspiracy theories, this is likely not be an issue. (They might try to hire you, though.)
There have been precedents, e.g., on the best algorithms to factor numbers, or some cryptographic algorithms. (I'd have to dig out references for that.)
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Academically and legally speaking you are all good. But if you suspect that a thing you learned is sensitive in nature. National security type stuff.
I would urge you to submit your work to the NSA for prepublication review.
<https://www.nsa.gov/Resources/Prepublication-Review/>
If your work is of concern to them they will likely offer you a very nice salary, and if you like this type of thing you will like working for them. I did.
And if they don't care you are likely to gain valuable feedback.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: Any academic research ought to consider ethics as part of the decision on whether to conduct or publish results, both in how the research is conducted (e.g. human/animal experimental subjects, personal data, etc.), and the wider social consequences of the results. Techniques that could be used by criminals to more easily commit or get away with crime, terrorists and hostile states to kill people, authoritarian governments to oppress their populations, processes that cause harm to human health or the environment, or to violate human rights of privacy, free speech, right to a fair trial, etc. should be examined to determine whether publication of the results would do more harm than good. Where there are legal limits on the release of defence data (like the Official Secrets Act in the UK,) the test is generally on the basis of harm done to the national interest of this sort, and so should already have been considered as part of the academic ethics clearance.
On the question of whether you might get into specific legal difficulty, it depends on what legal jurisdiction you are operating in, and you (or your university ethics committee) should consult a lawyer locally. But if you consider the potential for social harm in your ethics process and act responsibly, you are much less likely to get into trouble with the law. As a rule, (in the jurisdictions I know about) if you have not been explicitly *told* that something is classified, you are not expected to know, and would not normally be prosecuted for innocently revealing something the military would rather not have revealed. But if it's something that *obviously* could do a lot of social harm, you could find yourself attracting a lot of unwelcome attention and criticism from the authorities that you and your university would much prefer to avoid. Check your ethics.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> In this case, is it acceptable for me to publish this as my own research?
>
>
>
**Absolutely, positively, yes.**
And it will indeed be your own research.
There's just a single caveat: The above is true as long as you're just suspecting "Oh, those secret government crypto researchers must surely be considering this too." If you actually got tipped off about their findings, then it's a different story.
>
> If I do publish, can I be in trouble for publishing work which these companies/military don't want the public to be aware of (but which I developed independently)?
>
>
>
*Ethically/morally* - there is nothing wrong with this at all. On the contrary, it is laudatory, and I encourage you to write up your findings as accessibly to lay readers as you can, and publish not just in some obscure conference, but put your paper up on open-access platforms, and make posts to HackerNews, SlashDot, Reddit, or wherever is relevant.
*Materially* - the closer your publication is to thwarting concrete, specific commercial/military/governmental initiatives - the more likely is it that there will be some consequences to your publishing your work. That doesn't mean it is actually *likely*; a paper on breaking cryptographic protocols or devising new ones is probably safe enough though. But if your publication will lead immediately to embarrassing information or criminal behavior being exposed, then you cannot discount the possibility. Just look at what governments are doing to whistle-blowers and journalists these days.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/08
| 1,726
| 7,347
|
<issue_start>username_0: Measurement data in publications is often provided only within figures, while the original data is not available. There are some very useful tools around to digitize such data, such as the web application [WebPlotDigitizer](https://automeris.io/WebPlotDigitizer/), the app [Engauge Digitizer](http://markummitchell.github.io/engauge-digitizer/) or within the software [Origin](https://www.originlab.com/doc/Origin-Help/Tool-Digitizer), but to my knowledge they only support raster images.
Since publications are usually available in digital form and figures therein are often embedded as vector graphics, a more accurate digitization would be desirable. Are there tools around which allow to **directly digitize vector paths from figures** (similar to the aforementioned methods)?
This question goes beyond precision (see further remarks below) and also addresses an efficient and semi-automated workflow.
---
**Remarks**
* The achievable accuracy of course depends on the quality of the figure, or more specifically on (i) how the figure was originally produced, and (ii) how it was processed during the publication process. Since often high-quality plotting tools are used (e.g. guaranteeing proper resampling) and journals don't always mess up, figures in appropriate quality should now and then be available.
* The problem goes beyond precision in terms of reading out values (which could be resolved by rastering figures in high resolution and using the aforementioned tools). In complex figures graphs could (i) cover each other up, (ii) overlap themself due to scatter and line thickness, and (iii) have varying sampling rate. Hence, rastering involves misinterpretation of data. Using a vector graphics editor for preparation before rastering (e.g. hiding individual graphs) would help, but is time-consuming and does only solve some of the problems.
* At first, it should of course be checked if the original numeric data are available, as required by some journals (unfortunately not in many fields). Also, the corresponding author could be contacted, which often won't lead to success for many reasons such as unavailability (of data or author, after some time) or unwillingness.
Thanks to [Martin](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/133746/) and [<NAME>](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20058/), whose contributions inspired some of the remarks.<issue_comment>username_1: ***TL;DR. Extraction doesn't work; rather than attempting extracting, ask authors for raw data.***
>
> Since publications are usually available in digital form and figures therein are often embedded as vector graphics
>
>
>
Although many publications are prepared in digital form with vector graphics, such as those prepared in LaTeX, the vector graphics are lost during conversion to camera-ready format, such as PDF, wherein *vector graphics...are constructed with paths* (source: [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDF#Vector_graphics)). I believe precision is lost during conversion (but I'm uncertain). Further research provides [evidence](https://stackoverflow.com/a/15053947/3664487) that precision is indeed lost:
>
> what in PDF parlance is called an 'image', by definition always is a raster image. There's no such thing as a 'vector image'. Even if the original file which was converted to PDF included vector graphics, then the converter program could have decided that it includes these as raster image. If you extract this, you'll not get your vector graphics back, but a raster image. Raster graphics which are preserved inside a PDF as such cannot be extracted by `pdfimages`.
>
>
>
Thus,
>
> Are there tools around which allow to directly digitize vector paths from figures?
>
>
>
Original vector graphics cannot be recovered, assuming non-lossless conversion. Partial reconstruction should nonetheless be possible, with some loss of precision.
Even if original vector graphics could be extracted, it surely wouldn't be known whether they were indeed the originals, or some partial reconstruction, which is dangerous for science.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: (a) You will have to live with whatever graphic format, conversion, compression and thus imprecision has happened to the data. Authors are supposed to proofread and confirm that the data is - at least to on visual level - intact (or correct it - I have had high rank journals messing up with data for no obvious reason). I.e. you may be able to recover numeric data not to the original precision, but this is hopefully neglegible to the imprecision due to statistical sampling. You may not be able to recover "hidden" data such as higher harmonics.
(b) Consider that even the original data before upload/conversion for the journal may contain some drawing-related imprecision, e.g. if folks use Excel-smoothed lines only without showing the actually measured points (what I of course do not recommend for real data, just for symbolic simplification).
(c) In addition to precision, the second layer of complexity is overplotting: the "hidden object" may or may not be invisibly present in a vector graphic. You can use techniques such as opacity (or jittering e.g. in case of categorial data as "beeswarm plots" in R), but who knows what the authors have done?
In summary, if you are fine with the available level of precision, you will probably have to inspect the plot manually. I am not aware of a generic software solution that is intelligent enough to tell you, which data points in a drawn line are measured or smothed, if data is jittered or overplotted, if there must be overplotted data but is missing below an other object, or even in the first place what kind of plot it is (x/y scatter, categorial beeswarm where x does not matter, heatmap ...), and for some data symbols (e.g. numbers/letters) even if the numeric value is represented by the center or some corner (depending on plottting program and settings).
The alternative is to ask the authors for the data (and tell them honestly, what you are doing with the data). Also some journals require upload of bulk numeric data (e.g. gene expression), so check the journal policy.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: This is an amusing programming/hacking challenge, but my guess is that in 90% of cases the best solution lies in the realm of human affairs, and that’s simply
to **email the authors and ask for the data**.
Why? Two reasons:
1. When it works (and I expect it would most of the time), you’ll know with certainty that the data you have is exactly what the authors were working with rather than some approximation recovered by trying to reverse engineer an unknown sequence of human and algorithmic processes to convert the raw data into a figure. (Vector graphics may offer the *illusion* of lossless encoding, but that’s assuming no lossy steps were applied by the human or software at any step along the way — a dangerous assumption to make in practice.)
2. In the infrequent occasion when it doesn’t work because the authors refuse to share the data, you’ll still learn something useful about how trustworthy their data can be assumed to be (i.e., not at all). You can still try to revert to a technological solution, but in most cases I’d just assume the data is invalid and not worth relying on.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/08
| 492
| 2,083
|
<issue_start>username_0: When writing a paper, when I identify some area I'm uncertain of, I try to track down a good source in JSTOR, the library, etc. I am in a situation where I found there is no academic source available on the subject. Scholars studying the topic within the confines of a specific territory, I could find none presenting the information globally.
To be really specific about the case, I need info on the territories a European nation acquired globally, changes to that territory over time. All sources I uncovered were territory-specific, and it would seem silly to cite 10 separate books for this general information.
So that leaves me citing the Encyclopedia in about 10 places in the article, which I normally stay away from except for building background knowledge. Is that something that will be a problem to publishers if I have citations to something like Encyclopedia Britannica?<issue_comment>username_1: The answer depends on the nature of the information and the field - context you haven't provided and can't really on this site.
In general, information in the Encyclopedia Brittanica should count as reasonably reliable general information. You must cite it if you quote directly, and probably should in any case at all questionable. (You need not for, say, the dates of the Civil War.)
That said, relying heavily on that source for current (technical) information may well be a reason for an editor or referee to reject your manuscript.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: **No**
If other secondary sources like review articles are acceptable, then an encyclopedia is acceptable.
If the information is a well-documented, undisputed territorial boundary, then secondary sources should be adequate.
Personally, I have never heard of a paper being rejected for citing the wrong type of source in my field of research. If the source is wrong or irrelevant, that could be a problem, but *type* of source does not matter. In physics, non-peer reviewed sources like ArXiv can be cited, and these are less reliable than encyclopedias.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/08
| 526
| 2,228
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm an undergraduate and have been able to have my thesis on curing psoriasis published in a peer-reviewed journal. Does it qualify me for anything?<issue_comment>username_1: This can look good on your resume, but it does depend on the quality of the journal. Even some of the worst predatory journals claim to perform peer review on their submissions. If it's a reputable journal, this surely boosts your PhD position application chances.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Publishing in a reputable venue is an achievement that is definitely recognized.
To potential academic grad program admission committees, it signals your readiness for a PhD degree.
To employers, it signals your willingness to dive into a project and excel in it.
To your friends, family and fellow humans, it signals that you have made the world a better, more understandable place.
Whether you *qualify* for anything really depends on how important was your contribution. You might be eligible for a scholarship or an award from your institution for example.
Upvotes: -1 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: It doesn’t *qualify* you for anything in the literal sense of the word “qualify”. It is merely a sort of achievement, whose value to your future studies and/or career can range anywhere between extremely positive (if you’ve discovered a revolutionary cure for psoriasis) and slightly negative (if you’ve published a garbage paper in a predatory/vanity journal).
Assuming the most normal scenario in which your paper is a legitimate paper that makes a legitimate contribution to science but is not very good or exciting (the vast majority of papers authored by undergraduates aren’t), and is published by a reputable but not very prestigious journal, what it would mainly qualify you for is a bit of respect from your peers, friends, grandmother etc; slightly improved prospects to be admitted into a good graduate program; and microscopically improved job prospects if/when you apply to non-academic jobs.
All of these are fairly minor compared to the sense of satisfaction and pride at having contributed something to the sum total of human knowledge, which is probably the biggest reward.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/09
| 759
| 2,628
|
<issue_start>username_0: In Microsoft Word and Mendeley, is it possible to jump to the complete reference in the bibliography section of a document using a hyperlink?
For example, using "Ctrl+Left Click" on figures or table cross-references will take to the corresponding table.<issue_comment>username_1: Microsoft Word supports linking within documents: Such functionality can be embedded. However, Word can be used in terrible ways, such functionality might not be embedded.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: The Manual Way
--------------
Microsoft Word supports hyperlinks within documents. For instance, in the version of Word I have (Office Professional 2016), when I attempt to add a hyperlink ([1](https://i.stack.imgur.com/eVbTt.png)), the menu gives me the option of hyperlinking a "Place in This Document."
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/eVbTt.png)
If you use [styles](https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/office/apply-styles-f8b96097-4d25-4fac-8200-6139c8093109) to designate text Headers in Word, you will see those listed under "Headings" and can use those as links. Alternatively, you can set Bookmarks in Word ([2](https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/office/apply-styles-f8b96097-4d25-4fac-8200-6139c8093109)), and then use hyperlinks to point to those bookmarks.
So you would need to set bookmarks for each reference and then put hyperlinks at each in-text mention. It's time consuming, but it works, and these links are even preserved if you're eventually saving to PDF.
([1](https://i.stack.imgur.com/eVbTt.png)) You can add a hyperlink by selecting text or a point in the document and (a) right-clicking and selecting Hyperlink; (b) navigating from the top menu - Insert -> Hyperlink; (c) using "Add a Hyperlink" from the search function; (d) pressing Ctrl + K.
([2](https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/office/apply-styles-f8b96097-4d25-4fac-8200-6139c8093109)) You can add a bookmark by selecting text or a point in the document and (a) navigating from the top menu - Insert -> Bookmark, (b) searching for "Insert a Bookmark" from the search function, (c) pressing Ctrl + Shift + F5.
The Macros Way
--------------
If you want the functionality to be friendly with Mendeley, you may need a third-party solution like mabentwickeltsich's [Mendeley Macros](https://github.com/mabentwickeltsich/MendeleyMacros) on GitHub, which works for APA and IEEE. For this and other third-party tools, you would want to read the user documentation and make sure you understand what it's doing. That said, they do automate the process.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/09
| 9,298
| 39,134
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a TA in a US school and my professor told me to include my pronouns in the course outline. I personally would rather not for social and religious reasons.
Her argument was that I will confuse students because they do not know what my pronouns are. I find this argument not convincing since it is very obvious what my pronouns are from the way I look. We ended up having a heated discussion and she was very upset with my opinion. We had a great professional relationship, but once she found that I am on the opposite spectrum of her social/political opinions I can feel that the interactions between us are not "good" compared with our interactions before this argument. In the end, she wants to escalate this situation to a higher level.
**Am I legally obligated to do so? If not, will this affect my academic career?**
Responses to comments:
* I tried to avoid my view about the gender issue but since people are asking me to put it here, I will do so: If a ***student*** asked me to call him/her/...etc by a specific pronoun, I will do so (actually, I use names to overcome this issue, it is easy to do). I am here to teach them the material X, and I will make sure they ***all*** get the same opportunity. This includes trans and non-binary people. Even though I am not convinced; I do not support non-binary genders and I do not think it is possible that a one can change his/her sexual identity.
* If I start putting my pronoun on my cv, it will contradict my beliefs since it implicitly says that I am ok with that movement. I do respect people's choices but I do not like to be involved in it. I am talking about myself and what to do with my "pronoun".
* Some of the answers suggested to find an alternative and I did: I suggested to use my name instead! For instance: poman's stuff, poman said, I deliver it to poman. That is how we keep mutual respect. I always do this. I call people by their names, and I will ask about their names if I don't know.<issue_comment>username_1: First, you may think that
>
> it is very obvious what my pronouns are from the way I look.
>
>
>
but not everyone's pronouns can be inferred from the way they look.
Second, providing one's pronouns is becoming increasingly common. So is the singular "they" in unknown situations. I am learning to do so even though it makes an old language conservative like me uncomfortable.
I don't know whether or not your professor can insist that you provide your pronouns. But I think you should honor his/her/their request if you can.
If you have religious reasons (beyond just social reasons) that make it really uncomfortable to specify your (presumably traditional and noncontroversial) pronouns you may need to take that up with your professor.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: You should consult your university administration if you are unclear about whether this is an official requirement. Note that it is unlikely (though not impossible) that this will be specifically a legal requirement, but will more likely be a matter of university policy.
The university can require you to put this on you syllabus, if it is the policy. It is also possible that, since you are the TA, the professor of record for the course may be able to require you to put this information on your syllabus.
As far as I know, there are not any religious considerations that would prevent someone from being able to disclose their pronouns, but if you feel you are being discriminated against by this requirement, that is something to take up with a lawyer.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Many universities in the United States have a faculty member who serves as the university ombuds, *uh,* person. Here is what my institution says about that office:
>
> An Ombuds provides confidential and informal assistance in the
> resolution of university-related concerns, especially those not being
> addressed adequately through normal procedures. He or she is an
> independent person who attempts to consider all sides of an issue in
> an impartial and objective manner. An Ombuds cannot impose solutions
> but can help identify options and strategies for resolution.
>
>
>
If such a person is available in your institution, make an appointment to have a chat. Do it *soon* because your syllabus is likely due very soon. If not, try to find a senior faculty member in another department who will talk with you about your dilemma.
A person whose duties include resolution of concerns, particularly, can tell you the official requirements for a syllabus, which will answer your "legally" question. Such a person can give you advice on whether declining to do what your professor has asked will damage your career at that particular institution.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> **update**: this answer may have become less relevant (but hopefully still worth to read) now that more details about the situation have emerged from the edits and extended discussions in multiple comments.
>
>
>
As usual in a situation of differing opinion it will be very useful to try and understand the point of view of the other party. You say that *"it is very obvious what my pronouns are from the way I look"*, but clearly your professor does not think so, otherwise she would not expect students to *"be confused"*.
If your students do not know how to address you this could lead to uncomfortable situations (for you and for them) and possibly similar conflicts as the one you are currently having with your professor. The very fact that this discussion with your professor happened makes her point of view very understandable: you would not wish to have a similar conflict with one or more of your students.
If both you and your professor claim "religious" or "ethical" reasons for their point of view it will become very difficult to choose who is right. (Personally, and depending on the details that are not given in your question, I would probably choose your side, but my personal opinion is not a useful answer to your question.)
To answer your questions: There is unlikely to be a *legal* requirement to add the pronoun to a course outline, but having a bad relationship with your professor can affect your academic career: you may not get a good reference letter or contract extension in your current laboratory. Of course neither of these should prevent you from having a good academic career anyway.
To be perfectly honest (but this is again an opinion), I think you should not make a big issue out of this and follow your professor's suggestion to add the pronoun (even though you may be right that leaving it out will not cause any problems). In work and life, things cannot always go the way you want. Politics, religion, and egoism do not belong on the work floor (a valuable lesson for both parties in this conflict). If, in your own words *"it is very obvious what my pronouns are from the way I look"*, no harm will be done by adding that pronoun to your name on the course outline. If it hurts your pride, accept it and move on.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> Am I legally obligated to do so?
>
>
>
A UK employment law expert believes that, [in the UK, the answer is no](https://www.shma.co.uk/our-thoughts/can-employers-prefer-to-put-pronouns-in-email-signatures/):
>
> The question of whether UK businesses can force their employees to share their pronouns on their email signatures\* was raised by a recent tweet. **The answer, categorically, is no.** [*emphasis added —DR*]
>
>
> [...]
>
>
> “Forcing employees to reveal their pronoun preferences could leave employers open to discrimination claims, and employees feeling alienated.
>
>
>
\* Note: the article is discussing employers forcing employees to put their pronouns in an email signature and here we’re talking about a course outline, but that small difference seems obviously immaterial.
If someone can find the tweet the article mentioned, we could probably find additional discussions including for the US context.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: Instead of the legal aspects, I would like to address the professional and ethical aspects of the pronouns trend.
In my opinion, the purpose of announcing your pronouns is to indicate that you will address other people with respect. The message that is sent is: since I told you my pronouns, you know that if you tell me how you want to be addressed I will not disrespect that preference.
There is a secondary purpose. People whose pronouns are not obvious may feel stress because they are the only ones who have to announce their pronouns. If you announce your pronouns, you are reducing that stress.
Therefore, the professional way to behave is to announce your pronouns. It's respectful.
**Requiring** people to announce their pronouns is, however, **un**ethical. Some people are not sure how they wish to be addressed. Other people may not feel safe discussing their preferences. Requiring these people to announce their pronouns is abusive. Not announcing your pronouns is not necessarily wrong or disrespectful.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_7: While I don't know if it's technically illegal, I'd say that picking a fight like this would absolutely affect your academic career. Explaining this, I think, requires unpacking some of the social circumstances around these issues.
You say "I personally would rather to not to do so for social and religious reasons." Stating one's pronouns is sometimes used as a slightly coded way of expressing support for transgender and non-binary people. It's important to realize that stating one's pronouns has clear merits outside of this though. Even if you think it's obvious by the way you look (and perhaps you have a name strongly associated with one gender), it may not be obvious to students from different cultures than your own. Even if confusion is unlikely, it hardly hurts to make it plainly clear and referencable, so picking a fight over it really begs a bigger question.
From your question, it sounds to my cynical brain that you do not want anyone to think that you are supportive of transgender or non-binary people. Please feel free to clarify, but without further information this is what I (and quite possibly your professor, peers, and students) would cynically assume, given that many such people exist.
I'll be frank. Without more context, picking such a fight sounds rather extreme to me. You aren't being asked to affirm the existence of trans people, you aren't even being asked to use other people's preferred pronouns, you are just being asked to put down how you personally prefer to be referred to. So why the fight? It's hard for me to imagine an honest answer that isn't at least in part what I've described above. If you are fighting about something so inconsequential, it makes me wonder how you'd interact with any trans or non-binary people in your class (including those in the closet). If I came to the conclusion that you weren't capable of being respectful to all students (part of your job as a TA, IMO), I wouldn't want you as a TA.
Critics may argue that I'm being too cynical or assuming too much here, and indeed if I actually had to make any decisions here I'd definitely be following up and asking you much more specific questions and not relying on reading between the lines like this. No, I say all this in hopes that I can help you and others understand why your professor, or other people like me, may have concerns with you picking a fight like this. If my cynical discussion above doesn't describe you, then you should make this extra clear to avoid having whoever you talk to assume the worst.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_8: **Update -** **There is a precedent for using one's name as a pronoun**
I have detailed this in the EDIT at the end of this answer.
I suggest you copy the article to anyone who challenges you. I did one brief search. If you search further I'm sure you will find the *name* option in other universities.
I suggest you use the search term [***university gender pronouns***](https://www.google.co.uk/search?sxsrf=ALeKk009gmwrMOqpAB9YZ4Et1fk8PRxm9Q%3A1610394947896&source=hp&ei=Q638X8uvNNPlgwek_KnICg&q=university+gender+pronouns&oq=university+gender+pronouns&gs_lcp=CgZwc3ktYWIQAzIJCAAQyQMQFhAeMgYIABAWEB4yBggAEBYQHjIGCAAQFhAeMgYIABAWEB4yBggAEBYQHjIGCAAQFhAeMgYIABAWEB4yBggAEBYQHlCHG1iHG2D1NWgAcAB4AIABS4gBS5IBATGYAQCgAQKgAQGqAQdnd3Mtd2l6&sclient=psy-ab&ved=0ahUKEwiL3cLW1JTuAhXT8uAKHSR-CqkQ4dUDCAk&uact=5)
---
>
> suggested to use my name instead! For instance: poman's stuff, poman
> said, I deliver it to poman. That is how we keep mutual respect. I
> always do this. I call people with their names, and I will ask about
> their names if i don't know.
>
>
>
"poman" is a perfectly good pronoun when we consider the general proliferation of pronouns these days. It also has the advantage of being your name. It indicates that you are friendly enough for everyone to address you this way and leaves no worrying doubt in the minds of students.
Some people profess to being of fluid gender and they presumably would not want to commit to a fixed set of pronouns. Using a name seems ideal. In syntactic and semantic terms, it makes the meaning of sentences much clearer by describing who is being talked about.
I cannot see how anyone could logically or legally argue against this.
---
**EDIT**
With very little effort, looking at the first few results of a google search, I found that at least one university is allowing the use of names as a pronoun so there is a precedent for this.
>
> "We ask everyone at orientation to state their pronouns," says Sara
> Bendoraitis, of the university's Center for Diversity and Inclusion,
> "so that we are learning more about each other rather than assuming."
> ... At the University of Vermont, which has led this movement,
> students can choose from "he," "she," "they," and "ze," as well as
> "name only" - meaning they don't want to be referred to by any
> third-person pronoun, only their name.
>
>
> ... Most people stick to the default option, "none", which means they
> are not registering a pronoun - presumably because they are content to
> let people decide whether they are a "he" or a "she".
>
>
> **At the University of Vermont, which has led this movement**, students
> **can choose** from "he," "she," "they," and "ze," as well as "**name onl**y"
> **meaning they don't want to be referred to by any third-person pronoun, only their name.**
>
>
> <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34901704>
>
>
>
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_9: I would certainly not pick a fight over such a minor issue and I definitely see no "religious reason" that would prevent me from openly declaring that I'm a white heterosexual male and, thereby, should be normally addressed as "he" (in my case). If something is, as you said, obvious, why to refuse to state it openly? It is like stating that "the sky over lake Erie is normally of grey color" and if somebody I respect wants me to put it as an official statement, I'll oblige even if I may consider it somewhat silly. There is no real harm made to anyone.
This said, I usually do *not* put my pronouns or make any other statements of that kind on my syllabus and I am openly anti-Woke. This has nothing to do with supporting or not supporting transgender, etc. people; they have their own "scoring boards" in my mind and I just add or subtract 1 to the corresponding group scores after every individual encounter like I do it for any other group of people. I merely generally dislike people who are too eager to tell me how I should think and behave in general when those requirements go beyond the restrictions imposed by the US law and contract terms. However, I certainly make an exception from that rule when somebody I respect asks me to do something I normally won't.
In general, my advice is to value individual relationships over political views. We are separated and polarized enough here, so we'd better try to learn to yield to each other on minor issues like that whenever possible and the one who yields will definitely look smarter in the end. Stand your ground firmly only when you really have something important to defend and only against people whom you unquestionably classify as your enemies. Your workplace normally should not be a battleground. Turning it into one is detrimental for everybody involved.
Just my two cents :-)
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_10: If you were here in the UK, it very likely would affect your career path and there's little reason to suppose geography will be any defence.
The UK press, if not radio and TV media, almost daily reveals examples of institutions insisting any possibility that students might be confused trumps however obvious your pronouns might be from the way you look.
It's very likely your contract of employment requires you to do whatever the institution deems reasonable. Since in most circumstances "the institution" comes down to "the professor" again, yes, it very likely will affect your career
"Poman's stuff; Poman said; I deliver it to Poman" should be acceptable to any open mind but your professor's ideas of "should" and "open-minded" are more likely to influence your career path than yours or mine; the more so since - according to your description - "once she found that I am on the opposite spectrum of her social/political opinions… she wants to escalate this…"
A quick look around SE's English Language Learners/Usage pages should show why this problem won't go away any time soon.
However much work open-minded people put into using the language carefully, people on the other end of a social/political spectrum which only they define, seem bent on insisting not only "he" or "she" but even "he or she" must be subverted by "they."
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_11: For whether it is legal, I refer to username_3's answer and focus on the other part in my answer on whether it affects one's career. Note that I will use the term 'trans people' loosely, including anyone who might want/need to explicitly proclaim their preferred pronouns (e.g. indlcuding androgynous people, intersex people etc. who did not switch from one gender to another), for this answer.
**Will picking a fight with your professor regarding explicitly announcing your pronoun have any impact on your career?**
**Very *likely*, yes. However, the effect is *likely* minimal or small.**
Why? Your professor has already shown that they have a strong opinion in this matter or feel externally compelled to enforce this rule. If you pick a fight, no matter whether you "legally" win and can avoid following the rule, chances are the relationship with the professor is soured at least temporarily. The professor might be biased against you should you take further courses with them. They might not want to work with you in the future, either because they consider you a bad apple for not following the same political agenda or for just considering you difficult for making a fuss about such a non-issue (at least in their view) and this might restrict your options regarding bachelor or master theses or further TA work etc. with this professor. If it is quickly resolved with the professor (potentially via a quick answer from the higher body the issue will be escalated to), the effects will likely not go beyond direct decisions of your professor. **The most likely short-term effect could be that you are fired from your TA role or at least not re-hired next term.**
Note that your professor might also be perfectly reasonable/tolerant or calm down after a short time of annoyance and **this might have no effect at all**. It all depends on their character and how further escalation is handled by all parties. But there is always risk and there are multiple parties involved that you have no control over.
**However, generally speaking, the higher the issue is escalated, the broader the involvement of other professors and administrators gets and the larger public impact it has, the more likely are broader long-term effects**. Or sudden effects after a long term, e.g. if at some point someone wants to publicly denounce you and digs through your past. (See the stories for people being sacked / getting their university admission rescinded due to racial slurs used in the past for example; note: using this just as an example that hot social topics can be dug up and used against people, not saying this is somehow the same as these cases in any way). While non-participation in a well-intended gesture should in my mind have no repercussions beyond a head-scratching of why anyone would not go along, this is currently a hot social topic and unfortunately discussed in a very partisan style, where "both sides" too often read little deviations from their preferred ideology with a "you're not fully with us, so you're against us" mindset. However, since you're a TA, this is also a workplace issue and as such turns this from only a gesture into an issue of following proper workplace procedure as outlined by your superior (see also below). Even if only your current professor holds this against you, the professors at your university might exchange opinions about students, especially when it comes to student jobs like TAs. They need to make getting a bachelor and master thesis possible, but they do not need to provide you TA or other job opportunities, so these are more likely to be affected by bad mouth to mouth press.
So, **if you want to go through with resisting your professor's wishes, you should aim at a quick resolution that is as local as possible** to minimize any negative impact. If you have another discussion with your professor, consider to bring up arguments from the answers here, like questioning whether it makes sense to force people to proclaim their pronoun taking into consideration the people they aim to support. E.g. as @Serge pointed out in a comment, some transgender people might themselves prefer not to disculse their preferred pronouns. I'd suggest to argue from their point of view, i.e. does the policy make sense in its strict form especially considering trans people and the goal to support them. There is also a certain likelihood your professor is themselves only following a guideline imposed on them. In that case arguing the guideline with them will help little. You either need to address the source or indeed find a way for an individual excemption. So first establish whether the professor acts on their own or whether this is a university thing. This will also establish how far up you could need to escalate.
With respect to the long-term effects, it would in principle be possible that the tides shift and in a more "conservative" future having a track record of resisting a pro-trans-people move could be a benefit in some way. I'd consider this unlikely, but to be complete this can be considered too.
In any case, all that I can offer (and I'd say anyone as I doubt there are statistics, but if there are, they'd be welcome) is a personal estimation of likelihood and reasoning of how people might react. Neither of us can foretell the future, it's a hot topic in general but also a small issue by itself. It can blow up or just disappear and you laugh about it in a year.
**Perception**
While I personally feel your professor's approach is at least a bit misguided (see below), whether the approach is perfectly correct is not that relevant, it will be perceived as a well-intended attempt to be inclusive of trans people. Currently this seems to be a strong agenda in the US especially in academics (outside perspective, happy if anyone can provide data to back this up or counter it). So any resistance to such a policy will more likely be seen as negative than positive. In addition, to most people resistance to provide basic obvious information when asked by your employer, i.e. fill out forms correctly, will seem ridiculous. It is you who reads more into this than the average person. While the average person might find providing pronouns odd, picking a fight with a superior at work about giving (in most people's eye) obvious information like your name when filling out a document will seem way more odd to them and thus they will rather consider you a weird trouble maker than side with you. And yes, as a TA you are (should unless you don't get payed) now in a work relationship with your professor, not in a student relationship, where you mostly can do whatever you want as long as you learn something. Now you partially represent the professor and the university and thus there is a stronger expectation that you do as told unless that's particularly unbearable (discriminatory, illegal etc.). So, even people who have no investment into the general topic will see picking a fight over a (to them) non-issue like providing an obvious gender explicitly rather than have people implicitly derive it as an indication of a trouble-maker. So without deeper discussion, people leaning towards a pro-trans agenda as well as people who are not involved at all will likely lean to have a negative impression about you. This may influence their reaction to you, willingness to support you or work with you.
**Why do I think the professor's approach is misguided?**
The goals likely are 1) a symbolical gesture to show acceptance of trans people 2) to make it psychologically easy for anyone that doesn't have an 'obvious' gender identity to announce it and 3) to further the acceptance of trans people and specifically of announcing gender identity explicitly.
At least my hope would be that those would be the goals (or similar ones) rather than implementing the rule simply because it seems en vogue.
My personal problem with the approach taken is that it apparently tries to force compliance rather than convince everyone involved to participate voluntarily. Because
* that partially invalidates 1) - it's way less of a meaningful gesture if people are forced, can still be seen as a gesture on the university level, but none that I would value much of an academic institution
* it works against 3) - forcing people to do something in the name of an agenda or group typically breeds resentment against that agenda/group
* and it insults the academic spirit of raising free thinkers that rather use argument to advance their position than power.
**Pick your battles wisely**
As always, you need to pick the battles you want to fight wisely. So you might want to decide to swallow this issue and pick another battle at another time. The following might help in accepting this.
**Reconsider your own perception**
Your main problem with accepting to state your preferred pronouns seems to be that you read that as supporting a trans-oriented view with arbitrary genders/genders up to be chosen rather than assigned at birth/tied to biological sex. Remember how I noted above that too many people treat this topic black and white? Try to not read adding your preferred pronouns as supporting everything any pro-trans movement proclaims as their goals. Otherwise how different is it for any pro-trans person to read your decision not to go along as a rejection of all they stand for - including the acceptance of them in society and academia (which you apparently DO support).
If you look at it pragmatically, if you risk a fight now, you either loose it (nothing gained) or you win and you don't need to put your pronouns, but someone could find out about it, write an article about the bad conservatives that are so anti-trans they don't even want to put their pronouns on a form for some construed reason -> laughter and sympathy points for the trans community.
You can also consider it a courtesy towards trans-people that you as a generous person does explicitly despite not agreeing with their ideology (or what you perceive as such, because there likely isn't one they all support). Like saying Merry Christmas to Christians although you're not yourself or the like. Talking French to the French tourists (although in your mind it might be their job to learn English when travelling to America) etc.
What about the old formal address using Mr/Mrs? Would you consider selecting these as explicit support for a conservative model,too? Then most trans people do show support for that model every day when ordering stuff online, give them some support back ;)
What if this will simply be the replacement for the old Mr/Mrs model? How is it different from extending that model to Mr/Mrs/Other/...?
Whether you need to consider yourself a hypocrite or feel a conflict with your religious convictions in this case largely hinges on your perception of the underlying meaning of the action to explicitly state your pronouns. That is something you can easily change. Not just because it makes accepting to follow the professor's wishes more easy, but because it indeed is more or less arbitrary. Yes your view is kinda valid (but also confrontational by nature), so is the one I sketched here or some answers and comments assume. Be the better person in being non-confrontational and give people the cookie they want.
**If you want to fight this battle, support them and make friends**
If you do want to go ahead with a confrontation, my suggestion would be to not make that about you individually but what is best for your institution. Does your institution really want to force TAs to declare their gender identity? Would that be in the best interest of trans-people? Do you have some sort of student council where you could discuss this? If a student representation body would make a counter-proposal that explicitly asks to provide pronouns voluntarily rather than mandatorily, that would be a strong argument for your case.
You could e.g. take a bet and offer a compromise in that you go ahead with the policy if it is supported by the students. Then organize a feedback evaluation where you make sure rejecting to force TAs to declare their pronouns is an option. For instance there could be options like "would you support a university policy that forced every TA to declare their pronouns to make it easier for transgender people to do so too? For or against this policy" and separately "would you support a policy that encouraged/allowed TAs to declare their pronouns to make it easier for transgender people to do so too? For or against this policy". Obviously a gamble, but perhaps serving the majority wishes would also make it easier for you to accept the policy should the feedback turn out that way. Note, I'd only go this way with either support from a student representation group and/or having it discussed with the professor(s) first. If you do your own evaluation behind their backs, that might win you the battle but escalate the issue and breed resentment on their end.
Another important aspect, **stay polite and to the point**. Don't get sidetracked or tempted to make any general statements that could then be read as discrimination against trans people (or any other group). Don't make things personal, don't attack your professor. Things are typically easier forgotten or set aside if they were politely handled and about an issue than if people feel personally attacked. At least on the local scale. When you consider escalating, first make sure you are up to that and will be able to control yourself and what you say. The higher you escalate the more likely that anything you say will be used against you by someone.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_12: Saying what your pronouns are is more and more common. To lots of us it feels awkward, because we are not used to it. But in fact it is like curb cuts for wheelchair users making life easier for people pushing baby carriages or using shopping carts, it actually solves a lot of problems. For example, I am a woman who codes, even with my picture and what to me is an obviously female first name, people assume I am male. On SO or mailing lists they say "sir" or "he." It's annoying and draining to constantly correct but also draining and discouraging to have my identity denied if I do not correct.
By having everyone declare their pronouns rather than just the people who get called by incorrect pronouns, it makes things better and less awkward for everyone. By having the leaders of the course do this, it makes it more comfortable for the students in the course to do this.
Since you clearly have a set of pronouns you want to be addressed with, I don't understand why it's a big political statement at all for you to share that with people. Don't get sidetracked by your feelings about the issue of recognizing other people's preferred pronouns that may not match what you think they should use. Your supervisor has made a simple request to provide that information about yourself. The problem of what you are going to do if you have determined (somehow) that someone is using the "wrong" pronouns from your perspective, then you can deal with that issue when the time comes.
Just to answer the specific issue of will it impact your career, I would say that in general if you want to pick a fight with your supervisor who may in the future be someone you need a reference from that is a choice you have to make. It depends how important the issue is to them and whether you are able to make up for your defiance of their instructions in other ways.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_13: The best way to win this kind of fight is to not start it in the first place. It is probably too late for you to take this approach.
University administrators are used to getting their emails ignored, and they are used to getting incomplete replies because people didn't read the email properly.
I would just ignore the question about your pronouns, reply to everything else in the email, as if the pronoun section didn't exist. If they send a follow up email just ignore it. If they show up in person at your desk then it's clearly a big deal and you won't win the fight by ignoring it.
If you had followed this approach then I think there would have been a 90% chance that your name appeared without pronouns. However, it's too late now as they know that you don't want pronouns by your name, so lack of pronouns can't be written off to laziness/incompetence.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_14: I can't comment on the legality. However...
### Will it affect my career?
Your career depends on working with people. Sometimes you have to do things which seem like a waste of time to you, but which help other people.
You may think that stating pronouns only relate to trans people. This is not correct. "Hilary" used to be a man's name, and you still occasionally find men called that. (We have a male politician in the UK called <NAME>.) There are various spellings of Lesley/Leslie, and they do not always correspond to gender. Jean could be a female name, or a male French name. And that's before we get to less well-known names, which of course hits its peak with the African-American tradition of inventing names where a name could be genuinely unique.
If you've met the person, you know whether to say "he" or "she". (Or perhaps something else.) If you've only ever corresponded with them on email, you have no idea. So knowing what to call them makes life easier for everyone. Maybe it doesn't apply to you so much, but it certainly will apply to other people.
If you're unable to put yourself in other people's shoes for this, and see the benefits of applying this across the board, then it certainly will affect your career. Not specifically for this, but from the point-of-view of you being unable to understand how a large organisation is administered and being able to work with other people who have slightly different requirements to you. You have also created significantly more work in fighting this than it would have taken just to do it, and you've affected your relationship with your superior. You have started creating a reputation for yourself as being inflexible and unreasonable about things which have little or no practical cost to you. As a TA, your natural progression is into teaching at the same university, and if people don't want to work with you then they won't hire you, whatever your other skills may be.
Beyond that, your statement about a religious objection suggests that you may have issues working with gay or trans colleagues or students. There is a difference between having an opinion where people can agree to differ, and an opinion where you believe certain groups of people should not be allowed to exist. The latter case would affect your ability to do your job, and employers would then be entitled to fire you or to refuse to hire you in the first place. If your superior is concerned enough to escalate this, it seems likely that you are in this situation. In that case you should not just be concerned about having an academic career but concerned about ever being employed by anyone down to sweeping floors at Target.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_15: Don't get in conflicting situations you can avoid. Learn to avoid conflicting situations *well* -- it is a very common interview question nowadays and **you will be judged on your ability to handle conflict**. ("We escalated this to the Dean" certainly will not reflect well on you.) Below I describe one possible compromise I think might avoid conflict and keep peace.
---
You say some answers suggested you find an alternative, and you did. However, it seems like your alternative is not a satisfactory compromise and still leads to conflict.
Consider how you would react if the request was phrased like this:
>
> Please provide short biography of a few sentences about your research interests to include in the course outline. These are usually written in third person.
>
>
>
Would you still find the request unreasonable? This type of biography, always written in 3rd person, is common in most University profile pages and required by certain journal formats. It might look something like this:
>
> Poman, PhD (TA, statistical analysis)
>
>
> Poman completed his PhD on the topic of "Statistical study of Foo and its application to Bar" from University of Somewhere in 2017. He is currently a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Right Here, working on extending his PhD work to Fee. His other research interests include statistics, and other processes from the Floo family.
>
>
>
I think this might be a *good* compromise, that satisfies everybody, as:
* this is something quite reasonable to include in the course outline (*"meet the delivery team"*). It could be slightly shorter or longer as appropriate.
* it accomplishes your professor's goal -- shares your pronouns (notice that the above paragraph could have been written using any set of pronouns, or even avoiding them completely and referring to you by name)
* it accomplishes your goal of expressing yourself following research standards, and without sharing your view on, well, any other issues.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/01/09
| 2,820
| 11,544
|
<issue_start>username_0: I had an interview on Tuesday on a PhD topic and during the interview I was a little nervous.
I regret saying that I don’t like machine learning since the PhD topic requires using machine-learning tools. I explained that I don’t like it since I took a machine-learning course at university, and the professor taught us the subject in an unpleasant and boring way. His teaching manner seriously wasn’t clear.
I also told them that I will give myself a chance and learn it again in a better way since they don’t require deep experience in it.
I shouldn’t have told them this information because it could be an easy reason to reject me.
I have asked the professor in the interview whether he liked my profile. His answer was that he still has other students to interview... I mean if he did like my profile he could have simply said *yes.*
I still have some hope because if he didn’t find me suitable he would have rejected me the next day. Instead, when I asked him when I would get an answer to my application he told me next week.
I’m feeling bad. I was overly honest, and sometimes was too informal with my speech and facial expressions.
Did I make a mistake in being too honest in the PhD interview?
**Update:** I have read an article the professors have sent me where they have used a machine learning tool. I made further search and I was able to understand it. I have been invited to another interview and I did so well. They were friendly with me and I kept my honesty in everything. I asked them more questions and they clarified that there are different methods in the PhD and machine learning is just one of them. I told them that I no longer have fear towards ML since I no longer find it complicated. At the end I explained my interest that meets the goal of the PhD program. They will give me the final answer after one or two weeks. Please wish me luck :) I am glad that I have used Academia site and I thank everyone for their comments and answers that I found beneficial.<issue_comment>username_1: Possibly you made a mistake, but only the professor can judge that. But, honesty is still a good path here. Better that than to wind up in a situation that isn't productive for you.
You want a position in which everyone is comfortable. Hiding your feelings or your background is probably counterproductive.
But the past is the past and can't be undone. Work on other options in case this one doesn't work out.
But, if all of your options involve machine learning, then a somewhat more positive statement is that you feel unprepared as your course was poorly done. If you are willing to work on it (not "I hate it, but...") then this might be enough. But if ML really isn't your cuppa-tea then move on.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: It probably depends how you put it.
If you said: "I find machine learning boring, because my prof taught it in a boring way.", and machine learning is a key technique in the PhD: Yes, this was wrong, and for obvious reasons. (Then again, if you really find it boring: Why did you apply for that position in the first place.)
If, on the other hand, you made it clear that you had issues with machine learning & you were skeptical about certain points, since those were swept under the rug in your lecture, but you generally made it clear that in fact you would like to understand the topic better, this can in fact be beneficial: It makes it clear that you are actively thinking about the topic, that you are a critical thinker, and that you would like to understand things better. This is far better than someone who just says "Yes, topic X is great." just because it is listed in the job advertisement.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: If you find ML boring, you should not apply for a position that requires it to a significant extent. A 3 year PhD is a very long time to do something that you dislike. So, hiding that you dislike a topic is not doing you any favours.
If, on the other hand, you are interested in learning ML, that's a different issue, but even so, you need to know if the prof requires you to know the stuff from the beginning or is happy for you to learn on the job. Here some more politic answer is probably more suitable.
Others have commented that the past is the past. Let it run its course.
For your future interviews, decide ahead of time what you want to say. Prepare a list of things you want to say or ask ahead of time, so that you don't accidentally bump into unexpected answers of yours that surprise you as much as the interviewers.
**Update** There was a comment that questioned how tactful one should be when expressing the dislike. Basically, that's on OP, but I'll sketch what happens if someone is not reasonably open about it.
If OP knows they do not like the topic, they should consider being explicit about it. They are fooling both their supervisor and themselves if they hide this fact.
If they are unsure, and think that they may learn to like it, they can be more careful in the formulation. But still, what if it turns out that they just convinced themselves wrongly? After 2 years of investment, will they leave the project and their PhD and supervisor hanging?
Now, one could say that people may develop a dislike to the topic anyway. Yes, that's possible. But, consider a marriage. Would you rather start out with a partner you actively dislike from the beginning with unclear expectations that things will improve in the hope you pull through? Or rather with a partner which you like where there, while, of course may be a risk of intermittent crisis or long-term deterioration, you still at least start from a position of justified hope that things will work out fine?
While there is always some leeway how one can reinterpret what one wants to do in terms of what a position requires, I cannot recommend being untruthful about one's dislike of a particular direction. That's too much of a bend. There are enough interesting PhD topics to waste one's life with unproductive busywork.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: What you like and dislike aren't really relevant to a job. You want to give off enthusiasm for the job, and you to do that you can talk about subject areas you are passionate about. But mostly you should talk about how you experience, expertise, and how you can perform in an area they talk about.
Yeah, it's a mistake to go into how you don't like it, and how it was taught. Because that's not relevant to you doing the job, a lot of people hate certain aspects of their job but they do it anyway because they need to.
Interviews are tough, and it is an important career skill to develop, so learn from it and don't sweat it to much.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: Wait and see. Can't change the outcome, anyway, so what's the use of worrying? Besides, "I failed the PhD interview because I was too honest, too informal" sounds like ...beep!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: I want to make two points here, both are indirect answers to your question, but still open to interpretation with regard to your specific interview.
1. Interviews are less like taking an exam, and more like going on a date. It is possible to do everything right, and still not click. Equally, it is possible that you do many things wrong, but the other person is willing to take a chance on you, because they see something they like and willing to invest on. It is therefore not really worth it mulling over the details of the date in any meaningful sense, since you'll never really know what it was that did or didn't click. Having said that, just like a date, you would want to sound honest, but not arrogant, and generally not put the other person in an uncomfortable position for the sake of 'honesty' if you expect to establish some sort of relationship with them going forward.
2. There is always a way to rephrase a negative into a positive, and it typically pays off to do so. You come across as a more approachable, less negative person, who sees the good and the opportunity in things, as opposed to the negatives. It's generally a good way to go through life, too. So, in your case, you could have rephrased
>
> "it was boring and it was the prof's fault but I'll look at it if I really have to"
>
>
>
into
>
> "I am reasonably comfortable with the topic; however, I felt it was not given the time it deserved in uni, and my exposure to it so far has been more theoretical. Therefore I look forward to seeing an interesting application of this field in a real-life setting, and to improving my skills in this area: I'm very thankful for the training opportunities on offer in this job -- this is in fact one of the reasons that led me to apply here (blah blah, continue on positive spin)".
>
>
>
Regarding the second point, as a personal anecdote, I was taught this by my own PhD supervisor during my PhD. A large part of my PhD involved improving a field in which one of the most influential papers had many (in my opinion) naïve assumptions which weakened its conclusions. I approached this in my work from the point of view of "we build Y which doesn't suffer from the errors in X, who did bad things x,y,z". My supervisor thought this was unnecessarily harsh and had me rephrase it as "X pushed the field forward by proposing X. We improved on this idea by addressing improvements in areas x,y,z, which we believe make the general direction proposed by X even stronger".
Now, "technically", both versions say exactly the same thing, and both are 'honest'. However, imagine I wanted to invite Prof X to be my external examiner in my PhD viva at the end of my PhD. Which of the two formulations do you think would predispose them more positively towards my thesis?
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_7: I just had a PhD interview so I can relate.
(1) It is always good to be honest. So, you both find the right match
(2) Show motivation. And show you do not know now but you are willing to learn
(3) It depends on what program you apply. If Ph.D in Machine learning then apparently not the right match. Others, less relevant. Also your interest can grow and change over time.
You have not done anything wrong by being honest. But the information you give is relevant for your application.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_8: For job interview, I always go for harsh honestly. I am web developer and I consider it as luxury I can afford because there is a lot of offers.
And basically, if you are note hired because you are too honest, I guess you don't want to work in this company. As Tasos said, yes, you have stay positive and not looking depressed in advance about what you will do. Job interviews are mostly about personality, you have to look friendly and serious but you don't have to disguise yourself.
And as a personal anecdote, I was looking for a job one year ago. I have been asked about what could stop me from achieving my personal goals. I answer Covid-19. I did not have the job because I was too pessimistic… Well… I am glad, I don't work for them.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_9: No, you didn't make a mistake. You will spend several years of your life studying for a PhD, and it is vital that you are genuinely interested in the topic as there will be times during your PhD where your motivation is sorely tried. I'd suggest you would be better off studying a different topic that is closer to your real interests.
Pursuing a PhD on a topic you didn't like - **that** would be a mistake.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/01/09
| 411
| 1,635
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am writing a paper that is based on previous work I have done that I have published as a pre-print. I am submitting it to a conference. However it is significantly improved and different. The submission process is double-blind do I have to cite the pre-print? The idea and contribution is mostly the same.
I am in Machine Learning / Deep Learning field of research.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, you should *always* cite your own related work just as you would that of any other person. To fail to do so leaves you open to a charge of self-plagiarism.
Worse, in a double blind review, the reviewers might claim you are plagiarizing if they know of the old work and can't connect it.
But I'm assuming that the new work extends the old and isn't just a submission of what is in the pre-print.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes. Otherwise, you could keep writing the same paper over and over again.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: Across most of the social sciences, the answer would be: **No**, the published manuscript should not cite its own pre-print.
The pre-print is rather considered a *draft* version that happens to have circulated prior to its acceptance at a journal, where it transforms into its *final* version.
This seems to be grounded in the paradox of the *published* preprint being regarded as a preliminary, non-refereed and thus fictitiously *unpublished* paper (e.g., a [Google search for "preprints are unpublished"](https://www.google.com/search?q=preprints%20are%20unpublished) yields enough pages with confusing semantics of that kind).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2021/01/10
| 486
| 2,292
|
<issue_start>username_0: Do universities restrict the brand or manufacturer of computers their professors are allowed to use for work?
May a PhD advisor ban certain computer brands?
Are there any restrictions on using your own funding to buy certain brands of computers?
Corporate restricts company computers allowed for security reasons but the university doesn’t technically own any of the professors work or consider it their proprietary knowledge so are they allowed the control the electronic storage system of it?<issue_comment>username_1: University purchasing systems are very complicated and they are all different. It is common for universities to make a contract with a supplier stating that they will use that supplier exclusively in exchange for a discount. Often there will be loopholes.
Your supervisor can certainly refuse to purchase certain brands with funds the supervisor controls.
If you have a grant, you will be required to follow the university's purchasing policies.
Traditionally, most universities allow faculty and students to do their work using personal computers of any type. However, this could be limited for confidential information. There are laws limiting the use of educational and medical information which vary from place to place, and there are also policies.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In general no simply because the diversity of tasks implies a diversity of solutions: some specialized softwares might run on one but not another platform.
The institution may require some security software or an approved equivalent for some parts of the administrative system (say some specific VPN to access private information), support some software but not others, etc, and thus incentivize the use or one rather than other platforms, but beyond that it is usually managed at a lower level. Members of a research group might be required to have identical platforms so that data is properly transferred and stored when accessed, but rarely much above that level.
So yes your advisor may ban certain platforms, but it’s usually not a university-wide decision.
(I know of one case where a particular *shop* was barred by the university - no reimbursement for anything bought there - but this is truly exceptional.)
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/10
| 772
| 2,677
|
<issue_start>username_0: `pre-colon-part: post-colon-part` is a format which is often used in titles of papers. In all of the instances I have seen, the first part is an informative phrase, a (fictitious) example of which may be
>
> Optimal consensus control of drone swarms: a game-theoretic approach.
>
>
>
But, I am wondering whether there are instances of papers# first parts of whose colon-wise titles are questions; as another fake example, something like:
>
> Constructive or destructive?: Implications on the effectiveness of my
> vaccine on the mutated coronavirus
>
>
>
I just tried to look up potential occurrences of the pattern `pre-colon-part?: post-colon-part` in Google Scholar by searching "?:". However, my query yields nothing. Has anyone already encountered such instances in the scientific literature?
# I am preferably interested in the potential instances which are composed by English native speakers, and/or published in prestigious journals.<issue_comment>username_1: There are plenty of articles that have a title in the format "Question? Answer/Suggestion", however, without colon.
I'm pretty sure that you cannot have a colon following a question mark, given a question mark indicates the end of a sentence (same as full stop and exclamation mark).
See also this question on english.se: <https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/51485/sentences-ending-with-both-a-colon-and-a-question-mark>
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I agree with username_1 that it's bad style to end a phrase with ?: (assuming it isn't the ternary operator!), but that doesn't mean people haven't published papers with such titles. It does seem rare, but one example that seems to meet your criteria is
* <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, and <NAME>, *Does an Encapsulated Atom ‘feel' the Effects of Adsorption?: X-ray Standing Wave Spectroscopy of Ce@C82 on Ag(111)* [(link)](https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/nl035041i), published in Nano Letters.
By the way, I found it by searching for ?: in regular Google, which seems to handle punctuation differently than Google Scholar.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: At KDD, arguably the top data mining conference, a recent high-impact paper used this format. The published paper can be found here:
<https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2939672.2939778>
The publicly accessible arXiv preprint can be found here:
<https://arxiv.org/abs/1602.04938>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: You don't need the question mark; it is implicit in "Constructive *or* destructive:"
Upvotes: -1
|
2021/01/10
| 1,391
| 6,098
|
<issue_start>username_0: By "main" research advisor I mean: with him, I got my most valuable research experience, greatest results and of course I invested most of my research time. Our field is Physics and I am making some achievements, but when I asked him for a recommendation letter for my PhD application, he refused and said I would not want his letter if he really writes one. I'll give his reason at the end, but I want to state my own question here first.
Will it be weird that I state my research experience with him very clearly (I think it will make a strong part) in my SoP but without his recommendation? Will the admission committee wonder where this advisor's recommendation is? If this is not a problem, does it even help that I merely mention this experience in SoP without the support of a letter? I have another piece of research experience from a very prestigious place and I have the LoR from my supervisor there, but that one doesn't have strong results as this main piece of experience and I am counting on this experience to make my application strong.
Here is his reason why he doesn't want to recommend me which might be trivial to my question but I guess you would want to know.
First, my undergrad major is an engineering field that has almost nothing to do with Physics. My advisor said if he is recruiting graduate students, he would only consider Physics Bachelors to be graduate students because it will be very hard and even impossible for students trained in other majors to shape their thinking to be suitable to do research in Physics. I am no exception, although I am doing part-time research with him and have taught myself most Physics core coursework (Damn, another equally prestigious Physics Professor in the neighbouring office just holds the opposite view). For me, his suggestion is that I should treat Physics as a hobby but forget about going to graduate school. (We encountered a nasty math problem which was important for logical completeness of our work some time ago, and he got around it with a trick which to me was "ridiculous" by then. I proposed my own alternative method, but in his view my method is rigid, and he then used my failure of understanding his trick to tell me that my thinking is already not suitable for Physics.)
Second, he is really really an "idealist" in doing research. Since I am applying for grad school, I want to speed up a little bit to revise our work to have a presentable draft (I had already derived the results by then, we were polishing the writing and dealing the above-mentioned math problem). He said I was appearing to be like a "pragmatist" because I was not acting or thinking slowly and calmly like an idealist. He even got a bit unhappy with me when I was arguing with him, wanting him to explain his trick (mentioned in the first reason) more clearly, when I was so desperate to understand it.
As a result, he said I would not want his letter since his opinion is just he won't recommend me to a graduate program although I did research with him.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, it might look a bit weird, but you don't have control over that. And he is giving you good advice that he shouldn't write you a letter. Not every advisor is willing to be so honest.
But, I don't think it is an absolute block to your plans. Find others to write you strong letters and (US perspective) you should be ok.
What you need are letters from people who can confidently and honestly predict your future success based on their experiences with you. This advisor is not that person.
And FWIW, it is his problem, not a problem with your work mode. And no admissions committee should make any decisions based on guesses or suppositions. They should take your materials as they stand.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Do not press for a recommendation letter of someone who is reluctant to give you one. Nothing good is coming out of that.
You have a different approach to things. It's very dangerous of you to label him as "idealist", maybe what happened is that he considers you an strong pragmatist and if you let through that you see him in the opposite side of things, this simply escalates to the point where he sees you both not to have common ground.
Engineering and Physics have a lot in common, but they are quite distinct in the way of thinking. Physics is about finding out how things work, Engineering is about how to use these rules to create something that you want to do specific things. The way people think in both areas is quite distinct and you can sometimes recognize whether the education background of someone in a 3rd field comes from physics, engineering, math, or something else. Thinking style is almost like a signature.
You ended up in a situation where your prof sees only the outcome-oriented aspect of your work. [As an aside: The rigidity he accuses your trick of is a bit of an accusation that he may have leveled against a mathematician rather than an engineer (assuming your trick is really rigorous), which is unwise, because usually it is better to use the more solid mathematician's "trick" than a handwaving one. The latter may be justified to get an insight, but not because it is better.]
That being said, that's not a bad thing. Different backgrounds can bring in different fresh ideas into a field. However, if someone holds prejudices against you, there's not much you can do. You could of course try to kick off a social movement against the discrimination of engineers by physicists (and I am only partially joking here, because this *is* a form of discrimination, a suitably named -ism).
But, as long as you are on your own, your best bet is to look for a different recommender. You will not get a good recommendation from him, and better to answer questions about that discrepancy during your interview once that happens.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Get a job.
He is trying to tell you that you have no future in Physics at a uni.
You could try to see if someone else would write a letter but I doubt that would be productive.
Upvotes: -1
|
2021/01/11
| 468
| 1,997
|
<issue_start>username_0: One of our drafts was accepted for publication in Nov. 30, 2020. It has not been published online yet. I have not even received the first proof. Is it appropriate to push the Editor?
Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: You can ask, but "push" is probably the wrong verb. If you have a specific need to see it, then include that in your ask, but I doubt that you will be successful.
If the editor responded to every such request, I suspect there would be chaos and thrashing. You may have bumped up against year end holidays accounting for some delay.
And they will probably prioritize their own process over your request. But you can ask. Especially you can ask for an estimate of when it might appear.
Stay polite for strategic reasons if nothing else.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Assuming you mean the editor who handled your paper during the peer review process, the answer is no, because it's the wrong person to "push". The role of the editorial board members end once the paper is accepted. The person(s) you want to push is the publisher. How to contact the publisher is not always obvious, but if the journal has a contact email address, I would start there.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: You should not push the editor unless you know that a few months is a long time for this journal and in your subject area. I have had papers where it the time between acceptance and online publication took a few days (physics) and others where it took a few years (pure math). You need to first find out what is the length papers generally take to appear. In the future, investigate this before yous submitted to the journal.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: You can do what you want but once the paper is accepted it is transferred to production and it's out of the hands of the editor. Moreover, pretty much everyone would like to publish their papers "as soon as possible" so you're likely in the same (long) queue as plenty of others.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/01/11
| 850
| 3,815
|
<issue_start>username_0: I teach an advanced Engineering elective course which has a mixed audience of Junior (3rd year) and Seinor (4th year) undergrads and some Grad students. Since it is a interactive course with a lot of project based work etc. we are typically constrained to accepting not more than about 30 students (for reasons of grading time, vivas etc).
Somehow the course has gotten popular and we get many more students wanting to take the course. I wanted feedback on how other instructors handle this sort of situation.
The default at our University's online registration system is a first-come-first-served which I don't like so much. I am tending towards a grade point based shortlisting criteria (which is a lot of work since the registration system is not geared to handle this so I must do the shortlisting manually) but I also like to have a fairly even split between 3rd years / 4th years and Grad students since it makes for a better discussion and project groups. Maybe think of it as a classroom diversity of perspective.
Just curious to hear thought from others about shortlisting criteria and how much of "instructor discretion" vs a hard constraint / criterion is good. Sometimes I get students who seem really interested (or have some past background which makes for a demonstrable interest in this course area) but may not get in according to a grade point shortlisting criterion. Is it ok to make such exemptions and allow them to register?
I guess, what's the tradeoff between some sort of objective "fairness" and a subjective evaluation by instructor.<issue_comment>username_1: The main problems with doing something unusual are that it is unfamiliar to your students, which could cause consternation if they feel they didn't receive enough info about how to get into your class, *especially* if it caused problems with their graduation plans.
At universities I'm familiar with, registration is allowed for grad students first, followed by seniors, then juniors, down the line. It would be really unfortunate to choose a third-year for the last spot and force a senior to take another year or semester because they couldn't get into your class because they had incomplete information.
"Instructor discretion" sounds like a recipe for mishandling individual qualifications, whether you want to talk about inherent bias or lack of information (GPA seems far too coarse for this).
A couple of simple ways to address your problem:
* Split grad students into a separate grad student class that meets at the same time with the undergrads.
* If you can in your registration system, reserve spots for non-seniors (common at universities I'm familiar with). While within-year, it would still be first-come-first-served, you would achieve your goal of having both third- and fourth-years.
Finally, I think having an application system would be OK, **but it needs to be handled transparently and early** so students can plan their schedule; i.e. your application is due early enough so that you can select your students before the **earliest registration date.** Ideally, you should have a second person help you evaluate. This also lets you ask for cover letters and CVs. You should be clear you are reserving, say, 10 spots for third-years. Then, you just lock registration and give codes to the students whom you selected.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This is something individual instructors should not be deciding.
There are university-wide course requirements that students must meet to get their degrees. There must be university-wide policies to ensure that students can register for courses that meet those requirements. That policy should be enforced by the registration software, not instructors. The details of the policy should vary by institution.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/11
| 2,169
| 9,241
|
<issue_start>username_0: I wonder if it is appropriate for professors to ask their students in class to type notes (in latex whatever) for the classes they are teaching and if there is any "elegant" way for students to turn down such request of professors they are taking classes with.
There are several specific scenarios that I am interested in asking about:
1. Professor asks students to take turns to type the notes for the classes and the notes may be used *for publication under the professor's name* (with students appearing in the acknowledgement in some way), and professor **pays** students for doing that.
2. Professor asks students to take turns to type the notes for the classes and the notes may be used *for publication under the professor's name* (with students appearing in the acknowledgement in some way), and professor **does not pay** students for doing that.
3. Professor asks students to take turns to type the notes for the classes and the notes is just a shared free document for academic purpose, and professor **pays** students for doing that (simply as an act of kindness).
4. Professor asks students to take turns to type the notes for the classes and the notes is just a shared free document for academic purpose, and professor **does not pay** students for doing that.
Which of the options above are appropriate/inappropriate (and why)?
Since if the students are enrolled in the class and it might be hard for them to turn down the professor's request since their *grades are "controlled" by the professor* (one more question: is it appropriate for professors to make notes-typing a course requirement?), or simply that students might meet professor everyday and there might be *invisible pressure* for students (especially for graduate students). I understand this must be some grey area in university teaching but it seems to me it is also very common in the graduate level (especially for special topics) courses (but I haven't seen any professors paying students for doing that).
---
By "publication" I mean publishing the notes as a textbook or monograph to publishers like Springer, APS, etc, profit or nonprofit. And as a consequence the public have to spend money to get access.<issue_comment>username_1: There are a couple of issues, but, assuming that students don't volunteer and aren't paid, the most important consideration is whether it has an "educational" purpose or not. As you state it, it sounds like you think it doesn't, but I've required my students to take notes, though not for my own use. In fact I've required them to give me back (verbally upon questioning) the most important lesson from either the current or previous lecture.
But there is a clear educational purpose in that. Had I asked for them to be turned in to me to be reviewed, there is still an educational purpose.
I can easily imagine that the professor, indeed, is just forcing them to learn better study habits exhibiting that. But if it is done for purely selfish reasons then it would not be ethical.
However, the professor already has the information, though maybe not in a typed format. They could actually ask for a scribe to take down their lectures if they lecture completely extemporaneously, and pay the scribe.
I was once in a senior level undergraduate course where the students actually had to teach the course. We were given (or chose, I can't remember) topics that we would need to prepare a lecture for a few weeks ahead and we created and presented our lecture. The prof was there and gave us feedback later. I don't remember doing a great job and of getting appropriate feedback, though there wasn't any embarrassment generated by the prof. But we sort of knew whether we were doing a good job or not. The prof was actually one of the best teachers and the best lecturers, so it wasn't laziness. Just a teaching technique.
However, if you are a professor considering any of the scenarios you give, then you should check with the department head that they agree that the motive is educational progress of the students, not exploitation.
And if you are a student who objects to this, explore whether there is an educational purpose, perhaps with the professor and perhaps with a department head. If there is not, then you have a legitimate right to opt out.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I have experienced this in a couple of instances myself. I took a graduate level Natural Language Processing course in my undergraduate, where the professor would have a student, rotating each class, be a scribe for the lecture. This was more of a volunteer thing where a student took notes for a particular lecture and posted them on the discussion board so that other students could go over the notes and understand the lecture better. There was another case in an honors undergraduate theory class where the professor had students similarly scribe lecture notes in LaTeX, with the incentive that the best scribed notes would receive a small amount of extra credit.
However, as far as **paying** students for this goes, I haven't seen or heard of an instance of this, because from my experience this would be highly unethical. Same goes for taking notes, and the professor taking credit for it, it *could* happen, but it's just really unethical for the professor to take full credit for something someone else wrote. I have seen instances where professors have posted notes taken by students, but those instances the professor simply just cited the students who took these notes.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Is it appropriate for professors to ask students to type notes for their classes (with or without paying students) in United States?
>
>
>
I don't think it's appropriate for a professor to approach individuals to do so, in any situation you've listed, this is because it may seem like undue pressure. **Proposing a general solicitation for a volunteer seems fine, however.**
1. *Prof pays student for published notes*: Seems fine to me.
2. *Prof does not pay student and publishes notes*: It's unclear what you mean by "publish." If it's just on their website, then sure? As long as it's not directed at one person. If it's a textbook for which the professor is (nominally) paid, then I do not think this is ethical.
3. *Prof pays students to prepare notes for class*: It would be unusual (what if there's not enough slots for everyone?) but not unethical.
4. *Prof facilitates shared doc, no payment*: Sure, this happens all the time.
As another example, if familiar with one university would sometimes [request](https://depts.washington.edu/uwdrs/current-students/accommodations/notetaking/) a student volunteer to share their notes with a student who had a disability. I do not know if they were paid for their notes.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: It would be unethical for a professor to publish something written by students under the professor’s name without express consent (which is to be given free of any coercive pressure) and coauthorship for the student. (See [this recent discussion](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/160576/40589) on a related type of abuse.)
It would also be self defeating and something that no competent professor I’ve met would ever wish to do. Students do not generally write notes at a level that comes close to the level most professors can write on their own. Publishing someone else’s subpar notes under your own name is a sure way to hurt your own reputation even if you do technically get some publication credit.
Setting aside the publication issue, it’s fine to have note-taking as an official course assignment if there is an educational rationale, which there often is. For example in mathematics graduate programs we try to get students to work on improving their mathematical writing skills, which are extremely important for success in research, and some writing assignments of this type are not uncommon.
If note-taking is not an official course assignment but the professor simply asks students to do it on a voluntary basis, the request should be made in a way that makes clear the students should feel free to say no. To put pressure on the students to do things they don’t want to do and that are not an explicit course assignment is unethical, regardless of whether the professor publishes the notes or not, and regardless of whether some payment is exchanged.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: I have several personal experiences to add to others here.
I was one of four graduate students in <NAME>'s course who volunteered to take complete notes. He then used those to write a book. We were thanked in the acknowledgments. I learned a lot. See [The Mathematical Theory of Quantum Mechanics](https://store.doverpublications.com/0486435172.html).
Once when I decided to write a text after teaching a course I contacted a student who I knew had taken really good notes. I thanked her in the Preface for providing a zeroth draft.
In several courses I taught, students rotated taking notes and posting them on a course web page. (This did not work out particularly well. Most days I think it was useful only for the note taker.)
In none of these cases was pay involved.
Upvotes: 5
|
2021/01/12
| 835
| 2,819
|
<issue_start>username_0: A journal asked me to add the "series volume no" of a book in my list of references:
[10] <NAME>,Geometry and Spectra of Compact Riemann Surfaces, Modern Birkhäuser Classics,Q11Reprint of the 1992 edition (Birkhäuser, Boston, 2010).
From "mathscinet" i get this,
```
@book {MR2742784,
AUTHOR = {<NAME>},
TITLE = {Geometry and spectra of compact {R}iemann surfaces},
SERIES = {Modern Birkh\"{a}user Classics},
NOTE = {Reprint of the 1992 edition},
PUBLISHER = {Birkh\"{a}user Boston, Ltd., Boston, MA},
YEAR = {2010},
PAGES = {xvi+454},
ISBN = {978-0-8176-4991-3},
MRCLASS = {58J50 (30F10 32G15 58J53)},
MRNUMBER = {2742784},
DOI = {10.1007/978-0-8176-4992-0},
URL = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-8176-4992-0},
```
but i don't know where is the "series volume no".
Tanks for any discussion or answer
}<issue_comment>username_1: Since the book is part of a series, it must also have a series number - its position in the series.
Unfortunately enough there are 109 books in that series, and Springer's website does not order them in series number (which would be expected to roughly correspond to chronological order). If you have a physical copy of the book you might be able to find the series order in the front matter of the book, possibly on the copyright page. Otherwise you might have to ask Springer for the number.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I found this on worldcat.org by searching the title
Geometry and spectra of compact Riemann surfaces : "Reprint of the 1992 edition.". - "Originally published as Volume 106 in the series Progress in mathematics"--
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: First of all, let me state this, because this does not seem to be understood by the OP but none of the other answers actually try to clarify this confusion. "Series volume no" is an abbreviation of "series volume *number*", i.e. the number of the volume in the series. The journal is asking you what the position (number) of your book (the volume) is in the series "Modern Birkhaüser Classic".
I have another volume from the series Modern Birkhaüser Classic in my hands. No number for this volume is to be found anywhere. Nothing on Springer's webpage either. None of the usual bibliographical databases (mathscinet, zbmath) mention any kind of number. My university's library search engine does not make mention of a number either. If such a number even exists, it is useless to anyone.
Simply tell the journal that despite being part of a series, there is no number attached to this volume. If the journal is somehow adamant on having a number, then your other option is to cite the original edition from 1992, if you are certain that the content is exactly the same, but this sounds pointless.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/01/12
| 384
| 1,658
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am working as an editor for an edited book volume on covid-19.
I have come across a very peculiar chapter submitted by an author. In the chapter, the author discloses a personal incident where the author's father's friend passes away due to covid-19.
I am not sure what to do here i.e. whether to email the author as that paragraph seems very peculiar. Is describing such kind of incident, which I see as highly emotive and personal, allowed in academia for example book chapters or journal papers?<issue_comment>username_1: Since you are the editor of the volume, it is you who decides whether it is allowed. There isn’t any codified set of rules specifying whether any given content is allowed or not. That’s exactly one of the things editors are supposed to do - to edit.
Consider whether it makes sense to have such a paragraph in the volume given its topic and purpose. If you think it is appropriate, allow it. If not, don’t. If it is a borderline case, you can raise your concerns with the author and suggest that they change or remove the problematic paragraph, without requiring it outright.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There are many fields in which this would not be out of place especially if it is framed as data and then clearly interpreted (qualitative social sciences, in general). Or framed with theory and arguments to draw conclusions (humanities). In the end, you as the editor can decide where the goal posts are - what kind of offering the book is making, where the contribution sits. Then dialogue with the author about the relevance of the paragraph to the chapter.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/12
| 777
| 3,459
|
<issue_start>username_0: Since reproducibility is a major principle or basic norm of scientific experiments, simulations, and computations, what would you do or what to do if the author of a published CS article does not respond to code requests?<issue_comment>username_1: Simply nothing, but trying to implement it yourself!
According to my experience, there would be four potential reasons because of which authors may refuse to share their code:
1- Their code needs to process some particular data that they are not allowed to share. Thus, the code by itself, without that specific data, does not reproduce the results of the paper. So, sharing the code does not fulfil any reproducibility purpose.
2- They feel that they may still release more "major" contributions of that code. Then, they would postpone the public release of the code until they feel that the code is milked enough, and they have run out of further remarkable ideas.
3- They may believe that if one is really interested in their work and the cultivation of ideas to expand its results, she herself codifies the paper since personal codification often leads to way deeper levels of understanding of what's behind a piece of code, rather than just running some already-cooked snippets.
4- They don't have further access to the code. Not everyone may keep a clone of her contributions on her personal hard drive depending on the policies of the academic or industrial body under which that code was written.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Executing the same code on the same or similar data can be expected to lead to the same result. It isn't reproducible science.
The proper way to think of it is to think about what scientific question is being asked and find a way to answer it, either positively or negatively. In other words, from the nature of the question, create a methodology sufficient to give appropriate evidence for the truth or falseness of the hypothesis. Then execute that methodology in an appropriate way and extract the results, whether they confirm the original study or not.
But simple repetition isn't reproducibility.
It would be a different question if you were exploring whether the code itself is flawed and leads to biased results. But the same is true for questions about methodology in general. Likewise if you suspected fraud in the presentation of results.
But for true reproducibility conduct an independent study of the question at hand.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Some journals, especially in the physical sciences, require code or data to be made available as a condition of publication, either upon publication or upon request. For instance, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences [has this statement](https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/117/1/local/information-for-authors.pdf):
>
> Authors must make Unique Materials (e.g., cloned DNAs;
> antibodies; bacterial, animal, or plant cells; viruses; and algorithms and computer codes) promptly available on request
> by qualified researchers for their own use. Failure to comply
> will preclude future publication in the journal.
>
>
>
You could try contacting the editor of the journal if the article was published in such a journal, who would pressure the authors to make their code available. However, I would first try contacting other co-authors (first rather than senior, or vice-versa) who might be more willing or able to respond to the request.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/01/12
| 754
| 3,286
|
<issue_start>username_0: My article was recently published after a long process of peer-review. I don't know how to introduce the new findings in mainstream science.
Can you advise me on the best way to promote my study?<issue_comment>username_1: There are plenty of options when it comes to promoting your work, both amongst fellow scientists and the general public.
The first and most obvious is giving talks about your work either within your own institution or at other universities. If you're really keen to do this, don't wait for an invitation to speak. It's ok to email the organiser of a department's seminar series and ask if they have any free slots in the next few months. Most seminar organisers I know are very grateful when someone volunteers to speak, as it makes their organisational job so much easier. One bonus of the pandemic is that everyone is giving talks online at the moment, so you can probably give more talks than usual and in locations that might normally be too expensive to travel to for one fifty minute seminar.
Related to this is speaking at conferences. The typical conference season is the summer, but again with everything being online at the moment, more and more conferences are happening at different times. Talking at an online conference is obviously not a good replica of meeting in person, where it's much easier to strike up casual conversation about your work in the queue for coffee, but it's better than nothing.
Furthermore, you can try using social media. In my field, it's quite common to write a Twitter thread explaining your results when you publish a new paper, so you could do something similar. This only works if most of your followers are fellow academics; if your only followers are friends from school or fellow football fans (for example), they may be less interested. Personally, I prefer to write a blog post about my work and then draw people's attention to the post on Twitter. A friend of mine makes Youtube videos. This is your chance to get creative!
Finally, if your work is sufficiently high-profile, you could get in touch with your university's press office and ask if they will write a press release for you. This is presumably a more difficult process to go through but is clearly an excellent way to promote your work to a much wider audience than just academics.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Are you at a university? Some universities do press releases and other publicity for research results found by their faculty. So find out what office at your university does this, and notify them. At my university, the Dean would send us a request from time to time asking us to inform him of any research we may have done that should be publicized.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: One possibility is to *politely* send copies of your work to others in the field, *v.g.* people you cited, collaborators or collegues.
Remember that whomever you send this to has probably not chosen to read your work so this must be done *extremely carefully* and by thinking through the message that will come with the copy, else recipients will think you are pushy or self promoting.
Such emails should be selective as anything that looks like a mass email will immediately go to the delete folder.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/01/12
| 972
| 4,373
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a final year project in Artificial intelligence and I need to make a facial recognition project. I'm confused how to start this project and how plagiarism works in terms of coding? No one would make a project from scratch but the thing is my coding ability in python is very limited and the code that I have seen for facial recognition using the K nearest algorithm is like 70 lines. If I change that code with my variable names and create functions and add that code into those functions would that be a problem ? what do I do ? I would obviously cite where I got this code from and say that my code is inspired from this. But if i just change the variables and make a few functions and add their code clearly I have done very little work in terms of coding aspect.<issue_comment>username_1: When I saw your question, I was rather concerned. No-one should be asking how little they need to do in order to pass their final year project!
However, having read the content of your question it sounds as if you are not actually trying to get away with doing minimal work, just feeling stuck and trying to find a way to improve your project.
You already know that you need to cite your code - any attempt to pass off code written by others as your own would be an act of plagiarism, and as such would be subject to the penalties employed at your college. It's therefore very important that it's VERY clear which elements of the code are your own work, which you have adapted from another source, and which are entirely replicated from another source, and that those sources are clearly and appropriately referenced. You can find guides about how to reference code online, but it’s likely your local library or learning resource center would also provide guides about this.
Depending on the purpose of your code in relation to your whole project, your project may also benefit from a justification as to why you have utilized code from other (cited) sources rather than write your own. The approach you take to do this may be different where you are including external packages/modules rather than including code directly.
If I was supervising your final year project the first thing I would recommend doing is to look again at the scope of your task. If your project simply requires the reproduction of code already written by others just to see if you can get it to work, then its scope is very limited. Maybe you need to expand the scope and/or aim of your project to ensure you are developing something specific to a clear project aim.
I’d therefore suggest you note some ideas about how your project could be expanded then use that as a starter for discussion in your next supervisor meeting. This would show you are proactive in developing your project scope (and not asking them to tell you what to do, which wouldn’t be appropriate in the final year) and hopefully also enable you to improve your project into being something you can be proud to include in your portfolio of work once it’s complete :)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> If I change that code with my variable names and create functions and add that code into those functions would that be a problem ?
>
>
>
That seems like blatant plagiarism: Taking code and changing variable names surely only serves plagiarism. Creating new functions from existing code surely only serves plagiarism too.
>
> what do I do ?
>
>
>
Use as much external code as you like. That code should appear as-is, with any ownership, copyright, and licensing information intacted, where ownership information is missing, perhaps add it, at the very least, document the fact that code isn't yours.
Write your own code that uses external code. That's your contribution.
Occasionally, you may use an external code snippet within your code. Mark such code with comments, e.g., `/** BEGIN: Code from xyz **/` and `/** END **/`.
Ultimately, your goal should be to achieve your objective with minimal code.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I would recommend to look at the actual (discrete) mathematics and write your corresponding code from scratch.
You say it's only 80 SLOC, so why not implement it yourself? If you make use of established libraries, well, this is fine IMHO usually. Ask your advisor, if you are supposed to not use libraries/frameworks before.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/01/12
| 580
| 2,430
|
<issue_start>username_0: I reviewed a manuscript and suggested a major revision, which was done in meantime. Now that I receive the revised manuscript again, I see that the 2nd reviewer wrote only one sentence in his review to the first draft of the manuscript, although there were major issues at the theoretical, methodological, and linguistic levels. Should I tell the editor that I consider such a review insufficient?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I see that the 2nd reviewer wrote only one sentence in his review to
> the first draft of the manuscript, although there were major issues at
> the theoretical, methodological, and linguistic levels.
>
>
>
Are these issues not addressed in the revised submission (based on your comments)? Have the authors addressed all your comments carefully and satisfactorily?
>
> Should I tell the editor that I consider such a review insufficient?
>
>
>
I would not do this. It is the job of the editor to see whether the reviewer has done justice to the article.
---
However, if you think there are still some issues with the revised manuscript, give it a fresh read and add more comments, e.g.
"I can see that the authors have addressed all of my previous comments. But, I still see that the article could be further improved if the following few points are addressed..."
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I suspect that the editor has also recognized this and I doubt that your reinforcing it will have any effect. But yes, you can pass on your observations. There may be valid reasons for the "failure" of the other reviewer (or not).
But it seems as if the paper got improved, so the system as a whole hasn't failed.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I have seen this kind of response as an editor - reviewer A says reviewer B's review is terrible because of so-and-so. I was certainly not offended, and neither was reviewer B, because I never shared reviewer A's comments with reviewer B.
So it's OK. In your case though, "I consider their review insufficient" is not something for you to judge; what is sufficient or insufficient is for the editor to decide. A technical comment such as "reviewer B's \_\_\_ comment is not appropriate because \_\_\_" would be more useful to the editor. Furthermore, in your case, it might not be necessary to tell the editor at all, because it should be obvious that the second reviewer's review is superficial.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/01/12
| 2,446
| 10,348
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a first-year Ph.D. student. In the last year of my undergrad I began a research project with my then-advisor, who planned to hand me off to his former postdoc (let's call him John) who is tenured at my current institution. I believe that John is the only researcher working in this subfield at my current institution. However, I have recently learned John was actually on administrative leave for the spring and fall semesters of 2020, because he was accused of having an inappropriate sexual relationship with a female graduate student. He is back now and I do not know if the university's investigation found him at fault. I am trying to determine the appropriate path forward for myself. Currently I am tempted to quickly finish this project, with the help of my undergraduate advisor rather than John as much as possible, and then get out of that subfield; after all, I'm just a first-year, and should be able to switch without too much trouble.
I have two questions about how I may proceed. The second is more important, the first being more of an IPS.SE question than anything.
**Is it appropriate to ask the department chair or another authority figure if John was found "guilty"?** Though I am a man, I am uncomfortable working with John if the allegations turned out to be true. I have to weight my discomfort against the fact that I really enjoyed the project, and would strongly prefer to finish it this year. On the other hand, he's back, and teaching calculus no less, so maybe the truth turned out to not be as severe as the allegations. In any case, my decision would be a lot easier to make with this information (in fact it seems that the department may have tried to hide the reason John was on administrative leave from the first-years, though the other graduate students all knew). However, I fear that because I have not established much of a personal connection with the authority figures here (thanks mainly due to COVID) that if I ask I will just come off as a gossip.
**Will having worked with John, knowing what he was accused of, tarnish my own academic reputation?** I certainly don't endorse John's actions (and, again, don't know what he was actually accused of, or whether he was found guilty) and don't intend for him to be my thesis adviser -- I just want to get this one project done, and following the suggestions of [this Academia.SE post](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/125706/advisor-accused-of-personal-misconduct-what-should-i-do) it seems like I should just go ahead with the project, but I'm not sure if the reputation hit will be worth it. So suppose that I work with John, even though I know he was credibly accused of misconduct. I write a paper, coauthored with John. I recognize that my actions may come off as callous towards the victim of the misconduct, and while I don't know her identity, I strongly suspect that her research interests are similar to mine. Should I expect my reputation to suffer?<issue_comment>username_1: The matter is best left to the official circles. Do not pry, do not gossip. As for being tainted, you are just a student and dependant, and if you neither enabled nor profited from the prof's (alleged, we don't know) misconduct, you should be fine. But if you start poking your nose into matters yourself, you'll get into a lot of trouble, from being seen as a nuisance to the officials, to getting the prof upset, to violating privacy laws, to unwittingly becoming a witness.
A career-limiting move.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: There are a few aspects to this.
First, as username_1 says, any allegations or hearsay that you may have encountered are just that - you have no formal standing to enquire (and certainly not to confront your advisor about this). Doing so will be a professional mistake.
Second, there is your perception. If you feel that having an advisor who was involved in unethical behavior is something you cannot do, then it is best to cut things off on your first year and find another advisor. Advisor/advisee relationships are more than just professional; you need to get along.
Third, there is your perception of university policies. Some universities are notoriously bad at handling sexual misconduct cases. If you believe that the university is not creating a safe environment for you or your colleagues, then this is something to think about.
Finally, there is the research community. From what it sounds like, you work in a relatively small subfield. Word gets around (perhaps less quickly nowadays with less in-person communication but still), and your name *might* come up, and this might be something you'll be asked about or have to deal with. You need to think about how to handle these potential interactions, and distance yourself from that incident.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It looks as if you have placed John in a "guilty" category in your own mind, although you know nothing about it. Acting on rumors and gossip, and especially in the "sexual harassment" area is particularly nasty. Doing a project with John will of course not hurt you, unless you have your own illegal issues. However, I would strongly suggest you switch to another person to work with, mostly for John's sake and then for yours.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: Asking the Director of Graduate Studies (or equivalent) about whether there was an official resolution to the investigation is certainly appropriate, though be prepared that there’s a good chance they won’t be able to tell you anything. I would clearly stick to asking about official resolutions rather than their opinion on what happened. For one thing, it would not be unusual for a sanction from the university short of dismissal to include a ban on advising students! If so that’s certainly information you’d want to know sooner rather than later! I’d start with the DGS, rather than the chair, because issues around students finding advisors is more in their purview.
As for what you should do moving forward that is really up to you and your conscience. Personally I’m not comfortable collaborating with someone who I could not comfortably recommend as a supervisor to women students down the road. But I doubt that it would seriously harm your reputation (unless this professor gets fired for future behavior in which case you may be in a tricky spot), people understand that the advisor and student are different people.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: >
> Is it appropriate to ask the department chair or another authority figure if John was found "guilty"?
>
>
>
When you ask someone to disclose information that they are supposed to keep confidential, and you know or should strongly suspect that the information is of such a confidential nature, you are essentially asking that person to betray other people’s trust. I’d say that’s pretty obviously inappropriate.
In this case you have a small bit of plausible deniability in that you can claim not to have known if the person you’re asking is allowed to tell you the information, in which case the asking may be seen as perhaps nosy but not necessarily very inappropriate.
It also depends on how you make the request. If you make it politely and while making clear that you understand and accept that the other person may not be free to answer, that would help make the question seem more reasonable and acceptable.
At the end of the day, different people define differently what counts as inappropriate, so it seems impossible to predict the answer. I suspect that some reasonable people may indeed interpret the question as at least a little bit inappropriate, and a larger number still would see it as not quite inappropriate but at least clueless or in poor taste.
>
> Will having worked with John, knowing what he was accused of, tarnish my own academic reputation?
>
>
>
Again, it’s difficult to predict what sort of things would tarnish your reputation. In an age when people come under all kinds of criticism they didn’t expect for fairly minor actions like liking someone else’s tweet, or for some photo they appeared in many years ago whose content seemed to them innocent at the time or was taken out of context, one can imagine you being criticized both for working with John by some people, and (presumably by a different set of people) for deciding to *not* work with John when you knew so little about his alleged misbehavior.
**So what to do?** It seems to me that trying to guess what will tarnish your reputation is the wrong question to ask. Your reputation is the end result of the choices you make, which are guided by your moral compass. If you have a solid moral compass and a good sense of right and wrong, you should be able to decide which action is ethical given the information that you have, and should be able to defend yourself against any future accusations of wrongdoing. In other words, your goal should be to *do the right thing*. When you set that as your goal and your North Star, a good reputation (and the ability to sleep well at night) will generally follow.
As for what’s the right thing here: I can think of two extreme ways of doing the *wrong* thing, and I would certainly advise you to avoid both of them. First, I would avoid working with a person I know with certainty is an evil person. Second, I would avoid boycotting a person about whom I know nothing more than a vague rumor that he misbehaved in some way. Doing either of these things strikes me as indicative of a weak moral compass, and something that likely *should* tarnish your reputation.
For scenarios in between those two extremes, it becomes a question of what you actually know about John. Personally, I think rumors and gossip in general should be discounted and should not be the basis for making a decision as serious as boycotting someone, since they are often unreliable or outright false. (For example, have you considered the possibility that the person who told you about John was lying? It might sound far-fetched but strange things do happen sometime.) Beyond that, I don’t see a clear defining line. You’ll really have to just consider the facts that are known to you and make a decision according to the best dictates of your conscience. That’s all anyone can ask for. Good luck!
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/12
| 388
| 1,625
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have proposed a new equation and will be implementing it into a publicly available [code](https://open.uct.ac.za/handle/11427/17954) in the thesis. I have modified the core equation of the program (the main constitutive equation, "[Johnson Cook Model](https://images.app.goo.gl/XUgxa6W2fRYqmA4J6)"), while the numerical method (newton-raphson solver) is as implemented by the original author.
I would cite the original authors in my PhD thesis where I will explicitly talk about the functioning of the code. However, my journal paper would be only about the equation (as it is the highlight of the work) and the implementation is not the main focus. I will not talk about the implementation and just mention that the "equation was implemented using a VUMAT."
In that case, do I have to cite the original source in the paper when I would eventually submit to a journal?<issue_comment>username_1: You should put a footnote about how you modified this from such and such. While the reality is that people tend not to cite or acknowledge even when credit to someone is amply due, that is not the practice that should be followed. In my publications I not only give credit to obvious papers I use but I try to find the genesis of the idea and give credit of inspiration to my own work. Giving credit is never going to hurt your work. Not giving credit will, at least in the long run, hurt your reputation one way or the other.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: If you borrowed something from another source and modified it, you should definitely cite the original source in your paper.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/01/12
| 271
| 1,183
|
<issue_start>username_0: This is a question mainly in case I haven't foreseen any potential repercussions.
The pandemic is a contentious issue, and a particular academic in my country has been outspoken with the same view as me. I'm currently a PhD student, and would just like to send an e-mail in support to said academic, especially considering that I imagine they would be the victim of many negative and/or abusive communications, again given the contentious nature of the topic.
Their field is also an application of mine, so I would be interested in discussing some of their research in that vein.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes. Telling someone you appreciate their taking a public stand you agree with, thanking them for it, is always appropriate and appreciated, especially when you suspect they've taken some heat for doing so.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I see no reason that you should be worried about sending your support note to the professor. This happens all the time. People more often send disagreeable, if not nasty notes to people they do not agree with. This may be your introduction to the professor by way of explaining your work, etc.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/12
| 1,161
| 4,985
|
<issue_start>username_0: There is an internship opportunity at a prestigous institution, which I consider applying for. I do not yet have a job offer for the considered time period. I need a job/internship for financial stability. I am also applying to apply for internships in a different country, where I prefer to spend my time. These are less prestigious institutions, and I think I am more likely to get employment. However, I am not sure.
I want to make sure that I get employment, so I would like to apply for the prestigious institution as well. If I get accepted to both places (ie to the prestigious institution, where I don't want to be in general but I will cope if I have no other job, and to one of the less prestigious institutions, in the country where I prefer to be), is it burning bridges if I turn down the offer of the prestigious institution?<issue_comment>username_1: I think it pretty unlikely that such a decision would follow you into the future. Few would know about it unless you tell them (other than at that one place).
People understand applicants applying to several things at once, given the uncertainty of the process.
But you would do well to keep an open mind until you need to make some definite choice.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Generally, you should not apply for a position you have no intention of accepting. I find it is unethical to do so; others may see it as merely impolite or even not a problem at all.
That doesn't seem to be the case here - you're applying and would take the offer if it's given to you and you don't have another better choice (better means **better for you**, not "more prestigious institution"), but might choose another offer if it's presented to you.
There's nothing ethically wrong with this action. Is it possible someone would take your rejection of an offer as a snub and react negatively to your applications in the future? Sure, there are people all over who make judgments on people for reasons they should not. However, that wouldn't be you burning a bridge, it would be someone else acting vindictively towards you. More likely no one will even remember if you apply again in the future.
Adding from Noah Snyder's comment, when you do get an offer you want to take, you should withdraw from other applications and decline other offers as soon as you have confirmed acceptance of the offer you prefer. It is rude to delay or remain in consideration for positions you will not take.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: **No**
Offers are only offers, not contracts. They can be declined, and are declined all the time (for example, in 2018, [18% of undergraduates accepted by Harvard declined](https://www.thoughtco.com/harvard-university-admissions-787621)). Whoever is managing the internship will have a wait list, and if you decline, they will call someone else from the wait list and forget about you.
Naturally the more people are accepted in the internship the less likely someone is to remember you, but even if you're the only person, you should be OK especially if you decline courteously and promptly.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I agree with the other answers that you are not burning bridges with the *institution*. However, you may -- in some circumstances -- be burning bridges with *individuals*.
If an internship (or fellowship) is one of several offered by a group or department, or is just based on accomplishment not on fit with specific work requirements, there should be no problem. Your slot will just go to whoever is next on the waiting list.
However, if you specifically were selected since (formally or informally) someone spoke up to express enthusiasm to supervise you or otherwise have you work on their specific project, they may be now emotionally invested in you coming (and feel a bit rejected if you turn it down), and/or may have prioritized you over others in a way they cannot roll back. It shouldn't be that way, but selection meetings can become contentious with people backing their preferred candidates and emphasizing their strengths over others.
People do reject offers quite frequently and -- if you do so in a timely and responsible manner -- this will not make you enemies. But you do need to consider the possibility that specific people who may have lobbied on your behalf may feel less enthusiastic to invest more personal energy on your behalf next time you pop up on their radar screen in whatever other context.
Therefore: go ahead and do what you have to do, but be sensitive to who may be individuals who may (appropriately or not) feel a bit slighted if you do take another opportunity. If there are such individuals, it would likely be helpful if you reach out to them afterwards, explaining how you had to prioritize such and such, and reiterating how much you hope to work with them in the future (or somesuch, whatever feels natural). A bit of empathy and explanation goes a long way!
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/13
| 1,213
| 5,068
|
<issue_start>username_0: If you copy paste a diagram from a paper/book onto your own work, without permission or attribution, that's plagiarism.
What happens if you see a beautiful diagram about what you want to explain and you replicate it identically without copy pasting?
What if you don't copy it identically but it's still similar (say the colors are different, and the vertices/edges/boxes) have slightly different shapes? For example the original used a 3D blob to explain what a local chart is, and your diagram uses an ellipsoid.
What if you transfer mediums? For example a chalkboard diagram turned into a metafont diagram?
Since there are only so many ways to convey certain mathematical ideas, such as what a bivector is, or how to compute a spline. When do you know where your source of inspiration is too close to your own work that you walked over into plagiarism?<issue_comment>username_1: Paraphrasing <NAME> [here](https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/academic-program/give-great-research-talk/), credit is like love. Giving it to more people does not diminish it or you.
Even if you recreated an image yourself, there’s literally no reason to not attribute your inspiration for it (apart from your own ego).
The threshold for plagiarism is vague at times, but if you saw someone’s work, liked it and built upon it, give them credit.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I am not a lawyer. However, this is how it presents itself to me:
I think it is necessary to distinguish the "citation" from the "copyright" aspect:
**Citation**: A complete recreation of a diagram to convey a (semi-)formal idea is like the reproduction of a formula. I would not assume copyright violation applies here, but it definitely needs to be cited if there is any original contribution in the diagram (e.g. it is the first time that something is visualised in a particular way etc.) rather than a well-known and -used standard diagram.
In Greek mathematics, diagrams often took the role that formulas take today, and this is still often the case today: exact sequences, Feynman diagrams, Organic Chemistry etc. all fall into this category. In short, if your diagram falls into a category equivalent to any of these, recreate and cite.
**Copyright**: If the diagram itself is not original, but you are copying the style, possibly colour scheme etc., then recreating it may fall under copyright violation and you need permission from the copyright holder.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Plagiarism is the act of taking someone else's work and passing it off as your own.
If this happens explicitly (i.e. you claim originality) then things are pretty clear cut.
The problem comes when you fail to clarify that a piece of work is not your own. Leaving the authorship of an idea ambiguous is where you get into trouble.
Thus, at a bare minimum, you need to give credit. Depending on what you're doing, this might be a formal citation, or a clear notice of the source. In a presentation, this might be an annotation on the slide or a clear verbal indication of where you got the idea.
Copyright takes things further. This moves from academic conduct into legal waters.
The specifics here depend on your country. Copying someone's work with appropriate citations may be covered by "fair use" clauses in your local copyright laws which permit copying work for the purposes of comment and criticism; as an educator, you have a good case that this is your purpose.
However, even then, you should be careful, especially if you're reaching a wide audience with your replication.
So, in summary:
* avoid charges of plagiarism by using appropriate forms of citation
* avoid charges of breaching copyright by understanding your local fair use exceptions.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Plagiarism existed long before computers and copy-pasting did. Do not confuse the means of copying with the act of plagiarism itself. If you reuse something (significantly large or important) without attribution, it is plagiarism. It doesn't matter if the original was jpeg, chalk, or stone tablets.
Copy-pasting an exact copy of a text or image is the kind of plagiarism that is easy to detect and prove, but if I were to read a brilliant but forgotten math thesis, understand the core elements, and then write them up differently and present them as my own, I would be the worst kind of plagiarist.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: When I was writing a textbook, we had to be very careful about falling foul of copywrite issues with the figures we included. We had many figures that we cited as "adapted from..." or "inspired by....", and in those cases someone at the publisher looked carefully at how similar they were to the inspiration. In some cases our publisher decided they needed to seek permission from the copywrite holders and in some of those we had to pay a licensing fee, which was pretty large. I don't know to what extent our publisher was being defensive, and licensing things it didn't need to.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/01/13
| 457
| 2,138
|
<issue_start>username_0: My PhD research was applied mechanics. I used commercial finite element analysis software to simulate thermal spray process. My research did not involve developing any weak-form formulations or any new theoretical model. I just implemented existing models and the analysis was the novelty of my research. My publications are in applied journals like journal of thermal spray and technology.
Now the professor who's going to take my interview works in theoretical model and formulations development. His papers are in core mechanics journals. However, the advertised postdoc position description aligns with my research experience and I believe I can be successful there. But I cannot produce papers similar to the professor's profile.
How do I approach the interview in this case? Should I tell them that my research experience is applied and development of formulations is not my cup of tea?<issue_comment>username_1: My background is in computational mechanics, so I have some background to answer your question. It seems to me that you and the professor would make a good research team because your research interests and experience are complementary. Do not assume that the professor wants you to work on weak forms and model formulation. S/he might want to go in a more applied direction as @astronot said. Instead of assuming that the professor wants to produce more papers like s/he has done in the past, ask in the interview what you'd be expected to do.
Second, it might also be useful for you to learn weak forms, just like it might be useful for someone with a mathematical background to learn applied stuff using commercial packages.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't know you field, but I would suggest talking about your research and what makes it exciting, talk about the professors research and why you think its interesting.
Think about how your work and their work can be combined.
Look over the job description and see if there are 'keywords' for skills/experience/knowledge for what they are looking for, and if so, make sure you can sell yourself for each of them.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/01/13
| 1,563
| 6,646
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was involved with a research project with a group of people. Eventually, a paper was written and was accepted by a journal. I did not agree with the content of the paper and I didn't want to be listed as a co-author, but I did not want to create bad feelings between myself and the rest of the group.
The journal has a policy where every co-author has to turn in a signed agreement that they substantially contributed to the work. I refused to sign that document I thought that by refusing to sign that document, I would be left off the co-authors list.
However, the journal went ahead and included me without me signing the form. It is not going to ruin my reputation to have my name on this paper, but I didn't want my name on the paper and I am just wondering what I should have done differently to resolve this problem.<issue_comment>username_1: Well, there were a lot of mistaken decisions here, including by the journal to list your name.
To answer your title question, you should have, before the paper was submitted, told the group you didn't want to be involved, whether you said something like "I disagree with the conclusions of this paper, and don't want to be an author," or a white lie like "I don't feel I contributed enough to be an author."
>
> You can also offer to be happy to be acknowledged; I find this is an option for authors who do not wish to hide an unwilling collaborator's contribution without making them co-responsible for the publication. This can soften the blow of disagreement without requiring to lie. - [Captain Emacs](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45857/captain-emacs)
>
>
>
Upon getting the form, you shouldn't have silently declined, you should have talked with the other authors and informed the journal you were included accidentally. With everyone's consent, they would have taken you off.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You should have asked the co-authors not to be included up front. Leaving it until the journal asks to confirm your authorship is a lot more rude to your co-authors than just communicating with them. It makes them look dishonest or disorganized to the journal if you later ask to not be included.
However, if you got to the point you did, you should have explicitly asked to be removed from the list rather than hoping your non-response would give you the same result.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: A colleague and I once had to deal with a very similar situation: after telling our then-boss that we disagreed with his interpretations, he went ahead and presented them at a conference, listing us as co-authors.
In that case, there was no paperwork to confirm co-authorship permission. We ended up sending a letter along the following lines:
>
> We note that we have been listed as co-authors for presentation X and poster Y. We feel that our involvement in this work does not meet the requirements for listing as co-authors, and therefore we request that the proceedings be amended not to list us.
>
>
>
In your case, you should also note that you didn't submit the paperwork to be listed as a co-author.
If you want to soothe your colleagues' feelings, you might also suggest that a "with thanks to..." would be appropriate in place of a co-author credit. This allows them to acknowledge your contribution to the work, without implying that you endorse the paper.
Lesson for next time: people don't always check the paperwork closely, so if you don't want to be listed as a co-author, it's best to say so explicitly.
If they *had* checked the paperwork, the most likely outcome here is not that they'd have gone ahead and published without your name included. Rather, they'd have told you and your colleagues that they couldn't publish until you'd submitted the form, so this wouldn't have escaped the need to have that uncomfortable conversation with them.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: ### Send a request for retraction to the journal.
You're listed as a coauthor on the paper. This was against your consent, but you are still listed as a coauthor, and that gives you the right to write to the journal to request retraction. If you strongly disagree with the results of the paper, and you did not consent for it to be published with your name on it, I would suggest that you might wish to write to the journal to explain the situation and ask that the paper be retracted.
This will likely hurt your relationship with the group who wrote it, but they shouldn't have published something with your name on it without your permission. That's a big breach of academic ethics.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: The "Golden Rule" is a good start for most academic ethics questions. Treat other people the way you would want to be treated. I would hope that if your co-authors disagreed with the paper that you were working on that you would want them to tell you and that you would not want them to want to avoid disagreeing with you on research matters (which wouldn't reflect well on you). None of us really wants to publish work that isn't solid - it isn't in our long term interests, and we should have our collaborators best interests in mind as well as our own.
At this stage it is a bit late, but if you want your name taken off the paper, then I would suggest being open and straightforward about the reasons.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: How core were your skills or contribution to the research work in question ?
If you just contributed something secondary, e.g. statistical analysis for a small-scale social research project, then you could have plausibly asked to be left off the authors' roll. Maybe insist on it since you have reservations on the conclusions published - which should have been run by you even if drafted by others.
But if you did say 25% of the core work but still had reservations on the conclusions drawn by others, I think you should have done more than meekly try to shy away from it all.
I appreciate the fact that many faculty are kind of dragooned into joint research projects and it's hard to say no if you are a young academic. But the university's reputation ultimately stands on its rigorous application of high standards. Though this is often unpopular among a group happy to proceed with an "it'll do" approach, it is vital for your own esteem that you vocally disagree when you really think so.
Looking longer down the road, I suppose prevention is superior to cure. And avoiding - or at least not fully committing - to group dynamics showing a casual approach to research is the best way out of this situation.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/13
| 504
| 2,218
|
<issue_start>username_0: This might be a silly question, I'm doing a primary education uni degree and my subject study is computing. For our assignment, we have to create a basic website from scratch using HTML. I'm completely new to coding so I'm fumbling my way through it. I want to follow a video on coding parallax scrolling but would this be considered plagiarism as it's not my original code? My head is telling me no because surely there is only a certain amount of ways you can achieve this? Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: Are there any reasons not to make transparent that you used the tutorial as a source? Using sources alone is no problem. Not citing is a problem. So cite properly and you should have no problem with plagiarism.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I doubt that this is plagiarism in the formal sense of the term. I'd equate it with using things you find in a text book. This relies on the fact that there are a limited number of ways in which some things can be done and also on the fact that students should be allowed to learn with other resources than those provided.
However, if you are asking whether you could be sanctioned by a professor for this then it isn't so clear and depends on whatever rules are set for your completion of the assignment. A professor can certainly put an embargo on using outside resources for purposes of an assignment. If you use those resources then you can be punished even though you haven't committed plagiarism in the formal sense.
But if your final result gives the impression that the ideas are yours when they are not and not cited, then it becomes formal plagiarism.
Don't equate plagiarism with academic misconduct. The easy way to be sure is to cite what you use (avoiding plagiarism) and also avoiding any claim that you were hiding something from the professor.
---
Note that professors don't assign things because they need the end product produced by the students. They do it purely so that the student can learn something. Breaking the rules reduces the intended learning. It isn't really about "making" something. It is about "learning" something. Working with limited resources is often a good way to enable that.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/01/13
| 688
| 3,005
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently doing a fully funded PhD in a European country. I just finished my first year. The topic is ok but i dont feel very passionate about it. I dont feel i connect with the topic even though my supervisor is a nice person. the uni is depressing and i feel lonely. Both me and my partner do not really like the country we are living in.
I have another PhD offer from a better uni, in another country( i have close friends there) and in a field that i care much more about. The immigration status after graduating is also very important for me and in this country, i would have easier and faster ways of becoming a permenant resident.
I am very tempted to leave my current PhD and go for the second option. However, i have just finished my first year here, have been getting paid and my supervisor has been putting time and energy into helping me. I feel awkward talking to him about leaving and dont know how he would react.
What should i do? it is a very difficult decision for me. I am also worried my current supervisor would get angry and try to destroy my academic reputation. I know the funding i currently have is very generous and my supervisor worked hard to secure it for me. Im just simply not happy with what I am doing and where I am living...<issue_comment>username_1: Are there any reasons not to make transparent that you used the tutorial as a source? Using sources alone is no problem. Not citing is a problem. So cite properly and you should have no problem with plagiarism.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I doubt that this is plagiarism in the formal sense of the term. I'd equate it with using things you find in a text book. This relies on the fact that there are a limited number of ways in which some things can be done and also on the fact that students should be allowed to learn with other resources than those provided.
However, if you are asking whether you could be sanctioned by a professor for this then it isn't so clear and depends on whatever rules are set for your completion of the assignment. A professor can certainly put an embargo on using outside resources for purposes of an assignment. If you use those resources then you can be punished even though you haven't committed plagiarism in the formal sense.
But if your final result gives the impression that the ideas are yours when they are not and not cited, then it becomes formal plagiarism.
Don't equate plagiarism with academic misconduct. The easy way to be sure is to cite what you use (avoiding plagiarism) and also avoiding any claim that you were hiding something from the professor.
---
Note that professors don't assign things because they need the end product produced by the students. They do it purely so that the student can learn something. Breaking the rules reduces the intended learning. It isn't really about "making" something. It is about "learning" something. Working with limited resources is often a good way to enable that.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/01/13
| 1,213
| 5,090
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a young theoretical physicist who's currently enrolled in his final year of masters studies and I've started searching for doctoral programs.
I've started applying to PhD programs which have a starting date after my graduation date. So far, I've gotten zero positive feedback which is disheartening to say the least - during the entire course of my studies, I've only ever had one grade which wasn't an "A" and I also participated in several workshops and even held two talks at different occasions.
I can't help shake the feeling that it's due to me coming from a relatively poor European country where there's five serious researchers in theoretical physics in total, one of them being my thesis advisor. As much as I love working with him, I am "afraid" that I'll get stuck in this country (not an issue) doing bad and irrelevant work (definitely an issue). I don't see anyone pushing any boundaries.
I wouldn't be asking this question if I didn't hear multiple stories of and by people who decided to pursue a PhD here and either abandoned academia or are now just treating it as any old job, with zero interest or motivation.
I live for this. I want to pursue, explore and uncover.
Can I hope that if I don't find a PhD within a year or two somewhere else, that I'll be able to do so with a Postdoc some 5 years from now? Are the criteria for post doctoral study even "stricter", or are PhD students "filtered out" and it becomes easier to end up somewhere prestigious?
Please refrain from motivational talk about how I can definitely find a PhD in a prestigious university if I push hard enough - I know this to be not true from almost first hand experience (unless you're an absolute born-once-every-1000-years-genius, but then one wouldn't even be asking this question).
How hard is it to get a "prestigious" Postdoc after a "mediocre" PhD?<issue_comment>username_1: I think it would be wise to take one step at a time, and the next would be to secure a satisfying position as a PhD student. You seem to be willing to move and are also open for different countries. That is definitely a plus and your general approach makes sense as far as I can tell.
I am not sure what you mean by "PhD program". To me that sounds as if you were not contacting researchers directly. In my experience (from the natural sciences mainly, and in Germany) it is not uncommon that PhD students are hired after some personal contact with a potential supervisor without passing any official selection process. Often, positions are not even advertised and supervisors use their personal network to find PhD students. I do not doubt that you face some bias concerning your home country, but if you manage to find a way to some personal correspondence with a potential supervisor the bias might be less of an issue. Your supervisor might be able and willing to support you. Is he/she on a friendly basis with a potential supervisor? Then he/she could facilitate contact.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I know it may sound a bit crazy, but is it not an option for you to pursue a second master's in a foreign university and then apply from there for a phd? There are even some programs, where the master's takes only 1 year (I have heard about it in Germany). You could work as an intern at a lab during that time and could continue your phd at that lab.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Are the criteria for post doctoral study even "stricter"
>
>
>
The criteria for getting a postdoctoral position are not important. People who hire postdocs generally have to spend the money by a deadline. If they do not hire someone, they might have to return the money. They hire the best person they can, not every person who is qualified. The number of qualified people is always larger than the number of positions.
>
> How hard is it?
>
>
>
There is stiff competition for jobs. Most physics PhDs do not get postdoc jobs. Many get industry jobs, which are often higher paying.
<https://www.aip.org/statistics/reports/employment-and-careers-physics>
Other fields have even more competition.
Competition is based on how many papers you have published that are relevant to the job. Generally jobs are easier to find if your research is in experiment or in a topic currently popular with industry.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: The most important is not really where you do your PhD but rather if you can publish some quality research papers during your PhD. I have a few post-doctoral researchers in my team, and I have hired them because they are somewhat close to my research area but mostly because they have shown that they can write and publish good papers during their PhD. This give me confidence that they will also do good research in my team as post-doctoral researcher. Thus, my recommendation is that if you choose to stay in your country, work hard to publish in top journals/conferences in your field, and also have international collaborations. If you have good papers, then people will recognize your research ability.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/13
| 1,604
| 6,507
|
<issue_start>username_0: Similar questions have been asked here a number of times. I am raising it again to stress some specific issues that the previous threads have not resolved in my opinion.
The question is simply, what should the stated affiliation of a co-author who is employed in the industry be, considering that research was undertaken as an unpaid side-project in a field unrelated to that of their place of employment at the time (i.e. no conflict of interests).
Possible solutions are:
1. No affiliation.
I am concerned that this will stand out, given that all other authors have affiliations.
2. Previous academic affiliation.
Some users (in previous answers) seem to think that adding a previous academic institute as the affiliation for such an author is ethically wrong.
Moreover, I am concerned about crediting an institute that did not support the work, when this co-author's contribution was not supported by any institute.
3. Affiliation of otherwise unknown non-profit research organisation, specifically created for the purpose of providing an affiliation.
This would be ideal, as there is no misattribution or blank affiliation field; however, I am concerned that this will also look anomalous in the list of affiliations.<issue_comment>username_1: Listing a former affiliation as if it is current is not right. Listing an employer as an affiliation may run afoul of their rules. Permission may be required. And if they didn't support the research it is good for disambiguation purposes but no other.
Listing yourself as an Independent Researcher is correct in almost all cases, though your employer should probably be consulted as there may be contract obligations.
No affiliation is fine if the journal (or whatever) permits it, but for people with common names is less than ideal. But don't worry that it stands out. People rarely care much about it unless they want to contact you.
If you have an established personal "business" perhaps for tax purposes to manage income from publishing books and such, as I do, then you could list that. It is accurate and honest. But it might need to be public enough to enable people to use it to find you. And, creating a bespoke organization for this purpose, especially as a one-off, doesn't really help for any of the usual purposes.
But affiliation in general is used for several things. The most important is probably to indicate support from an organization, though disambiguation of names is also quite important. And a previous affiliation treated as if it were current could be interpreted as dishonest. And if someone tries to contact you through a previous affiliation and is told that you are in no way affiliated with them then you could suffer a bit.
However, specifying "Formerly a student at Universal University of the Universe" is fine, since you are clear about the intent.
---
And a warning. Some employers require you to get permission to publish most everything. Some will forbid publication if it affects their core business in any way. Know what is in your contract.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It depends on your co-authors' personal preferences.
1.) **Industry affiliation**: They could ask their employers in industry whether they may name the company as their affiliation. They are, after all, employed there, and it is likely that the employment at least partly facilitated the research. I see two additional benefits to this option: (1) The employer may be happy to see their company's name in a scientifc publication, which may increase their reputation; this would indirectly benefit your co-authors' position within the company. (2) Prominent world university rankings give bonus points to "university-industry collaborations", which is generally deemed to be highly valuable for fostering innovation (e.g. see this document from the [Times Higher Education](https://www.timeshighereducation.com/sites/default/files/the_consultancy_university_industry_collaboration_final_report_051120.pdf), [some further evidence here](https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2098-8), or [this OECD report](https://www.oecd.org/innovation/university-industry-collaboration-e9c1e648-en.htm)).
2.) **No affiliation**: Thousands of scholars have published under the affiliation "Independent Researcher" or "Independent Scholar" in the past years ([see the evidence here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/159416/how-to-submit-a-paper-without-being-backed-up-by-my-employer/159426#159426)); I deem this to be an honest approach, but it seems to be your least preferred option.
3.) **An existing research institute**: Your co-authors could ask nearby research institutes whether they would "lend" their affiliation to them. I do know of colleagues who have done so. From my observation, the benefit of this approach is that your co-authors can gain a bit of a foothold into academia through informal networking; for the publication benefits the research institute, and one cannot rule out that the institute will grant something in exchange (such as guest lectures).
I do not see any benefits in creating a new organization simply for the purpose of providing an affiliation. Unless you want to repeatedly collaborate together; then it may make sense to establish a 'name' and credible reputation for your newly established organization because this might enhance your chance to obtain research fundings and grants independently of other affiliations in the future. But this does not seem to be your plan.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: There are some examples where the author(s) do not belong to an affiliation. Such a paper is entitled [The RNA World at Thirty: A Look Back with its Author](https://link-springer-com.ezproxy.muni.cz/article/10.1007/s00239-016-9767-3). In this paper, the author simply omits the affiliation and just states her email.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: There are many different ways of writing "independent researcher", see e.g. [this answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/27804/101067) (or [another answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/161459/101067) to the present question). Judging from the linked papers, and also having seen this occasionally, I would say that this is not uncommon. Therefore, I doubt it will stand out in any way.
#2 is most likely not ok (as discussed by others), and #3 seems like an effort to hide something ("research institute" that nobody has ever heard of? sounds fishy). Just go with #1.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/01/13
| 603
| 2,762
|
<issue_start>username_0: I occasionally review articles for a prestigious but high-throughput journal. The most recent time, I went to check on the decision of the article, and saw that a decision of minor revision had been rendered but I was not informed. Is this a quiet way the editors have chosen to take me off of further reviewing a paper because they didn't like my review? I didn't even disagree with that decision particularly, but I had marked "another journal" for my recommendation.
In a previous encounter with this journal I was informed the journal had returned a decision of major revision, then the revision was never returned to the original reviewers, but rather was directly accepted by the editor and published 10 days later. Is this common too?
These may all be common practices at journals with more throughput than the specialized journals I am used to but they are new to me.<issue_comment>username_1: For the journals I review for, I have the impression that it is more common to not inform the referee about the decision rather than to do so, except if there is some communication from the authors to the referee. Of course, this might be highly field-dependent, so without much more information, this question is likely hard to draw specific answers.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: While most the journals that I have dealt with inform me of the editors' decision, I have found that a significant minority do not.
I've found this to be the case in fields with significantly different publication practices (e.g., computer science, biology), so I don't think it's field dependent. Likewise, there seems to be little consistency in which journals allow me to see other reviewers' comments and which do not.
My guess is that hiding review or decision information is some sort of attempt to increase editorial independence, e.g., allowing an editor to more freely decrease the weight given to an unfair Evil Reviewer #3.
I really do not like it, however, since seeing the editors' decision and the other reviews helps me simultaneously evaluate the quality of the journal and editor, which are also quite important to know (and sometimes give feedback on).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: For the first question, it depends on the journal, the paper and the editor.
For the second question, when receiving a revised paper, the editor/associate-editor may sometimes read it by himself and take a decision directly without asking the reviewers or remove one reviewer. This is done sometimes if the revisions are minor like fixing some typos. Or the editor may have other reasons to do so. An editor may also ask some new reviewer to get some different perspective. In any case, it can happen.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/14
| 740
| 3,289
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is it enough to discuss a higher mean in one set of results than another without statistical significance (as long as you are clear that significance wasn't tested)? Can this, in your experience, result in rejection by peer-reviewers?<issue_comment>username_1: Of course I can't speak for EVERY journal in the world. Who knows?!? But in principle, a difference in means, without further statistical analysis is 'meaningless'. You are applying a transformation that hides the variance of the underlying data, so it is impossible to interpret if the differences observed are likely due to a different mean of the samples, or due to simply random variation.
In addition, I would argue that if the journal does allow you to publish a difference in means without further analysis, you still shouldn't do it--and probably find a different journal to publish in.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It depends on the situation.
If the mean of one result is obviously much higher than another one, then there is no need to provide statistical significance at least from my point of view.
If the mean is the same or very close to each other, then there is definitely a need to provide statistical significance.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: It is a good idea to avoid meaningless ["Null Ritual"](http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.324.1400) statistical tests that give the appearance of statistical rigor, but are often deeply misleading. For instance, there is no point in performing a test for zero-difference between things that you know a-priori cannot reasonably be expected to be the same. For example, a test for zero difference in the proportion of journal paper abstracts that express an acceptance of anthropogenic climate change, versus the proportion when judged on the basis of the whole paper, tells you nothing whatsoever. A non-significant result only tells us that the sample is too small to reveal what we already know. The space in the abstract is too small to include a statement of whether anthropogenic climate change is happening, unless that is the specific purpose of the paper. However there is more room in the body of the paper, so it is more likely to contain such a statement in providing context for the findings. So we would expect the proportion to be somewhat higher in the latter sample. It certainly does not cast any doubt on the usefulness of the survey of abstracts (in case you are wondering, yes, this is a real example).
If the difference is too small to be of any practical significance, I'd argue that there is no point in performing a test for statistical significance either.
If you are going to claim that X is different to Y based on some data, then you need to perform a test of statistical significance. However, I'd argue that it doesn't necessarily need to have a significant result for the paper to be worth publishing, providing the conclusions are suitably circumspect (the method/reasoning may be of sufficient interest, even if the results are inconclusive). The main purpose of statistical significance tests is to enforce a degree of self-skepticism on the part of the researcher, and not much more than that. It is most useful when it give a non-signifiant result.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/14
| 2,166
| 9,204
|
<issue_start>username_0: In reviewing a paper I notice that the result presented there can be improved. However, the improvement may not be significant enough to appear in a good journal. Therefore, to me the best situation would be to have the authors' permission and to join the paper under review.
I would like to be advised of what I may do. I think I may write to the editor, and I would especially like to know how to ask politely. Would anyone have similar experience?
Edit: First of all thanks a lot for all suggestions! I just forgot to mention that my report was already sent one month ago. Would there be something extra I should take care of?
Edit 2: Again, many thanks to you guys! Actually contacting the authors is never an option in my mind. My options are only: (i) tell the editor (not recommending myself as a coauthor); (ii) write my own note.
Here note means a short paper, since my new short proof may be of ten lines (the original proof is three pages), that's the reason I would like to consult you guys, and to see if there is a third option.
At the moment, I prefer to do the first option, and I am thinking of whether in the email to editor I should include my new proof, or just say "I may further provide the details". How do you guys think?<issue_comment>username_1: What field is this? Would the paper go from 10 authors to 11? Or would it be 1 to 2?
My experience is in mathematics, where papers often have 1 author. I have seen in such papers something like: Thanks to an anonymous referee for the following proof.
Another case involving me. A paper by 3 statisticians, acknowledging me for providing a proof. The journal asked them to add me as author, so in the published paper I am one of 4 authors.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: It sounds like you're approaching the review process from the wrong angle and are looking for ways to contribute to the results of a paper.
Remember that **every single paper ever published could have been better**! Your main job as a reviewer is to judge the merits of the paper as is. Additionally, you should/can make suggestions as to how the paper could be improved. But these are expected to be helpful suggestions around the edges that would not warrant authorship. Unless the situation is extremely unusual, it is inappropriate for you to suggest new experiments that you could perform or new results that you could derive and subsequently suggest yourself as a co-author.
This is a social norm in science for which there are several reasons. Yes, there are some aspects in which science could be improved by following a different norm (e.g. this post can be improved by someone else who will become a co-autor!), but this is the currently accepted norm.
(Truly exceptional circumstances in which this norm can be violated is if you have the missing piece in an urgent and important problem that would change the field if included in the paper. Say, the whole paper is about an extremely important conjecture and you happen to have thought of a proof of it during your review. Or you have the missing experimental evidence that is the key to show that this drug is not just a reasonably good candidate to work against SARS-CoV-2 but in fact almost proven to work! Then you may contact the editor (but not the authors) with your suggestion. Simply having an idea for an incremental improvement is not enough to offset this strong social norm.)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Contacting the authors directly is a terrible idea. Don't go there. Contacting the editor with a question or request is fine. If you contact the authors directly and they interpret it as a form of poaching and complain to the editor, you may lose the opportunity to review in the future.
But the "best" option isn't to join the paper. It is to give your best review, pointing out what you think has been missed and asking for major revisions if that is what it would take.
Tell the editor that you would be willing to work with them on the improvement with permission and await what happens. You may not get a co-authorship (I doubt you will) and your advice might even be attributed to the anonymous reviewer, but that is pretty natural.
You will have contributed to the advancement of the art.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: **Q:** When I spot a possible improvement while reviewing, can I suggest to join the paper as a co-author?
**NO**. This would be unethical and unprofessional. username_3's [answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/161302/33210) provides guidance for your best course of action: *go through the editor and suggest improvements*.
However, a comment made by the OP motivated me to provide an additional answer on why this is bad idea:
>
> Thanks username_1! My field is math as well, the paper is written by 2 authors. I should confess that I really need publication, and I am really afraid if I were put in the acknowledgment after sharing. Therefore I am struggling whether I should write to the editor or just write a note by myself. Would you have any suggestion?
>
>
>
Contacting the authors to be added because you *really need publication* is a horrible idea because
1. You would be violating the blind system of review most journals use.
2. As a reviewer, you are in a position of power (albeit not much power) and your suggestion or request for addition as a co-author would not be one as a peer. However, another [answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/161299/33210) noted situations where the poster has been invited to be a co-author after suggesting ideas. But, in that case the the reviewer suggested ideas and other people though the reviewer should be a co-author.
3. If you do this, you may soon find yourself with a bad reputation in your subfield.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: As you describe the situation all you should do is to mention in your report that Theorem X can be improved to obtain Theorem X'.
But one can imagine other scenarios. One of the celebrated mathematics papers of the last century, published by two authors H & H', originated - according to H' - as follows. Author H' submitted a paper; it was sent to referee H who had in his filing cabinet an unpublished manuscript overlapping by about half the material; the editors intervened, the paper was withdrawn, and finally H & H' published a paper developing and expanding the union of the drafts.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: In my opinion if the improvement won't be significant as stand-alone work you should disclose it to the authors within your review.
If it is a real substantial improvement you can recommend - from your referee point of view - that it must be included.
You will likely be acknowledged (anonymousy, of course).
I do not think acceptance is under discussion anymore independent of the fact that the authors comply or not.
Conversely, if you have something publishable at hands, wait a bit then go on your own.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I assume here that by improvement you meant something like a way to prove a more general case of a theorem presented or a suggestion for a corollary.
As a referee your job is to judge the quality of the paper as it is presented to you. You are not expected to suggest additions or improvements to the results presented in the paper. After all, all research is incomplete by its very nature.
**So what are your options?**
I would definitely not contact the author(s) directly. This is a breach of an implied agreement of secrecy between you and the editor. Most journals explicitly require that all communication should go through the editorial office.
I would also not propose myself as a coauthor if I was in your situation. There are a few reasons for that:
1. There is arguably some randomness involved in you getting the draft for review, so it is a bit unfair.
2. You put the editor in a tough position of having to mediate a request of coauthorship between you and the author(s) of the paper.
3. It is, after all, their paper with their ideas and execution. If, by your own admission, the result that you want to add is not worth a standalone publication, perhaps is unfair that you share an equal amount of credit by cosigning the paper with them.
4. If the author(s) refuse to include you then the situation would become exceptionally unpleasant because now they know your unpublished idea and you run the risk of getting scooped.
One way is to propose the addition in the report and accept to be thanked as an anonymous referee. However, keep in mind you cannot ethically reject the paper if they refuse to do it because you are not asking them to fix something but rather to add something.
If you are happy with being acknowledged, but you would like to be acknowledged by name, you can give the editor permission to disclose your name to the author(s). Then the editor will decide whether it's ok or not.
The final option is to type the theorem yourself (citing that paper) and to find a less prestigious journal on which you can publish. I understand that publishing as a preprint-only is not an option for you at the moment, but in principle one might also do that.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/01/14
| 1,148
| 4,740
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am marking tests and a student wrote down 64 instead of -64 for one of the questions. This obviously changed the entire question and they would have gotten full marks otherwise, (i.e. all their steps are correct). They also did really well on the rest of the test. I do not know how much I should penalize them since full marks on this question would give them 87%, and anything lower would be an <85% mark. Even half marks would drop their mark to as low as 60%. How many marks would you penalize them?<issue_comment>username_1: Marks are a measurement of how well the student knows the subject. So it depends on how much of a lack of knowledge that mistake represents:
* in most cases, if all steps are correct and only a number was copied wrongly, then obviously the knowledge of the subject is very good, and most of the question was done correctly, so "almost full marks" are deserved
* if the mistake shows lack of knowledge (for example, if that "-64" is a value of power, which can only be positive, or if it leads to an obviously unphysical result that the student should have noticed), then one might remove more marks.
* a tricky case is if the mistake leads to the problem being much easier to solve (e. g. "Write the last 10 digits of 2^(64+x)"), and it is correctly solved. In this case, it would be unfair to give full marks, as the student did not show much knowledge of the subject. Unfortunately, this should probably result in no marks.
It seems like your case falls in the first category, so I would see no reason to give anything less than "the highest mark that is not a full mark".
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The short answer is, unless the rubric clearly lays out which kinds of errors merit which level of deduction, it is up to you. I would strongly encourage you to discuss this with whoever is supervising you in this role, as they may have expectations which have not been communicated clearly to you.
Grading, especially without a clear rubric, eventually relies on the judgment of the person doing it to decide "how important is this to the course? Did they miss anything important because of the minor calculation error?" In many of the courses I took as an undergraduate, the rubric was a simple 5-point scale (though you could choose to use 7, 3, 29, or whatever number you like). Roughly speaking, they marked:
5- Perfect or with minimal errors which have at most cosmetic impact
on the problem. For instance, if a student mis-copied a matrix or
used the wrong value in a calculation, a generous grader might still
award 4.5 or 5 points.
4- Minor computational errors. Some graders
will use this to remind students to pay attention by docking a small
proportion of points. Others will only use it if there is
course-relevant content involved but might not dock points for a
student misreading their own handwriting.
3- Major computational
errors. If a student made multiple computation mistakes or a severe
enough error to make their answer one which a reasonable person could
have known was wrong (and did not indicate this) then they might only
earn 3/5.
2- Partial conceptual failure. If a student got part of the question right but couldn't finish the job due to a mistake which demonstrated some kind of misapprehension of the course content or misapplication of techniques, but still did meaningful work towards a solution, 2 points.
1- Minimal progress. If a student made a small amount of progress towards a solution but then went into the weeds, they might earn a point.
0- No progress towards a workable solution.
The fairness-based reason that you might knock off 20-25% of the score for that question (or whatever the minimum relevant unit might be) is that if a student makes that type of error **on every problem** then they do not deserve the same level of credit as a student who meticulously checks their work. If it was possible for the student to verify their answer and they chose not to do so or if they should have known that their copying had failed them, I might mark off an additional point for that reason (because that serves a valid pedagogical purpose: if you could have checked your work but didn't, you missed an opportunity to make up the points).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Whatever it says in your pre-written markscheme. If you don't have one, the UK GCSE one is a fairly reasonable starting point:
>
> **Misread or miscopy**
>
>
>
>
> Students often copy values from a question incorrectly. If the examiner thinks that the student has made a
> genuine misread, then only the accuracy marks (A or B marks), up to a maximum of 2 marks are penalised.
> The method marks can still be awarded.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/01/14
| 1,213
| 4,915
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am doing a funded PhD in humanities and don't really enjoy what I am doing (the topic and area). I applied for another PhD and got admitted. The problem is that I need to apply for visa and wait a few months to see if I'll be granted visa.
I don't want to leave my current position before I know I have the visa (don't want to lose everything and don't want to be forced to go back to my home country as I'm on student visa here).
The question is when and how should I tell my advisor that I'm leaving?<issue_comment>username_1: I've had experience with similar issues and in my opinion, honesty is the best policy *assuming that your advisor is a reasonable, non-vindictive person*. If the issue is just the topic and the area, and not your advisor personally, then they probably want what's best for you and could actually help you out in working out the details (perhaps offering you an interim position so that you don't lose everything, or agreeing on you acting as a visiting scholar in your institution while your admission to the other place is finalized etc.). If your advisor is not on your side, then I would get out regardless, even risking going back to your home country. There's no point in suffering through a PhD you hate.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: **TLDR IMO (and based on classic answers of the Workplace Stack Exchange): Never inform your current employer of your intent to leave until your new employment is 100% secure.**
Adding to @username_1's excellent answer, I would make a few recommendations based on my conversations with other graduate students in similar situations.
1. Make sure that your place in the new program is **absolutely secure** before making any announcement or changes in your current employment. This is common advice on the WorkPlace Stack Exchange as there are innumerable stories of "offer received at new Employer B, informed current Employer A, Employer B now rescinded offer, what do?". This would include accepting the new admission, ensuring that your immigration documents are completed, etc (dot the i's and cross the t's). It would be to your immense disadvantage to make any proclamation at your current program only to no longer have the new opportunity.
2. Do everything possible to leave on a **positive note**. For example, in my department the assignment of teaching assistants is often planned one year in advance. It is very important for departmental scheduling to know how many eligible graduate students are available in the coming semester(s). If you have any departmental commitments (or research commitments) that you will be leaving, I would recommend creating a plan as to how you will leave these commitments on a positive note. This may be difficult/impossible if your announcement will be sudden. However, at the very least, make sure you inform **all relevant commitment managers** and not just your supervisor (if applicable).
3. @username_1's answer. Honesty and speed are the best possible answers **once you have sorted 1 and 2**. You should both inform the new university that you intend to come as soon as possible and complete all necessary paperwork steps. Once all of that is sorted, inform your advisor and department as soon as possible afterwards.
4. This is more for your personal reflection, but see the related questions on this site around other people who have changed PhD programs:
* [What are the ways to transfer from my current PhD program to another one?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/64971/what-are-the-ways-to-transfer-from-my-current-phd-program-to-another-one)
* [Hiring a PhD student who left another PhD position](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/60612/hiring-a-phd-student-who-left-another-phd-position?rq=1)
* [Changing University in First year of Phd](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/44780/changing-university-in-first-year-of-phd)
* [Changing PhD programs: should I submit a recommendation letter from my old advisor if it's not purely positive?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/46053/changing-phd-programs-should-i-submit-a-recommendation-letter-from-my-old-advis)
* [And many more (all questions related to the search "changing phd programs")](https://academia.stackexchange.com/search?q=changing%20phd%20programs)
The reason I say this is because it is **very normal to question the 'fit' of a PhD program**. You likely have entirely valid reasons for wanting to change, and lots of successful people change PhD programs. However, you do not want to find yourself in the same situation two years into the new program. Many people who complete a PhD change their topic of study as a career matures. Ask yourself: is there anything I can do to avoid ending up in this situation in my new program? The PhD is not the be-all-end-all of research. It is but one step in the career.
Hope that helps!
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/01/14
| 1,204
| 5,209
|
<issue_start>username_0: TLDR: Can a researcher include an entire paragraph from another article for which they were a co-author on a new, single-author article?
Copy-editor for an academic journal here with an issue I've never come across before. We work with Chicago-style footnotes.
I have a solo-authored article by someone (let's call them Alex) that includes an entire paragraph from another article in which Alex was a co-author. I only found out that the entire paragraph was lifted from another article through my own background research. Giving Alex the benefit of the doubt, I asked how they would like to address this paragraph: Would they like to rewrite it? Cite the paragraph in a footnote? They would like to cite it in a footnote; however, I am now unsure of whether this is an appropriate fix given that it's an entire paragraph from another article in which Alex was listed as one of many authors, and for which Alex was not mentioned as one of the writers. I'm not sure what to do given that an entire paragraph seems like it's enough to warrant including all the other authors from the other article.
Here are the questions I'm wondering about that will help me determine what path to take with this article:
* Do I go ahead and cite the entire paragraph as a quotation? If so, do I need to tell Alex that they need permission from all other authors in the previous article?
* Do I tell Alex that they need to include all the other authors as co-authors on this paper if they want to include this paragraph?
* Should I just change my mind and say that, after reviewing best practices or consulting with others, Alex needs to rewrite the paragraph?<issue_comment>username_1: They need to give a citation, but, if it is permitted to quote the entire paragraph, then they don't need permission from the other authors.
Whether it is permitted or not is a question of copyright and fair-use exemptions. If they still hold copyright jointly, then each of them needs to give permission. If your journal holds it then I see little problem as the journal can grant a license. Otherwise permission should be sought from the copyright holder for a long quotation.
Even if the old paragraph is paraphrased rather than quoted, a citation is required. Otherwise it is self-plagiarism. In that case, the copyright issue would disappear as there is no "copying".
But I don't see any reason that the other authors on the old paper need to become co-authors on this one. Certainly an individual can extend old joint work as a single author.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It depends how they use the paragraph. If they make it clear it is quoted from another source, e.g. if I wrote: "In this question, Parever wrote "Copy-editor for an academic journal here with an issue I've never come across before. We work with Chicago-style footnotes." -- then it is fine as long as it's cited. This kind of usage would fall under fair use, and would not require permission from the original copyright holder. The other authors of the paragraph would not need to be included as authors of the paper, either.
If I hadn't made it explicit that the paragraph is quoted verbatim, then it is self-plagiarism. [Attitudes towards this vary](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/148797/verbatim-self-plagiarism-in-introductory-sections), and it's probably best to avoid this issue entirely by rewriting the paragraph.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Regardless of whether the passage in question is paraphrased or quoted verbatim on a footnote, it must be fully cited, without exception.
Now, let us discuss the length of the actual passage and its implications regarding copyright. [As shown in this website](https://stevelaube.com/how-much-can-i-quote-from-another-source-without-permission/), there is no uniform legal standard for defining how much quoted text constitutes a violation of copyright. You would need to directly contact the journal in question to ask what is their threshold. Some publishers such as Taylor and Francis have an online system for requesting permissions for long text passages.
That said, in the case of quoting texts from other academic journals, I think it is reasonable to assume 300 words (roughly the size of an abstract) as an adequate threshold. If the passage in question exceeds 300 words, it might be wise to request permission from the original journal (if it indeed owns the copyright to the paper). If the copyright is held by the authors of the original paper, it should **normally** be possible to use the whole passage with the permission only of a single author (this is not legal advice!). A footnote with full citation would probably be the best destination for such a 300-word passage. If the passage goes much beyond this threshold, paraphrasing with full citation is best.
***Personal opinion, based on work experience:*** if this textual passage is 200 words or longer, and was included without any citation or acknowledgement, this is a major red flag. It is quite possible that several other parts of the text are also plagiarized, or that there are text passages directly translated from papers written in other languages.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/01/15
| 829
| 3,410
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm in my second year at uni.
There's a professor whose group I want to get into. My question relates to what's appropriate to send in a "hey can I join" email.
For example, this man quite recently (in the last 7 months) published a paper relating surveying different search algorithm techniques to find ideal locations in a molecular lattice w/ xray diffraction (this is a made-up research topic for privacy haha).
I really like this approach and wanted to use similar techniques in my graduate studies. However, he's so far only published this paper based on it. Should I not mention my specific interest in my email?
Also in general, there are a few people at my school who explore a similar "scale" of physics as this man. I'm unsure about how much detail I'm meant to put in my emails. Are professors looking for someone who's completely in-tune to their specific subfield of the subfield, or do they expect "someone who wants to work with physics on this scale and thinks your papers are cool"? Obviously the former is preferred, but I'm wondering if the latter is the usual.
Thank you for reading.<issue_comment>username_1: Rather than explaining in the email why you would want to join this particular lab over any other lab, I would simply write an email that says something like
>
> Dear Professor X, I'm in my second year at uni and I am considering
> which group to join. I read your recent paper ABC and would love to
> learn more about the work you and your group does. Do you maybe have
> 45min in the next week where we could chat about this in person?
>
>
> Best, anon.jpg
>
>
>
EDIT: Anonymous Physicist just rightly pointed out that this is for an undergraduate study and not searching for a PhD lab as I had mistakenly assumed. I would still ask for a large enough amount of the profs time though to make the meeting worth while. In my eyes there is no point to meet for such a short time that another meeting would be required. So maybe ask for 30 minutes. If the prof won't find 30 min time, then I think this means this prof is too busy for undergrads in the lab.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: First, be careful. Seeing a paper and writing "Dear Prof. X, I saw your recent paper "Title" and I found this extremely exciting, this is exactly what I want to do." can backfire: Maybe this is *not* what the professor is interested in, but it is just a side project, mainly driven by some other people, to which he made contributions. This might come off as you not having looked into what he/she is really interested in.
Second, you don't have to come across as overly eager, and don't try to say things just to please the professor. Most professors are reasonable and critical people, and they will not be pleased just because you try very hard to please them. What they will want to see and hear is why you contacted them, why overall you find their topic interesting and what excites you for that topic (not in detail, but, say, as compared to a completely different topic within the same field, say, experimental opics vs. theoretical high-energy physics). Being too unspecific ("I find everything interesting") is just as bad as being overly specific ("Only your very topic is what I want to work on"), but having *some* ideas of what interests you have, and where your strenths are, is certainly a good thing.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/01/15
| 1,567
| 6,542
|
<issue_start>username_0: What are the pros and cons of living in the same shared apartment building that house faculty members?
Some pros:
1. It's an opportunity to network with faculty and spend quality time together, outside of coursework and research. BBQs, coffee, dinners.
2. We get to know each other more personally, e.g. know each other's families.
I can't think of any cons.<issue_comment>username_1: I think it depends on the country, culture, university and also the invidiuals that are involved. I had some professor friend in Vietnam who would go out drinking to the bar with his graduate students. But for me as a professor, I personally prefer to draw a line between my university life and my personal life. I interact with students mainly at university but do not interact with them in my life outside university besides saying "hello" if I encounter them on the street. Being close to students in daily life might be ok or might be seen as inappropriate or a conflict of interest in some countries or universities... I think it need to be evaluated whithin your context (country, university etc.).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Here is a con.
You might not be as nice or as friendly as you might think. Your presence might be appreciated on occasion, and in smaller doses, but not in large and inescapable doses like being a neighbour.
Maybe you *are* nice, but maybe you're not. We have no way of knowing. But it's easy to dislike one's neighbors. And if you're looking at this as a networking tool, that means that you're going to look for opportunities to interact *more* with the faculty. And if at some point you step over a line, or annoy someone in the wrong way (could also be the spouse or the friends of these faculty members), then you become a nuisance. And you might not even be aware that they can hear your TV or your computer playing, and they might not even tell you that, just like I never told my previous neighbors how we heard them fight every night at 1am. Or god forbid, you forgot to mute your recent adult entertainment and their 6 years old child heard it through the paper-thin walls.
It can be perfectly fine if you only interact with these people at work related events, they don't have to bring their spouses and friends there. But you're now encroaching on their private living space. There's no escape from that.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> I can't think of any cons.
>
>
>
Life is more than just work. Many people want to call it a day and be done with work related stuff. They might not want to talk about work subjects in the evening or on weekends. Sometimes the mind needs some time off a certain topic to be ready to crack problems on Monday morning.
Another issue is that one might not want to spend the free time with work people for personal reasons. Maybe those people simply are not were friendly, maybe those people have (political) opinions you do not want to hear all the time. Maybe some people do not want to socialize with people they are supposed to keep a professional distance?
Naturally at university the lines between private and university life are a bit blurry. Most first-semesters have just moved to a new city and do not know anybody yet. Therefore many will have friends that study the same or work PhD at the same department. But always keep in mind that this does not apply for everybody and not everyone wants to blurr this line
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: When I was a graduate student, working toward my Ph.D., I wouldn't have wanted such proximity, or assumed that this would have resulted in me being a part of the social circle of any of the professors that I worked with, despite the fact that I got along well with them. It's an uneven footing, so to speak, and some of the joys (and trials) in that time of my life were better shared with friends in similar places (or, if professors, not with those in my department). This was true even though one or two of my professors occasionally went to the bar with some Ph.D. students (and I was a part of this). Universities are often wary of or even prohibit professors from fraternizing (being too close) with their students because a) professors have more power than students, which can set up the potential for exploitation, sexual or otherwise; and b) conversely, it can create a situation where a manipulative student can pressure or even blackmail a professor if something inappropriate has occurred. In addition, it can be awkward. The professor may genuinely like the student, but not necessarily want to bring them into their "friend" circle (or vice versa). It's partly a matter of having appropriate boundaries that both parties are sensitive to. Later, I taught at this same university (a few years post-Ph.D.), and discovered some other issues. A faculty member in another area (same department) offered to give me a lift home following a department-wide professional and social event; he became very sexually aggressive once we reached my place, and his (much) greater power was a possible threat to my continued employment. A student of mine who was my age pursued me romantically, and subtly pursued trying to get a better grade than he deserved. Mixing students and faculty living quarters isn't necessarily a good idea! Living in the same apartment building during the Ph.D. years makes it all too easy to make assumptions that may not be true, and to be emotionally vulnerable, particularly if you're the student, or to feel that your private life has been encroached upon if you're the professor. After I was no longer teaching there, I used to occasionally visit the area where the two professors I was closest to had moved. At that point, I felt free to call them, and we would see each other socially. This was not awkward, and was in many ways an ideal (and respectful) way to be a part of each other's lives.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: There are plenty of cons.
And it all depends on the building and where in the building everyone is, and how often you all would see each other.
You should not worry about the social circle because of the age differences.
But one big con is they might try to use you as their butler baby,sitter, or errand boy; and you would not dare say no to them as they, might retaliate.
Probably not but you would not take that risk and end up doing too many other tasks.
Your advisor will have you doing plenty of his personal tasks anyway so you do not need other people also doing it.
Upvotes: -1
|
2021/01/15
| 1,165
| 5,044
|
<issue_start>username_0: EDIT: Could the downvoter please let me know if I should improve my question in some way. For clarity, I am asking whether what I describe below is considered plagarism, and if so what the approporiate course of action to take is.
I am very concerned about an assignment I submitted recently for mathematics, and that I may be accused of plagarism. The assignment consisted of several questions. For a part of one of these, I had come across something similar in a slightly different context in a talk I had given a couple of weeks earlier. It was just an aside around the reading I was doing- it was actually a named theorem, but at the time I didn't register it, but I remembered gathered the sketch of the proof and moved on. With this proof, it is of the form that when you frame the problem in the right way, then the proof just flows and it isn't really possible to modify it in any way. It also seems fairly general- I didn't read it in a paper, it must have been on some general expository website on topics relating to my area of math or a blog post.
So I used this framework for my problem (I iterate was in a different context) and wrote up the proof. At the time, I had a small thought as to whether I should try to track down a source similar to whatever it was that I had come across in preparing the talk. For some reason I decided that it was unecessary because it was just a framing of the problem that I started arriving at myself (which is why I recognised the connection to this different context) and secondly because, as noted above, it seemed like something fairly standard that one might come across in a course on the topic.
But now I am panicking for two reasons. Firstly, I feel that I have not given proper credit to the person who came up with this framing of the problem and proof in a different context (even if it is standard now, it was not once in the past). Secondly, as mentioned above it is essentially impossible to modify the proof once you have the framing, so what I wrote looks very similar to other sources. Heck, now that I've been panic checking for this theorem online, I've found pages\lecture notes which actually use almost exactly the same notation as me because the choice of notation is very natural.
I feel sick to my stomach, and feel compelled to write to someone to say that the idea for the proof was from elsewhere, but I do not know if this will help the situation. I was very tired and writing up the assignment in a bit of a rush before the deadline, so I was less vigilant about referencing than I should have been. As an aspiring academic, I am absolutely disgusted with myself that I did not give proper credit to whoever came up with this proof first just because it felt 'standard' and 'assumable', like the kind of toolbox set of techniques one picks up in a course.
Whatever the official outcome will be, I have learnt my lesson simply because of the anxiety and worry I feel now. But I would appreciate some advice on this. I'm finding it hard to judge myself if what I did was wrong or not, because this is mathematics. What distinguished 'copying a proof' from 'having read the proof at some point in the past and acquired the gist as a useful technique that I am now applying'? I am quite confused.<issue_comment>username_1: Contact the professor now, if for no other reason than to get out of your panic spiral.
Let them know that you are concerned that you failed to appropriately cite your sources and that you are generally confused about what can be treated as assumed knowledge and when you should credit a source.
You could even go as far as submitting a version of your assignment that *does* cite sources more completely.
This can be a learning experience. Go ahead and be an active part of that process.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As long as the question wasn't specifically intended as a research question, but rather an exam question or ordinary assignment, I wouldn't be concerned if I were your professor.
You were given an assignment and in a limited time frame remembered something you'd been told earlier, that wasn't exactly the answer, but allowed you to reconstruct the answer to the question. I don't see any issue with that in this context.
If you were to develop this into a paper, given a longer time scale, then you would be expected to trace down some such things, provided that they aren't already common knowledge (to professionals if not to students).
I doubt that any issue will be raised, but if it is, just explain yourself as you have here. The "kernel" of most of the things you now know were told to you at one time or another. You don't need to start every answer with "A professor once mentioned..."
There is nothing wrong with the [answer of username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/161370/75368) but I doubt that it is necessary to contact the professor. This just doesn't have the *feel* of someone trying to behave dishonestly or even carelessly.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/01/16
| 3,977
| 16,040
|
<issue_start>username_0: So I have had this advisor for about 8 months now. Literally all students in my department talk very highly of him: his previous graduate students (master's) have gone on to have successful careers in PhD programs or are top data scientists who earn six figures.
I just took his class this fall. He prohibited all collaboration for homework, and we were not allowed to ask him questions either, unless we thought there was a typo on the problem or similar. Also, we were not allowed to discuss the material with others i.e. we cannot study for exams together or even talk about the book we were using. Or any of the topics. According to him, "collaboration is for undergraduates who struggle". So yeah.
Well, moving forward with his research. He refuses to read anything I write if it has a typo or I've made a mistake with citation. He won't read anything I've done, if he sees an imperfection. He also has strictly told me not to discuss my research with others / seek help elsewhere. Him I can ask questions, but only on papers / reading that I should do. Nothing about how to learn to program something or if I have a difficulty understanding a theorem. He always tells me "you're a master's student, you should do this on your own, you're not an undergraduate anymore".
Also, he has questioned the legitimacy of my undergraduate degree a few times due to me not being able to prove something he finds "trivial".
Now he wants me to learn programming in C, which we never discussed when I began my research. He compares me to his previous students, claiming how so and so worked 95+ hours per week on their master's thesis for 12 months after finishing all their classes. He idealizes cultures where studying is prioritized over everything, even one's mental health.
I am frankly getting tired of this, and contemplating on switching advisors. Am I just going crazy, or are his remarks completely out of line as an advisor? Is collaboration and similar stuff really that bad and makes you lazy and incapable of doing stuff on your own?<issue_comment>username_1: This sounds pretty extreme, even for the "sink or swim" school of education. If you can meet the extreme standard without going crazy you will probably turn out ok, if a bit of a workaholic. But the road will be hard and painful.
But, given your sense of it, you should probably move *quickly* to the exits. Not everyone is like that. Some of us actually try to be supportive.
---
As for the "why" of it, he just seems to demand perfection and won't compromise in any way.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: I would switch advisors, if I were you.
I can understand him only answering questions for papers that you should be reading; this keeps your thesis focused. Learning to program can be good for you to start. The no-collaboration rule seems a bit extreme.
Please take care of your mental health. Find time to socialize with your classmates, have a hobby, and practice mindfulness.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Let's go through the points:
1. **Perfection**: To some degree, I agree with that. Training to avoid mistakes in the first place, to provide clean work at every milestone is a good habit, as long as it does not interfere with getting the work done at all. It can, of course, and like in this case, be exaggerated, but sometimes one finds that the more disciplined one is in making sure one has done the best to produce a clean job, the more it becomes ingrained as a second personality to not accept second best. Of course, few people can uphold it to a practical 100% level, but of course if one can do so, there is no surprise they get top jobs or earn a lot of money: if a consultant can regularly deliver practically perfect work under time pressure, one is worth every bit of that. In academia, the time pressure is less, but if one has consistently high standards, this will create a reputation for reliability. Which is quite a high currency.
2. **Independence:** This is slightly more contentious, but still can make sense. To some extent, it means that you are able to work on your own, depend on your own judgement and are required to understand things for yourself. It will grow your knowledge and competence as individual. Given that our world is increasingly requiring collaboration, this may look like an obsolete expectation, and perhaps it is. However, if you, as an individual, master this, it makes you stand out from the crowd. As academic, it is increasingly frowned upon to work as individual, while it used to be a sign of particular competence few decades ago to be able to do so. Of course, this is not everybody's style, and in my own opinion, everyone should choose their favourite position on the cooperation slider (as long as it does not interfere with academic assessment misconduct, of course; or one leeches the work of other people to advance oneself).
3. **Work schedule:** Clearly, there are people who are ready and able to work the 13-14 hours a day every day of the week. That's a very particular breed of people. Top-level politicians, with all sneer they get from the public, belong to that type. However, the fact that one can not uphold this should not mean that one does something wrong. This is simply a biological limitation. There is a good reason why reasonable countries have a guideline of a 40-hour week distributed on 5 days; it can vary a bit, but not far; for most people, productivity simply drops drastically beyond that (not talking about quality of life). So, if you cannot fulfil the work effort expectation of this supervisor, there is nothing wrong with you, but this group is not for you, and you better switch group, the earlier the better.
This supervisor certainly earned his fearsome reputation and success and those who managed to survive his "Navy Seals" approach to research certainly did so, too. But this is definitely not the only route to success, and may also not be the right route, either, depending on which type of science one is aiming for.
What is important is for you to realise that there is no shame in deciding that this is not for you if you cannot uphold this schedule until the end. Identify what you want to do and who would be doing this, not just because someone's group has a "guaranteed reputation", but because you like the work they do and their style of work matches yours.
**Caveat**: If the prof is professional, he should be rational and cool about your switch. Mismatch of styles happen, that's the way it is.
However, be prepared for the following. There is a distinct possibility that, should you indeed resolve to switch, this prof will react in one of two ways which you should both ignore: either they will try to put you down and say something along the lines that he "always knew your work was unsatisfactory and it's better for you to leave"; or they will actually try to keep you because essentially what they did to you was what some call "tough love" and "black pedagogy".
If any of these two should happen, do not pay attention to it and do not fall for it.
In the first case, they try to justify their own "failure" to get you over the goal line at the expense of putting you down. Do not get goaded by that. Just take your leave from them in a professional way.
The second case, I think, would be even more despicable (and it occurs, make no mistake): it means they actually liked your work and they tried to get you get better by treating you badly. Once you have come to the conclusion that the above schedule is not sustainable and have committed to the switch, do not be tempted to give in to this and to try further. As discussed above, this mode of operation is this guy's recipe for success - do not expect things to change if you then again decide to stay. You have already sunk 8 months of your life, things will continue to go the way they went before.
**TL;DR** Decide if this style is for you, at least until completion. If it's not, find a different group to work with and do not look back.
**EDIT** As Prof. <NAME> says in a comment, "perfection" in the sense of a text (reasonably) free of spelling errors or non-compiling code is a default minimum expectation.
When I return corrections to a student and then with every correction iteration, there is still a considerable chance that I will find new errors introduced, not in the new material added, but in the parts that have been read but those that are being corrected, this is one of the few things that can seriously test my tolerance. It's ok to make mistakes first time around, but once one fixes them, one needs to take care. I am, of course, not saying that this is the case for OP, just make sure it's not you doing these things.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: This professor guy has lost it - if he ever had it that is.
Plainly all students should endeavor to do as much as they can for themselves subject to time available after basic human needs (this does include social life) are met.
But let's be honest here. Even very smart students can be a bit dumb about some things. Not every discrete math whiz can get a firm handle on continuous math. And putting in hour after hour craned over a book won't change that. Better to loosen up, kick a ball around so quick you don't have time to think only react, a shower, a beer, a conversation, a rest: the following day it often dawns on us what the concept is. That's what college life ought to be about: learning in a spirit of togetherness - not isolated cramming and to hell with everyone else.
You're in graduate school now. All the more important to think independently, choose your own textbooks, papers, approaches - and your own set of ethics. With this guy you won't become independent: you'll become totally dependent on him.
So by all means cut him loose. I applaud your first academic initiative.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: This sounds very much like the famous [Moore method](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore_method).
>
> "That student is taught the best who is told the least." Moore, quote
> in Parker (2005: vii).
>
>
>
Further:
>
> The way the course is conducted varies from instructor to instructor,
> but the content of the course is usually presented in whole or in part
> by the students themselves. Instead of using a textbook, the students
> are given a list of definitions and theorems which they are to prove
> and present in class, leading them through the subject material. The
> Moore method typically limits the amount of material that a class is
> able to cover, but its advocates claim that it induces a depth of
> understanding that listening to lectures cannot give.
>
>
>
Likewise, the primary badge of Moore's method is that an abnormally large number of his graduates went on to become top-performing faculty and researchers later on. Personally it's not a method I would want to use (also I've read he kept a gun in his desk and at least once used it to cow a classroom).
But if it's not a good fit for you, then you should leave and find another advisor.
(The linked article has a rather long list of college faculty who currently use the Moore method, I wonder if OP's advisor is on there?)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: I can identify with your advisor. On the other hand, his statement "collaboration is for undergraduates who struggle" makes me wonder if he may not be especially articulate in justifying his methods or empathetic in implementing them.
This answer is similar to that by username_3. It is largely subjective, based on my time in the US Navy (on a submarine as a reactor operator), later as a medical student and psychiatry resident/attending, and I'm now on my third career as a data analyst (not a data scientist).
Part of what he may be trying to instill in your work habits is the idea of *attention to detail*. It's critical in any kind of work, but especially important in STEM fields. You don't want to be the person responsible for [crashing a Mars lander](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1999-oct-01-mn-17288-story.html) because you used Imperial units instead of metric. That may be one reason he's strict about typos or citations. He may feel that attention to detail is a skill you could improve on. It's a common criticism.
If I can add anything to this discussion, it is that **learning to perform a skill is not the same as performing a skill**. In education, you will very often do things for pedagogical purposes that you may not do in a real-world situation. The idea that you shouldn't learn a shortcut until you master the brute-force method expresses this idea. The idea that struggling to discovery an answer on your own leads to a better, deeper, richer, longer-lasting learning and promotes creativity and "[higher order thinking](https://cetl.uconn.edu/critical-thinking-and-other-higher-order-thinking-skills/#)" captures this idea. At a real job, you will certainly collaborate with others. But you should at least *be able* to perform an entire task on your own (if it's considered a "data scientist" skill). And in education, you need to be able to *demonstrate* that capability. True, your advisor may be taking this idea to an extreme. But also consider that [taking ownership](https://govleaders.org/rickover.htm) of a task is an important step in maturity and (in my experience) one that is often difficult when students make the transition into independent professionals. It was difficult for me.
Short personal anecdote: When I was in college, I would have conversations with my younger brother who was in high school. Sometimes he would ask me a question and my reply was, "I'm not going to tell you because *I know* that is something you can figure out, and you will feel proud when you do." And my prediction never failed to come true.
Even when you don't know the answer and truly can't figure it out yourself, learning *how to find an answer* on your own (other than just asking someone or a simple web search) is another skill that a professional needs to have (and a student needs to acquire). His style may be more Drill Instructor than coach, but he may be trying to engender (and get you to practice) perseverance. You will need that skill no matter what you do in life.
Should you stay with this advisor? I don't have a suggestion there. The other answers on this page will give you something to think about. I just wanted to give what I think your advisor's view may be (even if he uses different words to describe it). If this answer isn't what you need, maybe it will benefit someone else who comes to this page in the future.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: Your advisor seems to be the academic analogue of [<NAME>](https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/246222):
>
> Managing a giant tech company is a lifestyle that leaves little time for sleep. Luckily, Mayer appears to be able to do without much. On multiple occasions, she's flaunted her habit of getting less than four hours a night and famously said that during her first five years at Google, she pulled an all-nighter every week. "I don’t really believe in burnout,” she said in a 2013 speech at New York’s 92nd Street Y.
>
>
>
>
> At Google, she reportedly clocked in 130-hour weeks, a feat managed by taking naps at her desk and scheduling "strategic" showers.
>
>
>
>
> One unfortunate and ill-timed nap aside, she expects her employees to push as hard as she does. According to New York Magazine, Mayer can be dismissive of people who "want eight hours of sleep a night, three meals a day."
>
>
>
Working for someone like her would for me be asking for problems.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: Collaboration can be a source of cheating for cheaters. Education is about learning independent thought and critical thinking, not formed from the opinions of others but by you. Just work hard, and let the rest of stuff roll off. Be respectful of your advisor and stay focused on you.
Upvotes: -1
|
2021/01/16
| 735
| 3,112
|
<issue_start>username_0: How would I credit an author's particular article who is not cited in my text but who has influenced my work? I am not referring to any kind of general mentorship or any personal connection. According to the Chicago manual current online edition in chapter 15:
"Each entry in the reference list must correspond to a work cited in the text."
The problem is I am *not* quoting or paraphrasing this author's ideas rather they stand as a ground of influence on my approach. It seems strange that someone who has influenced my work would not be included in the reference list, meanwhile if I quote one sentence or one word of someone else they end up in the reference list. This seems lopsided to me, even unjust.
I could consider explicitly adding a paragraph about the author's article in question and thereby open up the requirement to include them in my reference list but what if I feel that approach breaks the flow of my article? Sometimes we want ideas to be under the radar as opposed to in the reader's face. I am open to any ideas, or possibly the Chicago style has an answer for this.<issue_comment>username_1: This question hinges on the relevancy of citing this additional source. Whether or not it is appropriate to cite the work depends on the scope of its influence on your work.
For example, if you use a methodology or structure in your paper that is unique to a certain work, you should cite this. As per Chicago guidelines, you would cite the author and year without a specific page number (unless relevant sections are distinct).
However, if you write a humanities paper on new age magic because you were inspired by <NAME>, this is not appropriate. Even if you otherwise would not have conducted your research without having read <NAME>, it is completely irrelevant to the paper.
It is tempting to recount the path you take researching a subject when you are writing about it, however this is rarely relevant to your thesis. Cite work when credit is due, otherwise leave it out or use a formal acknowledgement.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In the acknowledgements section of your paper, you could say:
>
> The authors would like to thank <NAME> (1989) for inspiring this line of research.
>
>
>
Alternatively, if you're using LaTeX+BibTeX, you can make it somebody else's problem: put in a reference with `\nocite{}`, and if the publishers don't like it, they have the option of designing their "Chicago" BibTeX style file in such a way that `\nocite`s don't produce any entry in the reference list.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Citing isn't limited to quoting. What that styleguide says is that work should never be appear in the references first. If it did, it would be completely unclear to the reader why that reference is there.
But something like:
*We proceed to argue that flumms are not necessarily evil, with an argument somewhat analogous to how Smith established the vegetable nature of oliphants in [2].*
is a perfectly reasonable way to mention in your text HOW the inspiration looks like.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/16
| 1,642
| 6,796
|
<issue_start>username_0: I want to share both (1) programming codes and (2) datasets related to a research project.
While I know some suitable platforms superficially, I cannot gauge their pros and cons in too much depth because I lack experience. (In addition, many of their "About Us"-pages are not overly informative.) This is what I am aware of:
First, as regards codes, it seems that the best platform would be *GitHub*. They have a large audience of coders and they inhere a version control system to ensure transparent collaboration.
Second, as regards science-related datasets, it seems that *Open Science Framework* (OSF), *Zenodo*, *Dryad*, and *Figshare* are among the best options. They assign DOIs, automatically link your profile to ORCID, adhere to highly trusted Open Science principles (e.g. C0PE), and are non-profit community-driven platforms. (I would oppose them to, say, *Mendeley Data* which belongs to a large commercial publisher.)
Now I wonder the following:
If I want to publish a paper and share both its codes and datasets, what would be the best approach?
(a) Should I split them by sharing the code on *GitHub* and sharing the datasets on, say, *OSF*?
(b) Should I share both codes and datasets on one single platform? If so, which criteria could I use before choosing the right platform?<issue_comment>username_1: As a user I'd definitely like to get both at the same place. But if there are clear linkages between the two sites, I will not give up just because I have to click a couple more times. So, on that front, not very different for me.
As a creator, I'd first determine if the codes are essential for people who will be using the data. For example, codes for data processing and import, variable management and labeling, missing imputation, and scale/index building should reasonably be with the data set. Other more peripheral codes, like that regression analysis done for the second manuscript, is probably better to stay with the publication. Inside the code it's easy to link back to where the data are hosted, so linkage should be preserved.
Another feature I'll pay attention is if the repository allows you to feature publications generated from the data. If they do, then it'd make sense to put the analysis code there. If they don't, then I'd keep them separate or that analysis would feel very out of context.
The sense of permanency may be a factor as well. For repository I'd probably only submit the data expecting nothing will be updated. If an analysis is still ongoing and codes will be actively updated and released, I'd consider something more dynamic like GitHub.
Also, check where your colleagues or people in your field would go. Those should be safe choices.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Code should always be on GitHub (or other version control platforms). A lot of researchers don't put much effort into good programming practices, but learning to use version control properly is both best practice for developing your project, *and* best practice for sharing the code with others. It also happens to be the best way to handle collaboration with co-authors.
For data that isn't "big", I would rank your options this way:
* Good: Put your data in any sort of data repository, even if it's a
public Google Drive
* Better: Synch your data with your code on GitHub
* Best: Your code handles data retrieval as well as wrangling and analysis
The last option is the best because then you can host your data wherever you like, and just update the retrieval part of your code if you need to move it, and then you only need to distribute links to your code. Synching your code to your GitHub repo works just fine if it's not a very large dataset; otherwise this becomes infeasible.
If your data is "big", you probably want to look at something like S3.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Each platform has its uses, so it's best to use **both** GitHub for your code and a scientific data archival repository, such as [Zenodo](https://zenodo.org/), for your code and data.
GitHub allows you to share your code in a manner that encourages collaboration through stars, issues, forks, pull requests, and notifications. So definitely put a copy of your code there. However, GitHub isn't designed to ensure the permanence of the hosted repositories. For example, one can always entirely remove a repository through GitHub's interface and also delete or modify old code with a Git force push. In the longer term, we can't know that the company controlling GitHub (it used to be GitHub, now it's Microsoft) will continue to operate it in a way that serves science. Consider how many corporate products and services have disappeared or changed tack over the past twenty years, even things coming out of large established companies, such as Google (check [this list](https://www.androidauthority.com/failed-google-products-list-943812/)) or Sun Microsystems after it got acquired by Oracle (Java and Solaris licensing).
Consequently, for a better guarantee of your work's permanence and availability to future scientists you should **also** put your data **and code** on a scientific data repository, such as Zenodo. This will associate a DOI with your deposited artifacts, which will permanently link to the corresponding version. (Once you upload something to Zenodo, there's almost no possibility to undo the action.) GitHub and Zenodo even [offer you the ability to archive a specific GitHub version to Zenodo](https://guides.github.com/activities/citable-code/).
If the volume of the data is large or it is likely to be often used on its own, then split it from the code, and upload each on Zenodo as a separate dataset. Zenodo allows you to link the two (and also the GitHub repository) with the "Related Identifiers" metadata. You can use the `Compiles` and `Compiled by` identifiers for linking code with data, and the `Supplement to` identifier to link your GitHub repository.
For an example of a split associated with a large dataset consider [this dataset regarding the lifetime of code lines](https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4319986) (3.7GB), the [associated software](https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4319993), and the software's [GitHub repository](https://github.com/dspinellis/code-lifetime/). For example of a split associated with an independently usable dataset consider [this list of repositories created by enterprises](https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3653878) and the associated [replication package](https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3653888).
If the volume of the data is modest, it's fine (or perhaps better) to combine the two in a single Zenodo upload, as is the case in [this package regarding the completion of Wikipedia links](https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2528476).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2021/01/16
| 741
| 3,169
|
<issue_start>username_0: I teach two medium size groups (~100 each), supervise BSc and MSc dissertations, and have ~35 tutees. When applications to postgraduate programmes open, I tend to receive a number of requests for reference letters due to a combination of several students asking me to write letters for them, and them applying to a number of places (usually 30+ students × 5+ programmes), so I need to spend quite some time writing and submitting reference letters.
Are there any guidelines in terms of how many reference letters lecturers in UK should write per year?<issue_comment>username_1: Your director says "As many as you can" - in my philosophy these would be those where I think the letter would easily help and, as such, easily written.
1. Create a spreadsheet with comments, and evaluations, possibly link collections if that's easier than to search through mail.
2. Use automated template generation for the reference letter outline, possibly electronically added signature, and write short, crisp paragraphs on what impressed you about the student. One, at most two paragraphs are perfectly enough if you have something good to say. It's like feedback for an essay. "This student performed well because they ..., were able to ... and showed skilful handling of ... Whatever is relevant, give facts and a brief evaluation, this is perfectly fine.
3. Any awards, just mention them.
4. End on a standardized positive note. This is not a tenure reference. If you have to write many references, you cannot spend much time on refined formulations.
5. Group the references together for the same website/uni and fire them off.
6. For very strong students, usually it is possible (and pleasurable) to write more, as you will know more about what they have done. They can be treated in a more individualized fashion.
References for weak students, on the other hand, are very difficult to write, and so they will burn a lot more of your time if you want them to help at all; this will be like squeezing blood from a stone. I do not recommend doing that, unless you have some simple and strong thing to say about them and you wish to do so.
Although it's not up to you to decide whether they should proceed with a graduate education or not, if you yourself do not think they should continue, it is in your right to choose not to be part of the process in that case.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This is complementary to the [answer of username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/161413/75368).
For those students for whom your only contact is a class or two, tell them when they ask that your letter will need to be fairly pro-forma, describing the course and how they did in it. Tell them that other writers may have more valuable things to say about them. Then ask if they are still interested.
The best letters come from those with the most contact, I think. That may not be you. Make sure they understand that "full marks" may not be enough to judge future success.
This might cut the numbers down a bit and also permit you to give honest appraisals *as far as you know* about their likelihood of success.
Upvotes: 4
|
2021/01/16
| 7,049
| 30,473
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am giving a master course with another colleague, but since I am more experienced in the subject, I took the most difficult lectures.
My lectures contain a lot of mathematical equations and require deep knowledge in *algebra*. I tried to make them as easy as possible and even made extra videos to explain parts which I felt were difficult. I checked all available lectures to make sure I explain well. Therefore, I find my lectures among the most intuitive and informative ones.
It seems that my students (or most of them) are not that good in *mathematics* and found the lectures very difficult. They are rating my lectures with very bad scores although I made a lot of effort in these lectures (I have been teaching this subject for several years) this year as they are online. I see my colleagues just recording their old lectures.
As a lecturer, I try to transfer knowledge, so satisfying my students is my priority. However, I feel that my efforts were not acknowledged and I have lost motivation to prepare good lectures. I am planning to simply record lectures and read the slides as most of the lecturers at my university are doing.
Did anyone go through this? Also, how informative is this evaluation to me? In other words, how credible is it to validate if there is really an issue with my lectures or if it is just a biased opinion?
**EDIT**
It seems that the students are comparing my lectures and the lectures of my colleague with whom I am sharing the course. I assume they think the difficulty of the lectures is related to the lecturer and not the topic.<issue_comment>username_1: Student perceptions are perfectly credible *viewed from their own perspective*. But they may not have universal validity.
Yes, you are suffering from the comparison with the other instructor based on the difference in difficulty of the material as perceived by the students. I suspect the exercises you give are also harder for them. Hopefully others will understand that such a thing is natural and that students can confuse such things as you note in your edit.
But teaching is about *student learning* and that takes hard work on their part, which they don't always recognize.
You didn't ask for a suggestion, but I'd recommend that you mix up the material a bit more. Your colleague would probably also benefit from the challenge of teaching harder material. You can assist them in this, of course.
But I agree with Prof. <NAME> that you are doing well to care about teaching and the students. You might mention the issue to the department head to give them some foreknowledge of what is going on.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Student feedback can sometime be a difficult thing for a teacher, and it is sometimes inappropriate that teaching quality is measured in terms of student feedback.
Let me explain this by means of anecdotes. Imagine a colleague who is a good performer, much as a stand-up comedy act. They give good jokes, tell stories, show interesting films. How would many students rate them? Quite a few students might give them a good rating on the basis that they had a good time. However ask them in five or ten years time what they got out of that class, and they might remember one of the jokes or stories.
Now imagine a colleague who works their class. Makes them do test and examples. Makes them go places that makes them think, makes their brains ache from the thinking they had to do. It is possible that quite a few students might really give some negative feedback that this was a class they did not enjoy and might have liked to be changed. However, ask some of these students in five or ten years what they got out of that class and it might surprise you. It might be that they remember what they were taught and use it in their profession.
Good teaching can be preparation for the future and sometimes students can only discover that when they reach their own futures. I started to find this out when I would get unexpected emails saying *"remember me". "I didn't believe you when you taught me that thing, and now I see that lesson playing out in front of my eyes every day. Thank You."*
We have to balance those two aspects of teaching. We have to give them something for their now and something for their future. In fact something for our future and our grand-children's future, because that is what we build by good teaching.
As has been said by others: if you care, you will find ways to improve. You are doing the right things. Keep going. Best of luck.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> how informative is this evaluation to me?
>
>
>
The information you got is that students think your lectures are "difficult" and "bad." This is not informative.
I suspect your real question is: "How do I get useful student feedback?" which is a very broad question.
Some starting points are:
1. Identify learning objectives.
2. Form a hypothesis about how students achieve the objectives.
3. Ask students questions that test the hypothesis.
4. Change your teaching based on the results.
You should also take care to:
* Assess students' abilities before you teach them. This avoids the situation where it turns out at the end that students were "bad at math."
* Do more than "knowledge transfer." Have students practice learning objectives. At the university level, some of those objectives should be more than just "knowing."
There are a variety of places you can get formal training that will help you. If you do not have one locally, you might try <http://cirtl.net/>.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I'm aware of a variant of this: the same course is given by two different instructors in back to back terms; one of the instructor is "hard" and tenured, the other is "soft" and a sessional. Over the years the students have increasingly avoided the class of one to the benefit of the other.
Maybe this quote from [<NAME>](https://profilesincourage.weebly.com/daniel-webster.html) is slightly messianic, but nevertheless:
>
> I should indeed like to please you; but I prefer to save you, what
> ever be your attitude toward me.
>
>
>
In the end, you should do what *you think* is best. You should still reflect on the difficulty of your lectures (is it really necessary?) but it's a pretty universal observation that students disproportionately prefer "softer" instructors simply because of the short term workload differential. Regrettably many students (and their parents) are more interested in getting a degree than getting an education.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: Students are not perfect judges. They are not even impartial. In fact, they are often very, very biased!
* **Differing motivations.** Perhaps they are interested in your course. Or perhaps they are merely satisfying requirements.
* **Grading.** The higher the grade you give them, the more positive their response will be.
* **Lack of reference point.** Students may not have a reference point for what constitutes a "good teacher" for the course.
* **Perception.** If students *feel* like they've been given a better deal in some factor (e.g. final grade, amount learned, effort spent) than they would have otherwise, you might get a more positive response.
When performing (or presenting) to an audience, the content is not necessarily the most important thing. A magician that performs a simple card trick well might be more interesting and memorable than another magician that escapes from a straitjacket while hanging upside down over a bed of nails. It depends greatly upon the presentation and how it made the audience *feel*.
Perhaps simplified content is not enough to earn the love of an audience. (Without a **reference point**, they may not even be aware that it is simplified!) You also need to make yourself appear to be a good teacher. There are various ways you might go about communicating this. Some *positive* ways include: more interactive lectures, questions, discussions, greeting the audience, smiles and warmth.
Perhaps some of these views are a bit cynical, but we are dealing with *humans* after all. And humans are quite illogical.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: You say:
>
> My lectures contain a lot of mathematical equations and require deep knowledge in Algebra. I tried to make them as easy as possible and even made extra videos to explain parts which I felt were difficult. I checked all available lectures to make sure I explain well. Therefore, I find my lectures among the most intuitive and informative ones.
>
>
>
You put a lot of effort in, but is it effective? The problem is that *you* are trying to determine whether the material is hard before, and after, watching your lectures. But you already know this material thoroughly, and have lots of subconscious background knowledge. It's impossible for you to truly judge your work as it'll be seen through the eyes of student for whom it is all new.
You also say:
>
> Did anyone go through this? Also, how informative is this evaluation to me? In other words, how credible is it to validate if there is really an issue with my lectures or if it is just a biased opinion?
>
>
>
I'd say it's credible, but not informative. The students are having difficulty with your lectures, they're probably honest about that. They haven't offered very useful feedback for you to improve however.
I think you can kill two birds with one stone here. Involve your students in improving your lectures. Every lecture, contact some of the students to review the lecture. Assure them that they can speak freely and that you're intererested in their detailed feedback. Explain to them where you want to go, and ask them what they would need to get there. Then use that feedback for the next lecture. This should accomplish two things: (1) you get much better estimates of what is hard for them and where they need more help, and (2) the students feel involved in the quality of the lectures, which is very likely to boost their reviews.
This does increase your upfront workload, at least initially, because you can't pre-record all your lectures at the start of the semester anymore. However, it will also allow you to target your efforts more effectively.
Although the other answers aren't wrong, I think they're a bit too negative about students and feedback. I think there's a substantial share of students that do want to learn a lot, and that get quite enthusiastic and helpful if you involve them. Not all of them, but enough to make a difference.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: There is plentiful research to show that student evaluations are not a good way to measure the *quality* of teaching. See for example [Clayson, 2008](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0273475308324086?casa_token=QECQbOIuq8cAAAAA:A2_dcgvKsM_i3FZINoGR-rYIGzwIsVVnzZQ1HTKX7nYMH7gieIThlt7JQRYLfjDaSb1mgB9DWhnBSw). That doesn't mean they are completely useless however. I am lucky that my department doesn't use teaching evals in our annual appraisal. I use evals in two ways: I look to explain a large difference in scores between years. Did something go wrong/right this year? Did I substantially change the material this year? If I'd made the material harder, I wouldn't neccessary worry about a drop in score, but if the score dropped when I hadn't then it might be worth investigating.
I also tend to look at the free-text feedback to find specific and actionable feedback. For example, when I started teach stats 101, I got a lot of feedback from student saying they didn't understand why it was relevant to their biology degrees, so I changed the program to spend longer talking about why it was important, and spent some time showing how each example was relevant to real biological problems.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: It's probably a combination of the entire course being difficult and you taking the difficult topics. The students don't know your lectures are inherently tougher, so they assume you're worse at explaining things.
I'd do 2 things. Look at the previous courses. They may be weaker than you'd assume, or simply terrible. I remember a Computer Programming-II course where it took me a few weeks to learn their CS-I was "principles" and a few small programs, so I toned things down. Then I had a section that I couldn't reach at all -- turns out they'd never written a program in their CS-I or even seen the language. I had as much trouble with a 3rd "cadre" and later found out it was them -- every other instructor also found them very unmotivated.
I'd also check whether it was an elective or required. I've found electives tend to get more serious, motivated students and if they aren't happy, it's probably my fault. Then also how it was advertised. Maybe it sounded like a simple class (after an experience I've always wondered if students see College Algebra and think "oh, I had that in my Jr. High").
Second. I'd compare notes with the co-instructor. I've only co-taught where each has their own section. Swapping lectures seems especially difficult. The other instructor may be slowing down when students aren't understanding, covering less. There may be a slight mismatch of terms, style of examples... which the students are picking up on, making it seem like 2 separate courses.
With my each-their-own-section co-teaching we had hour-long weekly meetings. With alternate lectures I'd almost want to meet for a bit after each lecture "how'd it go, where did you leave off?"
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: Coming from an masters student perspective: I would agree with you and say that course evals are generally of little use (except when they are wayy below or above the median)
Indeed it's been proven that using methods that improve learning often makes students frustrated and confused while normal lectures make the students learn less but are more enjoyable, more familiar and students have also been brainwashed to think good lecture equal good class. Famous experiment with a video teaching students physics, many students, thanks to confirmation bias and only paying half attention, felt like they learned but learned the wrong things.
Do the same thing where an actor in the video gives the wrong explanation and is corrected the students will learn more but leave the classroom more frustrated and confused.
The best thing to do from a student eval perspective is to inflate your stats by being funny and lecturing well and yes, even making things easy.
You gotta remember the median students want an A not subject mastery. Though this isnt as bad as it sounds, because most of education is signaling anyway, so its not like by being funny and not maximizing the learning and whatnot your short changing students, quite the opposite.
Personally, I think the best teachers play to both types of students simultainously, which is of course, tricky.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: I would say that your experience is one of the most basic reasons why professors used to have tenures. Tenure was an acknowledgement that a professor is expert in its field and able to teach. With tenures becoming rarer and rarer, more lecturers are falling in the trap you found in. With universities caving in to student opinion, this may go horribly wrong in the future.
Myself, I do care about student opinion, because university makes me to think about it basically every day. I am successful and apparently highly respected by students, but still unsure whether I should be harder on them and care less about what they think of me.
This is not much of help in your current situation, I understand. My best advice would be to avoid such situations where students can directly compare you to other lecturers, as these comparisons can be highly unfair. There is also another point you may think about: how does self-selection bias influence student opinion about you? I have recent experience where there was a questionnaire sent out to the students about the quality of online lectures in time of COVID. The feedback was pretty bad, but there was only one student who submitted any kind of feedback! I have the option to do such survey myself, anonymously for students, and when half of them responded, the feedback was actually pretty good - they were satistfied with the lectures and did not even to bother to provide any kind of feedback to the University, when asked before.
So, think of this too - who is complaining, and whether they are representative sample of your student body.
EDIT: I am not sure why this is getting negative grades, so I will clarify that: It is university's job to employ good lecturers, and student's opinion should not have too much weight precisely because the dilemma described by the OP. Placing too much weight on student opinion is University's way of acknowledging that their committees who select professors are not doing their job and really puts University's administration in a bad light.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_11: To answer the question specifically I think the student feedback is valid and you should put it in context of your own evaluation of their learning. What you have learned is that they do not find your lectures helpful and find your teaching difficult to follow. If this is coupled with your students not doing well on assessments then it seems you did fail to teach them, plain and clear.
You mention the caveat that you think they disliked your lectures based on the algebra that you used to on them. I personally don’t think this demonstrates that your students arent prepared for the course but rather that you didnt use algebra in a clear manner. In my experience taking undergrad and graduate courses it is very easy to obfuscate the point of your teaching by wasting time doing algebra in front of them. This is simply fatiguing to follow and might not be the best way to teach.
Other answers suggest that the feedback wasnt helpful because they didnt give you suggestions to improve but I personally think that the student reviews do not serve that purpose , but instead give just an indication of how the students perceive the class. Then paired with the students objective performance in the class provide an indication of whether you failed or succeeded to effectively teach
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_12: A few points in additiont to the existing answers:
---
>
> since I am more experienced in the subject, I took the most difficult lectures.
>
>
>
IMHO in this particular situation, it may be good to tell the students beforehand that you are supposed to cover the "hard" topics. This may help them to differentiatiate topic from presentation of the topic.
---
IMHO the more specific feedback you ask, the easier to sort out general good/bad feelings from constructive feedback.
E.g. ask for *examples* of what was explained well and what wasn't and why (if possible), and do so timely (i.e. directly after each lecture).
---
>
> I find my lectures among the most intuitive and informative ones.
>
>
>
I've also honed some explanations over time to be very concise and hopefully intuitive. However, I think that particular ways of explaining (mind models) may be intuitive for one group of learners but to others some other way may be more intuitive. I think it possible that at this point your lecture would gain more from adding alternative ways of explanation rather than from further honing of the way that is intuitive to you.
Unfortunately, finding such alternatives is not easy at all. I think you've already done a good step in this direction by looking at how your colleagues approach the topic. However, I've once heard a lecture by someone from math didactics who made some (to me) very important points. One of them was that she told us (an audience coming entirely from STEM fields) that we are likely very similar in which (maths) explanation approaches do make intuitive sense to us: we're very likely self-selected with a liking for e.g. mathematical thinking. So are teachers (of any field). However, the student population may not be, meaning that there may be groups of students who'd do better with other approaches.
I can personally confirm that as undergrads in chemistry we had a physical chemistry professor who came from physics and we decidedly had the impression that his explanations just didn't "click" as well with our chemist mind-set as they'd have done with physics undergrads. So this may happen already with rather closely related fields.
And I've gotten feedback in a somewhat similar situation where a student heard both me (chemist) and a physicist colleague on the same topic and told me that it was completely worth while since we took quite different approaches to the same topic and thus they learned a lot by now having more and different "links".
I may add that I also enjoy hearing colleagues' explainations for the same reason: there cannot be too many different links in knowledge.
Now, lecture schedules usually do not allow time for multiple explanations, but
* Over here (Germany), courses usually do not follow *one* textbook, but students are referred to a a bunch of (text)books. When I was a student, we were encouraged to work with whatever textbook on the topic we found suitable for us (also the library typically had different textbooks available).
* You could consider presenting a different approach when a student asks about a topic.
* The math didiactician told us that one of their most valuable tools is asking students to write down (e.g. as homework) how they's explain the topic, or have them explain it to each other and take notes of this.
Somewhat related, I took the teacher training with the [carpentries](https://www.carpentries.org) where I learned that well-designed multiple choice questions can be used to get a quick overview over existing misconceptions/misunderstandings. In contrast to the explain-to-each-other appoach, multiple choice can of course test only for misunderstandings you are aware of.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_13: Some thoughts. First, you are concerned about your students' learning and also about your teaching. As mentioned in several comments this is clearly a positive thing and certainly not universal, if even at all common.
You ask to what extent students' feedback is credible. Student feedback clearly matters to you. Of course, sometimes student feedback is not the best evaluation of the courses they have been on. But an important question for you is this: would you prefer it if your students had these feelings or opinions about their learning experience and *you knew nothing about it?* Given the kind of teacher you appear to be, I think you might consider that a worse scenario.
A preliminary observation is that it seems that you might have been getting better feedback in previous years. You say that you have taught this material a few times. It seems that this year, after teaching went online, might be the first time that your feedback wasn't what you expected.
One question that might be useful is how your students' experience of your teaching has changed this year. There might be something different that you are doing now your lectures are online that you weren't doing before. It is more difficult to sense students' reactions when they aren't there live in front of you. Something very small that you are doing might be making all the difference in the wrong direction and also might be very easy to resolve, drastically improving students' experience.
One possibility (entirely speculatively) is that your lectures are less like lectures now. I mention this because you talk about extra videos that you've recorded, and it seems as though you might have changed your lectures somewhat due to their being online. One thought here is that many students joined up in the hope of actually attending lectures and seeing their lecturers face to face. In stark contrast with what they might normally appreciate, lectures that look and smell like lectures may make them feel more secure, and more as if they are receiving what they signed up for (in education-speak, they may have more 'face validity'). In a situation where students who are relying heavily on the internet can get, for example, a lot of quite good free video material online, some straight lectures directly from their lecturers might, in this new context, be novel and valued.
There are several answers here which rightly reassure you that student feedback can be both fickle and misguided. There are also answers that encourage you to mix the material up between you and your colleague. There are also, lastly, useful ideas about how to get *more useful* feedback from students. The latter are especially helpful. I would certainly take all of this on board. However, even if your students are fickle or misguided, I suspect that you would prefer to take that as a challenge, not as a fait accompli. My best advice would be to not take feedback too much to heart, but to keep adapting, reflecting and experimenting with your teaching styles and material and also to consider the changing needs of your groups of students and the contexts they find themselves in. It is difficult to do the latter if you never elicit any feedback from them.
I have no doubt you will get to where to want with your teaching and your students' learning. But I doubt that would be possible without feedback from your students (especially now that we don't get immediate low level feedback just from being in the same room as them).
---
One ancillary point. It's been suggested that students enjoy easy or merely entertaining lectures. As a director of studies, a teacher and a student counsellor I have found this to be completely untrue. Students greatly appreciate both cognitive challenge and real learning (and loathe being patronised by funny or sensational teachers *who don't enable their learning*). Of course, students cannot be cognitively challenged if they are completely lost or unable to understand the material at hand. It is always worth considering how to make ones teaching more engaging. Engaging teaching never prevented anybody from learning. Just ask Feynman.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_14: First, congratulations for caring about teaching.
>
> My lectures contain a lot of mathematical equations and require deep knowledge in algebra.
>
>
>
You did not mention the topic of your lecture, but (and really, I am not trying to argue about something I do not know) do they **really** need to know that?
If they need because otherwise it is not possible to have the course (say - not knowing what a derivative is and explaining what velocity is **in a physics course for physicists**) then please just skip this answer.
Otherwise:
My teaching experience
----------------------
When doing my PhD in Physics I was giving lectures to students of biology. This was a course that was part of their curriculum (actually two: physics and biophysics).
The people who decided on the curriculum probably had not much contact with the real world outside of academia that will welcome these students once they leave the university - in practical terms, they will never ever need to understand how the Zeta function is used in some physical context. (They will never use the word Zeta while we are at it).
So I simplified it to the extreme. I went for very, very basic math in order for them to understand the **core** of what they need to understand. I lied (ok, simplified) many times so that they get a grasp of the topic. I suffered by telling things that are only rough approximations but at least they understood basic things.
Note that they would have never used the original content in life, at least now they can read their electricity bill.
I was very hard on exams, though - because if someone does not make the effort to **understand** the topics (not to learn them, to actually understand) at the basic level then there is no pity (they are either lazy or dumb. Or I may be a bad teacher).
They had usually good marks because they cared about understanding something they could understand.
My life after academia
----------------------
I left academia after my PhD and went into industry. It is now 25 years and I am faced with math and physics again when helping my children.
I forgot everything in physics but is it is easy to get back on track because I had two teachers like you: they made me **understand**. The advanced stuff I had to pass an exam on looks like a miracle today, but the bases are there and I am a good teacher to my kids (because I understand what I am saying, and use the right level of abstraction).
To summarize
------------
* thanks for making the effort
* make sure that what you are teaching is what they need to know
* **there is a real chance that they will see you as a great teacher if they are taught the things they actually need**
* some will tell stories about you 30 years from now
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_15: ### Should they be able to do that maths?
In my uni course (electronic and electrical engineering), we had compulsory maths in the first and second years. In theory, this was supposed to teach us the maths skills we'd need for the rest of the course. In fact, no-one had told the maths lecturer what we'd need. The result was that basically the whole of second-year maths was 100% wasted effort with no application to our other modules; whilst two modules in the third year (modern control theory and electromagnetism) required matrix operations which we had never seen before, and which the lecturer did not have time to teach properly whilst also teaching the actual course content.
We all appreciated that the lecturers were in a situation not of their making. However on course feedback we all gave negative feedback on those modules, because the engineering department as an organisation had failed to teach in a way which allowed their students to learn properly.
If your students are having problems with this, I suspect there is a very high likelihood that you are in the same situation. Your first step should be talking to your students to find where they learnt how to do this maths. If in fact they never did, or if the teaching was not rigorous enough to allow them to succeed in your class, then you urgently need your department to review the teaching structure.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/01/17
| 6,823
| 29,513
|
<issue_start>username_0: When reviewing a manuscript as a peer reviewer and providing written feedback on a manuscript that is clearly a Reject, how does one decide how much feedback to provide? By "clear Reject," I mean poorly written, lack of novelty, experiments not satisfactory, issues with references, etc. Should the time be taken to provide comprehensive feedback for all aspects of the paper (i.e., what I'd typically do for a major revision) or do I just note the major components that led to the rejection recommendation? In other words, how much time should I spend providing feedback for a paper that is not reasonably salvageable?<issue_comment>username_1: Student perceptions are perfectly credible *viewed from their own perspective*. But they may not have universal validity.
Yes, you are suffering from the comparison with the other instructor based on the difference in difficulty of the material as perceived by the students. I suspect the exercises you give are also harder for them. Hopefully others will understand that such a thing is natural and that students can confuse such things as you note in your edit.
But teaching is about *student learning* and that takes hard work on their part, which they don't always recognize.
You didn't ask for a suggestion, but I'd recommend that you mix up the material a bit more. Your colleague would probably also benefit from the challenge of teaching harder material. You can assist them in this, of course.
But I agree with Prof. <NAME> that you are doing well to care about teaching and the students. You might mention the issue to the department head to give them some foreknowledge of what is going on.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Student feedback can sometime be a difficult thing for a teacher, and it is sometimes inappropriate that teaching quality is measured in terms of student feedback.
Let me explain this by means of anecdotes. Imagine a colleague who is a good performer, much as a stand-up comedy act. They give good jokes, tell stories, show interesting films. How would many students rate them? Quite a few students might give them a good rating on the basis that they had a good time. However ask them in five or ten years time what they got out of that class, and they might remember one of the jokes or stories.
Now imagine a colleague who works their class. Makes them do test and examples. Makes them go places that makes them think, makes their brains ache from the thinking they had to do. It is possible that quite a few students might really give some negative feedback that this was a class they did not enjoy and might have liked to be changed. However, ask some of these students in five or ten years what they got out of that class and it might surprise you. It might be that they remember what they were taught and use it in their profession.
Good teaching can be preparation for the future and sometimes students can only discover that when they reach their own futures. I started to find this out when I would get unexpected emails saying *"remember me". "I didn't believe you when you taught me that thing, and now I see that lesson playing out in front of my eyes every day. Thank You."*
We have to balance those two aspects of teaching. We have to give them something for their now and something for their future. In fact something for our future and our grand-children's future, because that is what we build by good teaching.
As has been said by others: if you care, you will find ways to improve. You are doing the right things. Keep going. Best of luck.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> how informative is this evaluation to me?
>
>
>
The information you got is that students think your lectures are "difficult" and "bad." This is not informative.
I suspect your real question is: "How do I get useful student feedback?" which is a very broad question.
Some starting points are:
1. Identify learning objectives.
2. Form a hypothesis about how students achieve the objectives.
3. Ask students questions that test the hypothesis.
4. Change your teaching based on the results.
You should also take care to:
* Assess students' abilities before you teach them. This avoids the situation where it turns out at the end that students were "bad at math."
* Do more than "knowledge transfer." Have students practice learning objectives. At the university level, some of those objectives should be more than just "knowing."
There are a variety of places you can get formal training that will help you. If you do not have one locally, you might try <http://cirtl.net/>.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I'm aware of a variant of this: the same course is given by two different instructors in back to back terms; one of the instructor is "hard" and tenured, the other is "soft" and a sessional. Over the years the students have increasingly avoided the class of one to the benefit of the other.
Maybe this quote from [<NAME>](https://profilesincourage.weebly.com/daniel-webster.html) is slightly messianic, but nevertheless:
>
> I should indeed like to please you; but I prefer to save you, what
> ever be your attitude toward me.
>
>
>
In the end, you should do what *you think* is best. You should still reflect on the difficulty of your lectures (is it really necessary?) but it's a pretty universal observation that students disproportionately prefer "softer" instructors simply because of the short term workload differential. Regrettably many students (and their parents) are more interested in getting a degree than getting an education.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: Students are not perfect judges. They are not even impartial. In fact, they are often very, very biased!
* **Differing motivations.** Perhaps they are interested in your course. Or perhaps they are merely satisfying requirements.
* **Grading.** The higher the grade you give them, the more positive their response will be.
* **Lack of reference point.** Students may not have a reference point for what constitutes a "good teacher" for the course.
* **Perception.** If students *feel* like they've been given a better deal in some factor (e.g. final grade, amount learned, effort spent) than they would have otherwise, you might get a more positive response.
When performing (or presenting) to an audience, the content is not necessarily the most important thing. A magician that performs a simple card trick well might be more interesting and memorable than another magician that escapes from a straitjacket while hanging upside down over a bed of nails. It depends greatly upon the presentation and how it made the audience *feel*.
Perhaps simplified content is not enough to earn the love of an audience. (Without a **reference point**, they may not even be aware that it is simplified!) You also need to make yourself appear to be a good teacher. There are various ways you might go about communicating this. Some *positive* ways include: more interactive lectures, questions, discussions, greeting the audience, smiles and warmth.
Perhaps some of these views are a bit cynical, but we are dealing with *humans* after all. And humans are quite illogical.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: You say:
>
> My lectures contain a lot of mathematical equations and require deep knowledge in Algebra. I tried to make them as easy as possible and even made extra videos to explain parts which I felt were difficult. I checked all available lectures to make sure I explain well. Therefore, I find my lectures among the most intuitive and informative ones.
>
>
>
You put a lot of effort in, but is it effective? The problem is that *you* are trying to determine whether the material is hard before, and after, watching your lectures. But you already know this material thoroughly, and have lots of subconscious background knowledge. It's impossible for you to truly judge your work as it'll be seen through the eyes of student for whom it is all new.
You also say:
>
> Did anyone go through this? Also, how informative is this evaluation to me? In other words, how credible is it to validate if there is really an issue with my lectures or if it is just a biased opinion?
>
>
>
I'd say it's credible, but not informative. The students are having difficulty with your lectures, they're probably honest about that. They haven't offered very useful feedback for you to improve however.
I think you can kill two birds with one stone here. Involve your students in improving your lectures. Every lecture, contact some of the students to review the lecture. Assure them that they can speak freely and that you're intererested in their detailed feedback. Explain to them where you want to go, and ask them what they would need to get there. Then use that feedback for the next lecture. This should accomplish two things: (1) you get much better estimates of what is hard for them and where they need more help, and (2) the students feel involved in the quality of the lectures, which is very likely to boost their reviews.
This does increase your upfront workload, at least initially, because you can't pre-record all your lectures at the start of the semester anymore. However, it will also allow you to target your efforts more effectively.
Although the other answers aren't wrong, I think they're a bit too negative about students and feedback. I think there's a substantial share of students that do want to learn a lot, and that get quite enthusiastic and helpful if you involve them. Not all of them, but enough to make a difference.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: There is plentiful research to show that student evaluations are not a good way to measure the *quality* of teaching. See for example [Clayson, 2008](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0273475308324086?casa_token=<PASSWORD>OIuq8cAAAAA:<KEY>). That doesn't mean they are completely useless however. I am lucky that my department doesn't use teaching evals in our annual appraisal. I use evals in two ways: I look to explain a large difference in scores between years. Did something go wrong/right this year? Did I substantially change the material this year? If I'd made the material harder, I wouldn't neccessary worry about a drop in score, but if the score dropped when I hadn't then it might be worth investigating.
I also tend to look at the free-text feedback to find specific and actionable feedback. For example, when I started teach stats 101, I got a lot of feedback from student saying they didn't understand why it was relevant to their biology degrees, so I changed the program to spend longer talking about why it was important, and spent some time showing how each example was relevant to real biological problems.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: It's probably a combination of the entire course being difficult and you taking the difficult topics. The students don't know your lectures are inherently tougher, so they assume you're worse at explaining things.
I'd do 2 things. Look at the previous courses. They may be weaker than you'd assume, or simply terrible. I remember a Computer Programming-II course where it took me a few weeks to learn their CS-I was "principles" and a few small programs, so I toned things down. Then I had a section that I couldn't reach at all -- turns out they'd never written a program in their CS-I or even seen the language. I had as much trouble with a 3rd "cadre" and later found out it was them -- every other instructor also found them very unmotivated.
I'd also check whether it was an elective or required. I've found electives tend to get more serious, motivated students and if they aren't happy, it's probably my fault. Then also how it was advertised. Maybe it sounded like a simple class (after an experience I've always wondered if students see College Algebra and think "oh, I had that in my Jr. High").
Second. I'd compare notes with the co-instructor. I've only co-taught where each has their own section. Swapping lectures seems especially difficult. The other instructor may be slowing down when students aren't understanding, covering less. There may be a slight mismatch of terms, style of examples... which the students are picking up on, making it seem like 2 separate courses.
With my each-their-own-section co-teaching we had hour-long weekly meetings. With alternate lectures I'd almost want to meet for a bit after each lecture "how'd it go, where did you leave off?"
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: Coming from an masters student perspective: I would agree with you and say that course evals are generally of little use (except when they are wayy below or above the median)
Indeed it's been proven that using methods that improve learning often makes students frustrated and confused while normal lectures make the students learn less but are more enjoyable, more familiar and students have also been brainwashed to think good lecture equal good class. Famous experiment with a video teaching students physics, many students, thanks to confirmation bias and only paying half attention, felt like they learned but learned the wrong things.
Do the same thing where an actor in the video gives the wrong explanation and is corrected the students will learn more but leave the classroom more frustrated and confused.
The best thing to do from a student eval perspective is to inflate your stats by being funny and lecturing well and yes, even making things easy.
You gotta remember the median students want an A not subject mastery. Though this isnt as bad as it sounds, because most of education is signaling anyway, so its not like by being funny and not maximizing the learning and whatnot your short changing students, quite the opposite.
Personally, I think the best teachers play to both types of students simultainously, which is of course, tricky.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: I would say that your experience is one of the most basic reasons why professors used to have tenures. Tenure was an acknowledgement that a professor is expert in its field and able to teach. With tenures becoming rarer and rarer, more lecturers are falling in the trap you found in. With universities caving in to student opinion, this may go horribly wrong in the future.
Myself, I do care about student opinion, because university makes me to think about it basically every day. I am successful and apparently highly respected by students, but still unsure whether I should be harder on them and care less about what they think of me.
This is not much of help in your current situation, I understand. My best advice would be to avoid such situations where students can directly compare you to other lecturers, as these comparisons can be highly unfair. There is also another point you may think about: how does self-selection bias influence student opinion about you? I have recent experience where there was a questionnaire sent out to the students about the quality of online lectures in time of COVID. The feedback was pretty bad, but there was only one student who submitted any kind of feedback! I have the option to do such survey myself, anonymously for students, and when half of them responded, the feedback was actually pretty good - they were satistfied with the lectures and did not even to bother to provide any kind of feedback to the University, when asked before.
So, think of this too - who is complaining, and whether they are representative sample of your student body.
EDIT: I am not sure why this is getting negative grades, so I will clarify that: It is university's job to employ good lecturers, and student's opinion should not have too much weight precisely because the dilemma described by the OP. Placing too much weight on student opinion is University's way of acknowledging that their committees who select professors are not doing their job and really puts University's administration in a bad light.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_11: To answer the question specifically I think the student feedback is valid and you should put it in context of your own evaluation of their learning. What you have learned is that they do not find your lectures helpful and find your teaching difficult to follow. If this is coupled with your students not doing well on assessments then it seems you did fail to teach them, plain and clear.
You mention the caveat that you think they disliked your lectures based on the algebra that you used to on them. I personally don’t think this demonstrates that your students arent prepared for the course but rather that you didnt use algebra in a clear manner. In my experience taking undergrad and graduate courses it is very easy to obfuscate the point of your teaching by wasting time doing algebra in front of them. This is simply fatiguing to follow and might not be the best way to teach.
Other answers suggest that the feedback wasnt helpful because they didnt give you suggestions to improve but I personally think that the student reviews do not serve that purpose , but instead give just an indication of how the students perceive the class. Then paired with the students objective performance in the class provide an indication of whether you failed or succeeded to effectively teach
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_12: A few points in additiont to the existing answers:
---
>
> since I am more experienced in the subject, I took the most difficult lectures.
>
>
>
IMHO in this particular situation, it may be good to tell the students beforehand that you are supposed to cover the "hard" topics. This may help them to differentiatiate topic from presentation of the topic.
---
IMHO the more specific feedback you ask, the easier to sort out general good/bad feelings from constructive feedback.
E.g. ask for *examples* of what was explained well and what wasn't and why (if possible), and do so timely (i.e. directly after each lecture).
---
>
> I find my lectures among the most intuitive and informative ones.
>
>
>
I've also honed some explanations over time to be very concise and hopefully intuitive. However, I think that particular ways of explaining (mind models) may be intuitive for one group of learners but to others some other way may be more intuitive. I think it possible that at this point your lecture would gain more from adding alternative ways of explanation rather than from further honing of the way that is intuitive to you.
Unfortunately, finding such alternatives is not easy at all. I think you've already done a good step in this direction by looking at how your colleagues approach the topic. However, I've once heard a lecture by someone from math didactics who made some (to me) very important points. One of them was that she told us (an audience coming entirely from STEM fields) that we are likely very similar in which (maths) explanation approaches do make intuitive sense to us: we're very likely self-selected with a liking for e.g. mathematical thinking. So are teachers (of any field). However, the student population may not be, meaning that there may be groups of students who'd do better with other approaches.
I can personally confirm that as undergrads in chemistry we had a physical chemistry professor who came from physics and we decidedly had the impression that his explanations just didn't "click" as well with our chemist mind-set as they'd have done with physics undergrads. So this may happen already with rather closely related fields.
And I've gotten feedback in a somewhat similar situation where a student heard both me (chemist) and a physicist colleague on the same topic and told me that it was completely worth while since we took quite different approaches to the same topic and thus they learned a lot by now having more and different "links".
I may add that I also enjoy hearing colleagues' explainations for the same reason: there cannot be too many different links in knowledge.
Now, lecture schedules usually do not allow time for multiple explanations, but
* Over here (Germany), courses usually do not follow *one* textbook, but students are referred to a a bunch of (text)books. When I was a student, we were encouraged to work with whatever textbook on the topic we found suitable for us (also the library typically had different textbooks available).
* You could consider presenting a different approach when a student asks about a topic.
* The math didiactician told us that one of their most valuable tools is asking students to write down (e.g. as homework) how they's explain the topic, or have them explain it to each other and take notes of this.
Somewhat related, I took the teacher training with the [carpentries](https://www.carpentries.org) where I learned that well-designed multiple choice questions can be used to get a quick overview over existing misconceptions/misunderstandings. In contrast to the explain-to-each-other appoach, multiple choice can of course test only for misunderstandings you are aware of.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_13: Some thoughts. First, you are concerned about your students' learning and also about your teaching. As mentioned in several comments this is clearly a positive thing and certainly not universal, if even at all common.
You ask to what extent students' feedback is credible. Student feedback clearly matters to you. Of course, sometimes student feedback is not the best evaluation of the courses they have been on. But an important question for you is this: would you prefer it if your students had these feelings or opinions about their learning experience and *you knew nothing about it?* Given the kind of teacher you appear to be, I think you might consider that a worse scenario.
A preliminary observation is that it seems that you might have been getting better feedback in previous years. You say that you have taught this material a few times. It seems that this year, after teaching went online, might be the first time that your feedback wasn't what you expected.
One question that might be useful is how your students' experience of your teaching has changed this year. There might be something different that you are doing now your lectures are online that you weren't doing before. It is more difficult to sense students' reactions when they aren't there live in front of you. Something very small that you are doing might be making all the difference in the wrong direction and also might be very easy to resolve, drastically improving students' experience.
One possibility (entirely speculatively) is that your lectures are less like lectures now. I mention this because you talk about extra videos that you've recorded, and it seems as though you might have changed your lectures somewhat due to their being online. One thought here is that many students joined up in the hope of actually attending lectures and seeing their lecturers face to face. In stark contrast with what they might normally appreciate, lectures that look and smell like lectures may make them feel more secure, and more as if they are receiving what they signed up for (in education-speak, they may have more 'face validity'). In a situation where students who are relying heavily on the internet can get, for example, a lot of quite good free video material online, some straight lectures directly from their lecturers might, in this new context, be novel and valued.
There are several answers here which rightly reassure you that student feedback can be both fickle and misguided. There are also answers that encourage you to mix the material up between you and your colleague. There are also, lastly, useful ideas about how to get *more useful* feedback from students. The latter are especially helpful. I would certainly take all of this on board. However, even if your students are fickle or misguided, I suspect that you would prefer to take that as a challenge, not as a fait accompli. My best advice would be to not take feedback too much to heart, but to keep adapting, reflecting and experimenting with your teaching styles and material and also to consider the changing needs of your groups of students and the contexts they find themselves in. It is difficult to do the latter if you never elicit any feedback from them.
I have no doubt you will get to where to want with your teaching and your students' learning. But I doubt that would be possible without feedback from your students (especially now that we don't get immediate low level feedback just from being in the same room as them).
---
One ancillary point. It's been suggested that students enjoy easy or merely entertaining lectures. As a director of studies, a teacher and a student counsellor I have found this to be completely untrue. Students greatly appreciate both cognitive challenge and real learning (and loathe being patronised by funny or sensational teachers *who don't enable their learning*). Of course, students cannot be cognitively challenged if they are completely lost or unable to understand the material at hand. It is always worth considering how to make ones teaching more engaging. Engaging teaching never prevented anybody from learning. Just ask Feynman.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_14: First, congratulations for caring about teaching.
>
> My lectures contain a lot of mathematical equations and require deep knowledge in algebra.
>
>
>
You did not mention the topic of your lecture, but (and really, I am not trying to argue about something I do not know) do they **really** need to know that?
If they need because otherwise it is not possible to have the course (say - not knowing what a derivative is and explaining what velocity is **in a physics course for physicists**) then please just skip this answer.
Otherwise:
My teaching experience
----------------------
When doing my PhD in Physics I was giving lectures to students of biology. This was a course that was part of their curriculum (actually two: physics and biophysics).
The people who decided on the curriculum probably had not much contact with the real world outside of academia that will welcome these students once they leave the university - in practical terms, they will never ever need to understand how the Zeta function is used in some physical context. (They will never use the word Zeta while we are at it).
So I simplified it to the extreme. I went for very, very basic math in order for them to understand the **core** of what they need to understand. I lied (ok, simplified) many times so that they get a grasp of the topic. I suffered by telling things that are only rough approximations but at least they understood basic things.
Note that they would have never used the original content in life, at least now they can read their electricity bill.
I was very hard on exams, though - because if someone does not make the effort to **understand** the topics (not to learn them, to actually understand) at the basic level then there is no pity (they are either lazy or dumb. Or I may be a bad teacher).
They had usually good marks because they cared about understanding something they could understand.
My life after academia
----------------------
I left academia after my PhD and went into industry. It is now 25 years and I am faced with math and physics again when helping my children.
I forgot everything in physics but is it is easy to get back on track because I had two teachers like you: they made me **understand**. The advanced stuff I had to pass an exam on looks like a miracle today, but the bases are there and I am a good teacher to my kids (because I understand what I am saying, and use the right level of abstraction).
To summarize
------------
* thanks for making the effort
* make sure that what you are teaching is what they need to know
* **there is a real chance that they will see you as a great teacher if they are taught the things they actually need**
* some will tell stories about you 30 years from now
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_15: ### Should they be able to do that maths?
In my uni course (electronic and electrical engineering), we had compulsory maths in the first and second years. In theory, this was supposed to teach us the maths skills we'd need for the rest of the course. In fact, no-one had told the maths lecturer what we'd need. The result was that basically the whole of second-year maths was 100% wasted effort with no application to our other modules; whilst two modules in the third year (modern control theory and electromagnetism) required matrix operations which we had never seen before, and which the lecturer did not have time to teach properly whilst also teaching the actual course content.
We all appreciated that the lecturers were in a situation not of their making. However on course feedback we all gave negative feedback on those modules, because the engineering department as an organisation had failed to teach in a way which allowed their students to learn properly.
If your students are having problems with this, I suspect there is a very high likelihood that you are in the same situation. Your first step should be talking to your students to find where they learnt how to do this maths. If in fact they never did, or if the teaching was not rigorous enough to allow them to succeed in your class, then you urgently need your department to review the teaching structure.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/01/17
| 1,286
| 5,215
|
<issue_start>username_0: I completed my Engineering PhD in 2019 and started working in a small startup. Things did not work out as expected. A few months ago I signed a job offer for a postdoc at a (great) US institution. I would have started immideately but couldn't because of visa. They applied for an H1B visa with premium processing for me, which is a big ask and big cost. And takes a few months.
I've been pondering about this over the past months since I signed and I came to the conclusion that I do not really want to do this any more. I loved my PhD, I loved doing research but the output wasn't super great (which means I'd need great output in the postdoc to be competitive).
My main reasons are that I just feel exploited by the system: The pay is about 3x less of what I would make in industry, yet I would continue live PhD life: Working like a pig without weekends and little money. Once I am through, no guarantee to find a (good) faculty position, specifically given my sub-optimal PhD outputs. And even then, five years tenure, again with little pay. Finally, 10 years later, MAYBE a bit more quiet but still little pay. Likely in a location where I do not want to live.
I am getting towards 40 years, I am married and want to start a family. I have full support from my wife for this way but I feel I am having trouble "providing" for the family and once I have kids life will be so stressful. I was so energetic during my PhD but now I would feel so much more doing a nice but exciting job in a big company. Finally starting to make real money. Starting savings. Starting a family and buying a house.
I think it's not really "ok" to withdraw from an offer once it's signed. Here in particular, it's worse since they put so much money & effort with the visa in and my PhD advisor (I have a wonderful relationship with him) vouched for me and made this (partially) happen.
I am torn: I could be honest, bite the bullet, destroy bridges and maybe need to pay for the visa fees (not sure?).
Or I could give it a shot: I love doing research, I'm sure I'd like the work itself and the group and university is amazing and world class. Maybe it turns out great. And if not, I could still leave after a few months.
Is it "ethical" to retract the offer? Should I try to contact the international department or HR first about the visa status (maybe the fees have not been paid yet)? Or talk with the prof first?
Should I share my thoughts first or be upfront from the beginning?
Any advice appreciated!<issue_comment>username_1: I’m not seeing a huge dilemma here. Given that you have decided on a change of direction in your career, your choice is between disappointing the people who hired you now, versus disappointing them in a few months’ time once you finally work up the courage to tell them that you don’t want to do this anymore. Avoiding the disappointment and possible bridge burning is simply impossible, unless you are willing to sacrifice the next couple of years of your life doing something that you decided you don’t want to do. This stuff about “giving it a shot” sounds more like it’s about you looking for a face-saving excuse to avoid admitting to the people who hired you that you made a mistake than about having a genuine desire to continue to explore the option of staying in academia. You don’t sound to me like you have any such desire.
It’s best to pull off the band aid now, apologize for wasting people’s time and money, and allow everyone to move on. It’s not completely “ok”, and you can’t realistically expect people not to be upset at you, but it’s the most mature, honest and professional way to handle the situation you’ve found yourself in.
P.S. since an H1B visa is involved, make sure to check the legal and immigration implications of withdrawing your acceptance before making any official moves. You don’t want to end up having to leave the country or being ruled ineligible for future work visas, etc. Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: By reading your post, it seems clear that you prefer to go in the industry and it has advantages for you. So this is what you should do. Of course, it would have been best if you would have known earlier and you you would have declined the offer, as it would have saved time and money for the visa and other things. But now you are here. So the best is to talk directly with HR and the professor and tell them the truth that you have changed your mind and you will not do the post-doc to avoid wasting more time. There is some chance that the professor may be upset, or he may understand. For example, there was a post-doc who was supposed to join my team, and I spent quite a lot of time to prepare documents and provide an invitation letter for him and he was supposed to come. But then, he told me that he took another offer in another country at the last minute. Thus, it appeared that although he accepted my offer he was at the same time taking other interviews and still looking for other offers. I was a bit upset but I can also understand the motivation to look for the best job, so we still had some collaboration after that. But other people may be more upset.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/01/17
| 723
| 3,186
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a graduate student in mathematics, currently working from home due to the COVID crisis. Even though , yea, pure mathematicians can work from home, but I really miss the campus and the environment which drove me to be better.
Do other mathematicians think the same on this platform?<issue_comment>username_1: My degree (pure math) is from long ago and almost all my work was done working alone, though I had an office at the U. There were two exceptions. One was that the coffee lounge was both a good place for a break and a good place to bounce ideas around. The second was that we had a periodic seminar of a few faculty and students interested in the specific research area.
But both of these (other than someone else making coffee) are doable in the modern world with internet connections. There is no reason to give up the "contact" with others if you have access to email and zoom. Even the seminar environment can be replicated effectively.
One issue for some is the possible distractions of having family around as you work. I had two children by the time I finished, so working at home (pre internet) would have been pretty difficult, even though the work I did was mostly in my own head and not collaborative.
---
I suspect that in applied math, closer contact with colleagues is more important than in pure, but I don't have experience with that.
But, the world is as it is. We all need to learn better ways to cope with that.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm writing from the perspective of a computer science Masters student, so somewhat similar vantage point.
At the start of the past semester it became clear that most classes would be online, apart from a handful of on-site lab sessions with lots of socially distanced lab space. However, the masters program attracts a lot of students from different directions (the local bachelor, other bachelors transferring into CS, and foreign students) so a lot of the students didn't know each other.
However, most courses had a couple of team assignments. Faced with the prospect of having to team up with people sight-unseen, I proposed an outdoor picnic for a meet and greet among students. About twenty people attended and this resulted in various teams for various classes. It was a very positive experience. The team I formed for one particular class became the most successful one and we also discussed the work for various other couses, as well as things like how to navigate life in the Netherlands for the foreign member of our team.
Another thing that was quite helpful is that the department head set up a Discord server aimed primarily at students, with lecturers advised to stay out so students could talk freely. With channels for each course this helped students troubleshoot each other and get some of the classroom feeling of everyone anxiously preparing for a scary exam.
The moral of this story: lots of students are the same position as you, and would like a safe social venue. But someone is going to have to take the initiative and get it started. That could be you. It's not actually that hard, because lots of other people want you to succeed.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/01/17
| 493
| 2,148
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am submitting a manuscript to a journal that specifies "papers must not exceed 30 double-spaced manuscript pages, including all figures and tables." My manuscript has 37 pages. The journal asks to provide a justification statement if the manuscript exceeds the length limitations. Based on previous experience with the journal, one of my colleagues told that the journal is not too strict and generally considers papers that exceed the maximum specified length. Since I am submitting a manuscript to this journal for the first time, I am quite anxious. Please advise how I may justify the length of the manuscript.<issue_comment>username_1: Assuming it is true, I'd say that I'd made a good faith effort to keep it to the limits, considering whether any of the material was extraneous, but it is still at 37 pages.
But also add that you would welcome advice from reviewers including advice on reducing the length.
I doubt that a detailed technical statement will get the result you want, since the editor may not be able to evaluate what you say since that is more the job of reviewers.
Some papers can also be split into two, of course. Perhaps you have considered that already. Not all, of course, but it is worth a look.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Perhaps most important is to explain why this paper belongs in this journal, and not in another journal that allows longer papers. I am not sure of the research area, but in mathematics there are journals that allow much longer papers than 30 pages. What is so special about this journal?
If there is somehow not a more appropriate journal, have a look at other papers in the journal that are over in length. Perhaps none are longer than 32 pages, and yours has no hope unless you trim further. Perhaps there papers as long as 37 and you can deduce the reasons. If there are lots of papers well above 30 pages, then your colleague is correct that this is a minor issue. In that case, do as username_1 says, and explain why this cannot be sliced into two 25 page papers, all the effort you put into making as short as possible.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/01/17
| 3,900
| 16,317
|
<issue_start>username_0: I guess this a question about 'career pacing'. I am currently a first-year grad student studying for a PhD in Aerospace Engineering at a research university in the US. Even though I have only been studying this field for about 5 months, I am already starting to get quite a few ideas about interesting potential avenues for research. For example, possible numerical simulations or experiments that could be done.
I am thinking about pursuing an academic career post-PhD, so my question is: would it make sense for me to keep some of these ideas 'in reserve' for a possible post-doc or tenure track position? If I have one or more really 'great' ideas, when is the best time to pull those out of the bag? Now, during the PhD, or save them for later?
What I'm thinking is: if I pull out my best ideas now, it might be less clear whether they were really my ideas or my PI's; however, if I wait, then someone else might have similar ideas and beat me to it (i.e. publish or perish).
To look at it in another way: when is the optimal time during an academic career to fire off your 'biggest impact' ideas (if there is such a thing)? If I have more 'promising' ideas than I think I can work on during the PhD, would it make sense then to keep some in reserve?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't see a point in holding back ideas on purpose, at least not for a longer time.
If you are doing well in research, you will generally have more interesting ideas than you have time to pursue. And you will keep having new ideas all the time. So there won't be a time when you will have ample of time, but be in desperate need of a great project.
So you should work now on the best ideas you have now: First, people will judge you by your best work and best ideas. If you work on more exciting ideas now, you will be more likely to secure good postdoc positions later. And if you have a fair advisor, they will clearly credit you with those ideas (e.g. in recommendation letters). So you win by working on your best ideas now. Second, your best ideas now might be outdated in a few years time, or your interests might shift, or you might have even better and more timely ideas at that time, so there is not much point in saving those ideas. Third, someone else might have the same idea and publish a result on it in the meantime, making your ideas not new any more. And finally, even if you don't have the time to work out all ideas fully yourself, it can make sense to share them with colleagues: Maybe they get excited by the ideas and collaborate with you on them, increasing your scientific output.
Finally, what if you will not have good ideas any more in the future? Well, then very likely your chances to secure a permanent position in research are slim, and having kept your old ideas will not save you.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm not sure I'd look at it quite like that. Your dissertation has a problem to solve an/or questions to answer, so you do what's necessary to resolve that. That is the main line.
There is no reason to make your dissertation longer or more complex than it needs to be.
But, along the way you will have ideas for other related (and maybe not so related) things that you might pursue. Rather than trying to find a way to squeeze them into the dissertation, creating a hodgepodge, keep a notebook of those ideas.
Make it a formal notebook, with a new idea starting on a new page, such as a physical notebook. If you use an electronic version, keep it backed up as you may not return to some of the ideas for years.
You can keep this notebook up throughout your professional life, adding to it as ideas come to you. It is also worthwhile perusing the notebook periodically to see if you have things to add to earlier thoughts. At some point some specific thread may ripen into a paper.
---
With regard to your concern about who's idea something is, there is no reason you can't continue a collaboration with your PI after you graduate. Collaboration at a distance is much more possible now.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The answer may depend on the field you happen to be working in. As an example, in health sciences, 5 months is an extremely short amount of time. It takes years until you have any data that's worth publishing and as a junior scientist, it is rare to publish ideas or concepts alone (ie. writing a review article, letter to the editor etc.). Those articles are usually written by senior scientists in the field who are invited by the journals to do so.
The focus of a junior scientist (at least in health sciences) is expected to be the production and publishing good data. Once you have the data, the priority is to get it peer reviewed and published asap, and when you do so, you do not want to be withholding any data for later. You do not want to make a hodgepodge as Dr. username_2 said, but in order to get a high impact paper, you want your paper to be rich in content.
A paper that is rich in content gets a lot of citations, not only for the main message that it is conveying, but for the methods employed, individual pieces of data and the occasional reference to new ideas, concepts and **possible future research directions** (and... you are intending to withhold this?:D). A journal's aim is to maximize its impact factor, so a rich manuscript is the most valuable for them. When you try and divide your content into sub-papers, your main manuscript loses some of its desirability for the high impact journals and the sub-papers will usually be extremely difficult to publish anywhere. Some may never even make it to any journal at all, and the process will drain a lot of time and energy from you.
You also need to take into account the human factor: by the time you successfully published 1 paper, you will be near the end of the road as a PhD student, burnt-out, emotionally drained and depleted. The ideas that once looked great will appear so far away and it is not unusual for individuals to prefer spending time with family (or just some high quality sleep) over pursuing those. I found myself handing some great projects of my own to newcomers of the lab which I never regretted. Most eventually got published and I was the severalth author, but at least they made the finish line. I guess my point is, if you discuss your great ideas with the team now instead of keeping them to yourself:
1. You may at least get some credit for the intellectual aspect of the work.
2. The ideas may have a better chance at eventually being realized and your name being associated with it.
3. You will get criticism, which is great. Some ideas may not be as great as you imagined they were, and may have some room for improvement.
One can't do everything on their own and 21st century science is nothing but teamwork.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: When I was a graduate student, I thought I had lots of good ideas; most of them I realized after working on them for 6-12 months were not so good or led nowhere (i.e. they weren’t good at all).
In a competitive field, there is no point in holding back. In 5 years from now the simulation you wanted to do at the start of your PhD will no longer be cutting edge or - if it’s really a good idea - someone else will have scooped you to publication.
Moreover, good ideas actually snowball. A really good idea gets noticed and opens collaborations that bring other good ideas. If the idea is yours, then these collaborators will recognize this as a fact through your comfort and competence with the and will attribute you proper credit.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: In some fields, coming up with new ideas is not hard. But then, you still have to carry the research to test these ideas, and some of them may turn out to be bad ideas or to give results that are not great, even if you though it was some good ideas. What I personally do is to keep track of all the ideas that I have over time. For example, when I read a paper and think about some new possibility, I will take some notes to remember it. Then, when I need to start some new project or give a project to a new graduate students, I will browse through my list of previous ideas to select the best one or to use this as startup point to search for more ideas. Generally, it is better to always work on the best idea first, because you want to publish good research.
But what is the "best" idea? Well, you can think about it from different perspectives such as the potential impact in your field, the time required to do the research (some idea may be easier than others), the risk of failure, the risk that someone else publish it before you or not, etc. So I recommend to list your ideas and think about which one you should give the most priority first based on the different perspectives and your own goals. For example, if your goal is to publish a paper quickly because you urgently need to graduate, you may focus on some easier idea than working on the harder ideas. But if your goal is to get a paper in the top journals, then you should focus on the harder ideas that may have a bigger impact first.
Thus, to summarize, I think you should focus on your "best" idea first, where best is defined based on your goals and the different criteria to evaluate an idea (time, risk, potential, impact, ...) You don't need to hold back ideas but I recommend to keep a list of your ideas so you don't forget them. It may be useful later.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Keep in mind: given you are similarly bright-minded as your peers (including current PostDocs and Professors) and you are accessing the same material they are, it is likely that someone else is already working on those ideas.
So ... do not hold back them!
On one hand, they can be the starting point of a path to your future career steps **and** those ideas can be your way out of a possible non-optimal development of your PhD: what if you feel strongly your ideas are correct, you can prove that, but your current advisor is strongly against those ideas? he may be right, but you better found out on your own if he is right or wrong... and you will need support from people in your field already investigating those ideas.
On the other hand, if you are just thinking about new possible numerical simulations or experiments that could be done, only to improve (not changing) current knowledge or getting more precise data, just piggy-back who is doing that already, experiments are something like 10% idea and 90% implementation, so proposing a new thing is worthwhile only if you can commit
* your time
or
* some undergraduates' time working for you
Keep up your curiosity!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: No matter how many ideas you have, they will only award you one PhD. The definition in most disciplines is an original contribution of knowledge (that is, your knowledge and not anyone else's). Hence, if you are sure of your facts you could certainly hold back ideas over and above "enough" if you have a good reason to do so. Many people, however, complete a PhD for personal reasons and in that case doing one's best would be the key driver.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: Previous answers give some great advice, which is somewhat one-sided. These answers are based on the presumption of having a "fair advisor". If you were confident in that, you would have talked to them directly. But since you posted your question here, the validity of such a strong assumption is questionable.
[Speaking of one-sidedness, some participants even [advocate](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/163813/123042) [+](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/163839/123042) letting unethical behaviour stand, [claiming](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/163801/former-pi-lists-a-non-contributor-as-first-author-on-a-manuscript-for-which-i-di#comment441357_163813) it is for the victim's own good, which makes me suspect the class solidarity motive. It is difficult to give impartial answer to student-vs-faculty questions, because most respondents belong to one of the two groups (guess which one), but we all must at least try!]
Here are reasons why you might want to **hold your idea** from your PI/supervisor and some problems you may face if you don't.
**Your PI may or should have plans for your PhD**. Maybe they already have a great project reserved for you, and are just waiting for you to get ready for it? Sharing your idea may disincentivise your advisor from thinking hard. Pushing your idea may discourage them from caring about you. They may decide that you will be fine and it is better to "feed" other students, who are more receptive or have less on their plate. In other words, you will simply learn more by listening more and letting others speak.
**Your PI's ego and favouritism**. They may think it is their role to generate ideas. Or that their most senior or favourite student should do it, not you. If, *in your PI's worldview*, a first-year PhD student cannot propose a good idea, then it won't be a good idea or it won't be yours. No matter the reality. A spherical PI in a vacuum does not behave irrationally or immorally, but humans do.
**Your PI may have plans on you** and envisages you doing specific work for them. This is more relevant to postdocs, because postdocs are paid from PI's grants, which is not always the case with PhD students. Nevertheless, your PI may expect you to do the work they allocate based on seniority. Changing this expectation and proving that your time can be spent with greater use maybe worth it and is easier than fighting someone's worldview, but still a potential challenge.
**PI might claim authorship even if the work is yours from cover to cover**. You won't be able to protest, because you have to finish your PhD with them, then get recommendation letters etc. You may hope that they mention your leading role in the recommendation letters, but [you will never know](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/1152/123042). Your claims that the idea and all the work is yours will be taken with a grain of salt: read other answers again and infer the consensus about the probability of a PhD student of 6 months coming up with a good idea. It could be the case that you generate and implement many good ideas by the time you finish (which will make your claims plausible), but it could be just one, this one.
Why would a PI do that? Don't they have myriads of their own better ideas? Well... Some don't. There are few practical upsides to being generous (and letting students take full credit for their work), as there is little danger in cutting little corners here and there. The first instinct of some high-score participants here is not to condemn PIs' unethical actions, but to highlight the importance of "having good relations with" a PI for one's own career (see the links in the 2nd paragraph).
Working on your own idea all by yourself can be a great **motivating factor**. You can be simply more efficient when you don't have to deal with the resistance or reluctance of others. Depending on your personality, it can be much easier to recover from wasting several weekends on a crappy idea ("embracing failure") than from the feeling of being dismissed, taken advantage of, or not given a proper credit. The latter can be more discouraging and destructive.
Previous answers pointed out that ideas expire, get published by others, are superseded by better ideas, and tend to get less exciting for you personally. Also, you will have less time and freedom as a postdoc. I agree that **the optimal time for your best idea is now**, the question is how. In addition to working on your idea with your PI and working on it alone, consider a third option: **use your idea to establish a collaboration outside your PI's lab** or your university:
* Outside connections are good for your career: postdoc opportunities with that person, cross-fertilisation of research topics, independent feedback on your knowledge and skills, and a solid recommendation letter.
* You PI might welcome this collaboration, provided there is no direct competition.
* Even if your PI is included as a middle author, you'll find it easier to assert your primary role in the project, while others will find it easier to believe.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/17
| 1,002
| 4,168
|
<issue_start>username_0: Would doing so go against the declaration many journals require that the author has not submitted the work anywhere else?<issue_comment>username_1: It depends on the journal. If it is not found on their web site, ask them.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You have to carefully read to be sure what "submitted anywhere else" really means. Depending on the field (e.g. math or physics), this might only mean that you have not submitted to any other journal, while posting it to a preprint server such as the arxiv is fine. For example, [Physical Review Letters states](https://journals.aps.org/prl/authors/editorial-policies-practices)
>
> The manuscript has not been published and is not being and will not be considered by another journal while it is considered here.
>
>
>
clearly stating that this only refers to journals, and [Nature Physics states](https://www.nature.com/nphys/for-authors/preprint-servers)
>
> Nature Physics supports the posting of submitted manuscripts on community preprint servers such as arXiv and bioRxiv. We do, however, ask you to respect the following summary of our preprint policy:
>
>
> * The original submitted version may be posted at any time.
> * The accepted version may be posted 6 months after publication.
> * The published version—copyedited and in Nature Physics journal format—may not be posted on a preprint server or other websites.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: **Usually, yes, you can.**
arXiv is a preprint server. Preprints are not like submitting a paper for review at another journal, they do not involve formal peer review, and arXiv is not a journal. Many (most?) publishers have explicit policies that deal with preprints as well, and they are usually minimally restrictive, e.g. [Elsevier](https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/sharing):
>
> **Preprint**
>
>
> * Authors can share their preprint anywhere at any time.
> * If accepted for publication, we encourage authors to link from the preprint to their formal publication via its Digital Object Identifier (DOI). Millions of researchers have access to the formal publications on ScienceDirect, and so links will help your users to find, access, cite, and use the best available version.
> * Authors can update their preprints on arXiv or RePEc with their accepted manuscript .
>
>
>
with caveats
>
> * Some society-owned titles and journals that operate double-blind peer review have different preprint policies. Please check the journals Guide for Authors for further information.
> * Preprints should not be added to or enhanced in any way in order to appear more like, or to substitute for, the final versions of articles.
>
>
>
So you are usually free to post an article on arXiv, even before submitting it for peer review. Exceptions can apply if the journal you submitted to operates double-blind peer review.
Your question asks about something else, which is whether journal policies that say "has not submitted the work anywhere else" prohibits you from submitting to arXiv. Usually it doesn't, because this journal policy is typically of the form "if you submit here, your paper is not currently under review by another journal". Since arXiv is not a journal, there is no issue. Again here's another policy page from one of Elsevier's journals:
>
> **Submission declaration and verification**
>
>
> Submission of an article implies that the work described has not been published previously (except in the form of an abstract, a published lecture or academic thesis, see 'Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication' for more information), **that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere**, that its publication is approved by all authors and tacitly or explicitly by the responsible authorities where the work was carried out, and that, if accepted, it will not be published elsewhere in the same form, in English or in any other language, including electronically without the written consent of the copyright-holder. To verify originality, your article may be checked by the originality detection service Crossref Similarity Check.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/01/18
| 1,237
| 5,031
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am doing a literature review for a project and I have come across recent papers in top journals where one of the co-authors is a famous Statistician (<NAME>, 1951 – 2016). This is an example that motivated my question, but my question applies in general. Reviews in those journals usually take less than 2 years (in most cases, about a year). Thus, the papers where submitted a fair amount of time after the famous co-author passed away.
My question is, how do editors check (if at all) if the authors actually worked on those projects with the late famous co-author in order to (i) justify their inclusion, and (ii) determine if the inclusion of that co-author does not follow some sort of political move to increase the chances of getting a paper accepted.<issue_comment>username_1: Do not add fake authors because they are famous or politically connected. It is unethical and often ineffective. (This is for future readers. I did not think the asker would do this.)
Journals never independently check to see if extra authors have been added inappropriately. It is impossible for a journal to prove that an author did not earn authorship without an author's cooperation. Some journals do email all authors, using the list included with the submission, which might cause a (living) author to point out an error.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: This situation can happen, just like some professors have been caught putting the name of their child or their spouse on their paper in the past.
Generally, the editor will not verify if authors really contributed to a paper because it would be hard to verify. Hence, journals adopts some simple mechanism such as requiring that authors disclose what are the contributions of each author at the time of submission, some journals will also send an e-mail to each author to notify them of the submission, some journals require authors to use official e-mail addresses, and some journals also require that authors sign a document when submiting.
Upon receiving a paper, some journals do a pre-screening where they check for plagiarism, if the paper is out of topic and other problems, before sending to reviewers. During that phase, if something is suspicious, the editor could try to investigate more. Or if the reviewers subsequently find something suspicious, they could also raise questions during the review process.
But generally, it is not easy to discover such cases unless it is quite obvious or some authors talk about what happened to the editor.
For the article that you mentioned, it is maybe correct because top journals sometimes not only have a long review time (1 or 2 years), but also have a backlog of papers to publish that can extend to 2 years in some cases. Maybe that the famous statistician has participated to an earlier draft. But in any case, it is hard to verify this.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I'm very much alive, and have appeared as a co-author on a paper published 6 years after my contribution.
Delays can happen for many reasons. In my case, the work I did was a crucial early step, and the group couldn't take it further. By the time they could, I had moved on, but my contribution was still enough to warrant authorship. This was in a field that normally moves fairly quickly (work is normally published within about a year).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: As a partial answer with examples, sometimes research takes time to get started, finish, and published. Especially if graduate students are involved.
For example, [<NAME>](https://www.depts.ttu.edu/agriculturalsciences/news/posts/2012/01/texas-tech-horn-professor-wildlife-scientist-warren-ballard-dies-a-64.php) was wildlife professor at Texas Tech who died from cancer in 2012. He had new graduate students when he died as well as served on committees and had ongoing grants funding research with collaborators.
I do not know the specific, but here are some possible reasons for the long publications time:
* **Completion of field work:** Studies he helped designed were ongoing at the time of his death and some may not been started until after his death.
* **Graduate student chapters to publication:** Graduate students in his field often do not submit their dissertation chapters until after they defend. Also, this step takes time, especially if a new advisor takes over mentoring students.
* **Post-defense delays with former students:** Post-defenses paper are often delayed because the former students often do not have time to complete papers quickly (e.g., new jobs).
Hence, he has legitimate, co-authored, [publications](https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/Warren-B-Ballard-11428716) ~8 years after his death.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: Just come into my mind, <NAME> passed away in March 2016.
He has published a lot of papers since then:
<https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=9VeRxLIAAAAJ&view_op=list_works&sortby=pubdate>
Upvotes: -1
|
2021/01/18
| 1,307
| 5,558
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am having serious trouble with my previous university email account (Office365), provided by the university where I finished my master’s studies last year (I am currently pursuing a PhD at another university in a different country). The account is still active but I am no longer using it to send any email, although I have been receiving messages for alumni.
A few days ago, for a reason I still do not understand, a blank Teams meeting invitation was sent FROM my account to multiple professors and faculty members. The account seems to be hacked. I noticed it today when I received a notification saying that one of the recipients “rejected” the invitation. I am very confused and embarrassed.
I successfully cancelled the Teams meeting (which was automatically added to my calendar), but then, I logged out of that account (just to check my other account), and now I can no longer log into it again.
I am going to contact the university for technical support, but here is my question: Should I send an apology email to the recipients of the invitation? I want to apologize, but it’s been more than half a year since I graduated, and I no longer get in touch with any of them. And more than half of them are the ones with whom I interacted only once during my studies (e.g. to ask for an internship opportunity), and they probably do not even remember/recognize me. Also, except for the one who rejected the invitation, none has reacted to it in any way, so I am assuming that they haven’t yet seen the invitation or simply ignored it, noticing that it was mistakenly sent.
Would it be appropriate for me to send them an apology email? Or would that just end up bothering them, given that they are all busy and keep receiving numerous emails every day?
Any advice or suggestions are highly appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: Contact tech support and let them know what happened. They can probably clean it up appropriately. The apology message might be better if it comes from them. In any case, ask them for advice.
Perhaps you need to pay more attention to passwords and watch out for phishing attacks.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The first step is to reset your password, not just on this account, but everywhere that you use the same password or have easy to guess passwords.
Then contact your IT support for advice. They will handle the communication to your alumni.
To avoid this, or something worse happening again I would recommend using a password management application, these do more than just store your passwords, they can also randomly generate complex passwords that you will never need to remember.
Activate multi-factor authentication on every account that allows it.
Search the Microsoft website on [how to recover a hacked or compromised Microsoft account](https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/account-billing/how-to-recover-a-hacked-or-compromised-microsoft-account-24ca907d-bcdf-a44b-4656-47f0cd89c245).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Would it be appropriate for me to send them an apology email?
>
>
>
The problem is that somebody else sent a useless automated message. If you send another automated message, this will not help the situation. So no.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: If you still have the list of recipients of those team invitations, consider sending a message to them **immediately** to **warn** them. Viewing or accepting such invitations could run the risk of getting a virus or revealing personal data on a phishing website. This is the case when every minute counts, since a warning is only good if the recipient sees it before opening the spam message.
Apology is generally a good idea, but in this case you actually shouldn't sound too apologetic. You don't want to sound guilty and make people assume this incident is your fault, when in fact it may be someone else's.
And make sure to resolve this quickly: either reset the password on the account if you still need it, or contact the IT and ask them to disable it. An apology for the spam message followed by more spam doesn't look good.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Ditto on using a password manager. Dashlane is a free one that gets decent reviews - get the browser add-in(s) and the phone app and you'll have access to your passwords from all of your devices. Another thing I would do is check all of your email accounts on <https://haveibeenpwned.com/> to see if they've ever been involved in a large data breach. I would recommend signing up for alerts from that site as well.
Remember - don't reuse account passwords. You can lose access to multiple accounts that way like dominos.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Sending an apology for [compromised-account](https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0376-hacked-email) spam would likely only make things worse, especially since your university's email admins may have been able to delete some of the messages before the recipients even saw them.
If you cannot log back into the account, it's possible that IT saw suspicious activity and froze it, but it's also possible that someone maliciously changed the password.
Aside from **immediately** contacting your IT department for help *and following their advice*, you should change your password, change your password on any site where you use the same password, and thoroughly check the settings on your account for any unauthorized changes, such as an auto-reply message, email signature, or forwarding address with unfamiliar contents.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/18
| 3,971
| 16,570
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've been thinking a lot before asking this question, but now I feel it's time to seek some advice. I started my PhD a couple of months ago and now it is almost 4 months since I put my hands on this project. I joined a very small research group (I'm the only PhD) to embark on an industrial PhD in the UK. I moved away from my home country, I rented a flat and my girlfriend joined me a few months ago. Should be an ideal condition but for me, it's a nightmare.
I don't feel well. Every day a sense of depression and anxiety is constantly present thus forcing me to spend most of the time alone. I don't like my project and I don't like the environment despite having two supervisors who are very kind to me. I don't want to stay in this condition anymore but at the same time, I don't know what to do. I don't have the courage to speak with my supervisors and explain my condition.
Does someone have any advice on what should I do?
P.S. I would like to add some details just to give a clearer picture of my condition. I graduated with honours during both my master and my bachelor's degree. I was the best student of my years in my course. I felt that a PhD should be the most suitable choice for me.
I decided to start this industrial PhD in collaboration with a huge company thinking that after it I would be immediately hired. But now I don't know exactly if this is my way. I'm constantly obsessed with the idea of going back to the lab every day... it's really hard and demotivating. I started thinking of getting a job where you do your hours and then you go back home without any thoughts, problems, or pressure.
P.P.S. Thanks for all your answers, it's quite an encouraging fact that some other people went through the same thoughts. I feel that I will start speaking with my supervisors to inform them about my condition. However, I have some concerns connected with the founding of the project. In the case I'll quit, do I have to return all the salaries received? Some of you have experience with that?<issue_comment>username_1: No one here should tell you whether to quit or not. But you need to find a changed situation *somehow*. Some suggestions...
Talk to your supervisor about the situation with your project and see whether there is some alternative that will make things better. Another project? A modification of this one? More assistance?
Talk to others in the research group about how they see the project and its likelihood of success. Are they happy or just coping like yourself?
Talk to a mental health professional about how you can arrange things so that you don't fall into depression. Many universities provide professional counseling.
Talk to your girlfriend about her wishes, goals, and plans. Ask her if she has any advice for you.
Find some "escape" activities so that you don't spend too much time working. My escape was bicycling with a small group. It had the advantage of being aerobic, but other things can help. Resting your mind can actually aid productivity.
Think about your goals as well as whatever options are open to you. Options about staying as well as about leaving. What are the pros and cons of each? How can you achieve your goals and stay sane?
The hardest part, as you describe it, is to find the courage to talk to your supervisors. But that is probably the essential step to find a way out of the dilemma. But don't just continue on, hoping for the best. Some situations need to be escaped.
---
The biggest mistake I made in my doctoral studies was not speaking up for myself at a certain point. In my case it was because I had an unhelpful advisor. But my lack of courage cost me about three years. I was successful after a change of institutions and only realized later how I'd missed the opportunity. There was also the issue of burnout after an intense undergraduate program.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: username_1’s answer makes good suggestions to begin improving how you feel, but I’d like to add that, based on the information you provide here, my answer to your question is: “No, not yet.”
That’s because your question describes how you are uncomfortable in your current situation, but doesn’t talk about alternatives at all. The two points you single out are that you don’t like your project and your “environment.” Depending on what you mean by environment, they can both possibly be changed by talking to your advisers as was mentioned priorly here too, and maybe that would help.
But as long as you really don’t know what else you would do - maybe that’s not the case and you just failed to mention it here -, dealing with depression and falling into a void after quitting is quite possibly going to make things even worse. At least there’s a chance it could happen. To have something to hold onto professionally tends to help with these feelings; moving back in with your parents, or such, can further negatively impact your mood as you probably would find yourself obsessing about what to do now.
I’d follow username_1’s advice, talk to your peer and your advisers, but also focus on thinking about what else you could and would like to do, as well as where you see yourself in 10 years. When you have a better idea about that, it’s time to choose.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I know your dilemma as I was in the same position in 2015. I started a Social Science PhD at University of Kent in 2012 part time for 5 years. The first couple of years were great then by the third year I started to feel more pressure because of more work responsibilities. On top of that I had financial pressure as I did not qualify for ERC bursary and had to self-fund. I spent a few months weighing up why I wanted to do the PhD and what I hoped to get out of it and balanced this against the stress and financial pressure I was experiencing. The main reason I wanted to do the PhD was to enhance my career prospects. I decided that there was no guarantee that I would get a better job with higher pay than my current job unless I stayed in academia, which I didn't want too. However, I had invested 3 years already so I did not want to make a mistake I would later regret.
In the end I chose the safe option and spoke to my supervisor about my problems (remember that they are not there to just supervise your project but also address any issues that may impact on your studies). We decided that I could defer my studies for a year and rejoin if I wanted. That was great for me and took a lot of pressure off my shoulders, as I knew I could go back to my PhD if I wanted to after a year and I could just use that year to focus on my job and save money. In the end after a year I was really enjoying my job and became a private contractor which gave me more freedom. I still had an appetite for academic study but I reasoned that unless I was going to be an academic having a PhD would not present a life changing opportunity for me.
That was 8 years ago and I was 30 when I started my PhD. In that time I have achieved all my career goals and now I am considering going back and finishing my thesis which I have kept in my head all this time. I think you are much younger than me when I started my PhD, so my advice to you is that you have plenty of time to pursue your PhD. Don't put yourself under any unnecessary pressure that might compromise your health. I would speak to your supervisor and I'm sure they will be understanding especially under the current climate in which a lot of people are suffering in silence from loneliness/depression etc. Ask if you can defer for a year and use that time to recover and do whatever motivates you and brings you happiness.
You’re a young guy. You can do a PhD anytime. Sometimes we need time to develop as a person before we commit to intellectually rigorous tasks like undertaking a PhD. Keep your head up and practice yoga and breathing exercises to clear your mind away from any negative thoughts. Also speak to your GP. Talk therapy will help you now so speak to someone you trust.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I started an industry-funded PhD years ago. These are often regarded as being very prestigious. They often come with bigger stipends, better resources and better industry networking opportunities.
I hated it.
Some people like the structure and the guidance that comes with these sorts of projects. For me however it never really felt like 'my' project. Also my supervisor was a shithead. So I bailed and never looked back.
It came at a huge cost. But for me on balance it was the right decision.
Years later I returned to do my own project in a different field and it was the best decision I ever made.
As others have said - there is rarely a single reason to stay or go - its the kind of thing you have to consider on balance.
Fortunately there are many factors that can be adjusted, including switching to an entirely different project. Taking leave can also clear the head.
You are certainly not the first person to feel this way - and I expect your supervisors may surprise you with how supportive they are. Some are crap but most are great and are there to support their candidates.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: It is too soon for you to make a decision to leave, but leaving may turn out to be the right answer.
The first thing you need to do is *access your university's mental health services* (I'm not in the UK but my understanding is most universities have counselling services available). You should also speak with your GP as physical ailments can cause depression and anxiety. You can access mental health services from outside the university, however one advantage of using services provided by your university is they often have considerably more experience with students in similar situations to yourself.
Please don't underestimate the effects of mental health on your happiness and enthusiasm for your work. It could be that your PhD studies are negatively impacting your mental health (that's not at all uncommon!). It could be that your currently poor mental health is what is driving your lack of enthusiasm for your project. Both can be happening at once!
You mention that your supervisors are nice - that's great! That means that you should also feel comfortable talking to them about your situation. You are not the first student in this situation and good supervisors will work with you to help you meet your goals. Don't lead with "I don't like the project" - instead focus on the impacts on you - struggling to be enthusiastic / not sure where it will lead / worried about progress. Not liking the project might be the central issue - but your supervisors are likely very invested in the project, and I don't like your work is a hard thing to respond to.
Starting a PhD can be very overwhelming. Sometimes, finding new ways of working can dramatically change how you experience your PhD. It might be having your supervisors provide more structure for what you are doing during these first weeks. It might be them backing off and giving you more time to find your feet and work your own way. Your supervisors being nice does not necessarily mean that their way of working is suitable for you. Nice supervisors aren't always *effective* supervisors. This company provides some free resources for PhD students that you might find helpful <https://www.ithinkwell.com.au>.
You mentioned that you don't like your project. What is not clear to me is if this is a new feeling, or if you never liked the project. Is this a new feeling? Were you ever excited about your project? Has something changed? Does the project differ to what you were expecting?. If something has changed you need to work through WHY you no longer like the project and determine if that is something that can be fixed. If, however, you never liked the project, then I do not think you should stay and attempt a PhD on something that has never interested you. That being said - you should consider your Visa and financial situation (especially with travel & employment limitations of a pandemic) before withdrawing.
It may be that a PhD is not the right path for you. It may be that *this* PhD is not the right path for you. It may be that *the way you are going about this PhD right now* is not the right path for you.
So key steps before you decide to stay or leave:
1. Get professional medical help for the depression and anxiety you are experiencing
2. Get specific about what you don't like about your PhD - are these things that can be changed?
3. Look into the financial and visa implications of leaving - have an escape plan that works for you and your girlfriend
4. Talk to your supervisor
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: No-one has yet mentioned the twin elephants in the room, Covid and lockdown. One of the major reasons you may be feeling socially isolated is that the UK is presently in a very weird situation where a lot of the things that a young and happening frood like you would be doing to feel more socially included can't be done. Socialisation with other people from your own country is out (ex-pat groups are a great way to cope with culture-shock), going to the cinema is out, going out for dinner and drinks with university colleagues is out, etc etc etc.
**Fear not!** The situation is likely to change quite rapidly now that we've begun a programme of vaccination with normality hopefully returning in the next few months. You'll soon learn why they call us '*Cool Britannia*' when you suddenly find that all of the social support mechanisms, entertainments and other paraphernalia of British life (that presumably was what encouraged you to choose the UK in the first place) suddenly comes thundering back into action.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: It seems we've driven into a similar situation but from different sites.
I have no magic remedy nor try to find one for you while still looking for mine.
Just check this course: <https://www.coursera.org/learn/the-science-of-well-being>
It's free.
I think you will be surprised.
Bart
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: You are stressed by your current situation. When I am stressed, I try and remove the sources of stress, or make changes to my life, to improve personal wellbeing, to become happier. You may be suffering a little from burnout after doing a Bachelors and Masters degrees, and feel a more relaxing change is required, though normal jobs can be very stressful themselves. As others have said, you have the option of returning to a PhD at a later date. Yet, unhappiness with your day-to-day work situation means that something has to change.
You cannot continue living with stress, therefore, what are your options? Leave the PhD or get changes to the current working situation. There are consequences to both. If you leave the PhD, depending upon your situation, you may need to leave the UK. Alternatively, changes to the current arrangements will require discussions with supervisors and University support staff, you are not the first person in this situation. They will help you.
If you decide to leave it may take a few weeks to go through due processes. A compromise, if your work is suitable, is to plan to leave after one year, enough time to sort out affairs, and not make your time in the UK a waste. I.e., see if you can convert to a Masters by Research. Having a closer endpoint on the horizon would give you something to focus on every day.
To answer your last question. No, you do not need to give back any salary paid.
>
> Although you may not always be able to avoid difficult situations, you
> can modify the extent to which you can suffer by how you choose to
> respond to the situation. - <NAME> XIV
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: One of the reasons to do a Ph.D is to learn self-discipline. If you find that you don't "switch off" when you get home... learn to switch off when you get home!
It's actually a very common problem in all sorts of jobs these days. The job may not require people to be "on the job" all the time but a lot of people do. Your brain will work on a task for two reasons:
1. If you pressure it to (anxiety)
2. If you get excited by its ideas (reward)
Set the boundaries, break the habits, remember that your work will get done even if you don't constantly work on it. Your work really will be more effective if you have good quality down time.
If after this you still aren't keeping up with the project, it's simply not suitable. Change your project, or defer, or quit.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/01/19
| 1,525
| 6,671
|
<issue_start>username_0: The title to this question is the best way I can think offhand of phrasing it - but to anyone with a more widely accepted phrasing, please feel free to edit it.
Basically it's about a common experience in research where we have had all the requisite facts for some time (in some cases for years) but nonetheless miss viable conclusions that could yield opportunities to advance our work. As frustrating as the usual struggles of research are, the self-reproach felt after finally realizing something we could easily have obtained earlier is so much worse.
After one such occasion in my life, I had to ask myself hard questions about my research methodologies. I wondered if I had been unwise to ignore other research students' practice of keeping an index-card file. The index-card system was not simply a memory aid - it also allowed one to make multiple cross-associations between items of interest. Although perhaps 95% of the effort of maintaining an index-card system for one's research was in vain, the final 5% effort could save one's blushes.
More recently, reflecting on a research topic from earlier in my life, I came to a superficially counterintuitive but rationally interesting conclusion after putting 4 long-known facts together. Putting aside the suggestion of neglectful supervision of my research - I know few PhDs with genuinely adequate supervisors let alone ones who would constructively criticize the researcher - I have to wonder what would have been if newbee PhD candidates were first taught some means of collating their research facts and logically/sensibly constructing conclusions or exclusions from these.
May I ask PhD researchers here if today's academia provides any 'bootcamp' or practical methodologies for research reasoning prior to formally beginning their work ?
The methodologies I have in mind might be things like:
* Writing out facts as premisses and trying to link them logically together
* Sketching out concept associations or 'mind-maps' of facts or ideas
* Speaking aloud some conclusions in the hope that, on hearing them, implications may be stimulated
* Dialogues on blocking issues with a knowledgable colleague
* Dialogues with common-sense people *without* expertise in one's research domain<issue_comment>username_1: After looking around, it seems that the best tool to assemble research facts logically would be **an expert system using a language like Prolog.**
This would allow facts to be entered and queries to be made so as to make deductions from them.
Care would have to be taken in how facts are entered into the system. Primary or "core" facts, i.e. basic tenets of the research programme, would have to be classified differently to subsidiary and extraneous facts. So one would have to structure facts so their level of importance (i.e. their advance from the primary objective towards it realization) is recorded: this might also allow a *fact hierarchy view* to be constructed to help the researcher form overview and inviews of the project to that point. All queries would have to reference the importance level related to the query - otherwise one would have the classic researcher's problem of getting bogged down in details that may be irrelevant to the project's ultimate objective.
The expert system must have a capacity to amend an erroneous or incomplete "fact" (e.g. an assumption based on a common understanding of some phenomenon) whenever a new fact combines with others to bring it into question. Core facts would naturally be as contradictable and correctable as subsidiary facts. The impact of such corrections may have dramatic effects on the fact hierarchy and may indicate a whole new direction for the project.
But the problem here is the same as that without such a resource. **If we *consciously* knew the assumptions we (and all others in that field of investigation) were making, we would already be half-way towards making a serious leap forward.**
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: That sherlock holmes trope where discoveries are made through some dispassionate application of pure crystalline logic is nonsense. If you want to do that you should be a protagonist in a fiction novel.
Turning disconnected facts into knowledge is creativity. If there was a universal tool for creativity we would all use it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It sounds like you're in the "frustrated" stage of research. And you're asking if there's some kind of surefire algorithm for gaining insight. I think it's fairly obvious that there is not, otherwise it would be used and those using it would have a crushing competitive advantage in almost anything they do.
That said, I think we can do a bit better than just saying "be creative". Creativity can be helped along. You've actually already mentioned some of them.
* Teach what you know. The act of putting together a lesson that others will understand, requires you to structure your raw disconnected knowledge. Teaching can be teaching a class, writing a tutorial for novice users in your field, or a popular science blog explaining what you're doing to lay people.
* Present your work to colleagues who are somewhat into your field. Or even other people in your institution who aren't exactly in your field, but smart enough to ask good questions. Let them ask questions about stuff that seems fuzzy. Even poke holes into your ideas. And return the favor for their work. This doesn't have to be a mammoth undertaking - lunch seminars are a good venue for this.
* Teach about your work to *children*. This forces you to come up with examples and analogies to explain what you're doing that are completely different from what you would normally use for educated adults. (Side benefit: you'll be prepared next time you have to explain what exactly you do during a family party.)
* Get a big blackboard, or a notebook, or mindmap or whatever. Not every tool inspires everyone. Try out stuff to see if it inspires you. Don't feel childish for enjoying a particular style notepad or whatnot.
* Apply your work in smaller projects and prototypes. Build something that uses some of the techniques and knowledge from your research, but that's free-standing from your core experiments. Seeing the principles in action may spark new ideas.
* Get enough rest. Go easy on the caffeine. An actual rested, relaxed mind has got something going for it.
* Have some hobbies outside of research. Sports or something physical like going for works. Only trying to focus on research can just make you more frustrated and blocked. Taking a step back and coming back with a fresh view later on can help.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/19
| 1,513
| 6,354
|
<issue_start>username_0: I received an invitation from Neuroscience & Brain Disorders (NBD 2021) conference to present my work as an honorable speaker. My research interests are related to the topics of this conference and I have some interesting contributions, however, I am still a PhD student and I still don't have that strong background in research. I tend to think that this is a scam. What do you think?<issue_comment>username_1: How big is the conference? Has it happened before? Check your university library for proceedings of past events. If this is the first occurrence of this conference, that's a warning sign. If the proceedings of past events show similar things to your work, that's a good sign. If the previous events had several researchers close to your level, that's a good sign.
Conferences come in many sizes. There is a conference every year among 4 universities called MRST (Montreal, Rochester, Syracuse, Toronto). It's usually open to staff and grad students of those universities to present their research. So grad students, occasionally even master's students, can present. If it's like that then you probably can relax.
Some conferences get loaded up with world class folks and Nobel winners and the like. If previous versions of this conference had people like that, maybe you should be investigating more.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: If you are invited as an "invited speaker" or "honourable speaker" and the conference organizers still ask you to pay a registration fee to give your talk, that is likely a scam. The reason is that as an invited guest, you would expect some kind of preferential treatment over regular attendees. Otherwise, you are just another speaker for their conference.
Besides that, you can look at the conference website to check if the conference looks serious or not.. or if it contains some obvious problems (not always the case)? Who runs it? Is it a famous organizations like IEEE, ACM.. or is it some organizations that has a bad reputation? Has this conference been held for several years? Who are the organizers? This is just some points that you may think about to help you evaluate a conference. If you are still not sure, I recommend to ask your supervisor or colleagues about it.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: [As per suggestion of user151413, comment converted into response]
A few sanity checks to run:
1. Ask them who else is in your session and with which topics, if possible.
2. Check the participant list or the confirmed speakers. I know established researchers that had been taken in by junk conferences. If a junk conference manages to get a lot of good speakers, though, it ceases to be a junk conference :-) Of course, they may lie, but that is usually less likely. If you know one of the other invitees, you could pop them a mail and ask them whether they go.
3. Check the topics. Does this look like there is a proper scientific agenda or just a jumble of buzzwords? Are the sessions organized by topic (more or less)?
4. Is there a program committee? Do you know anyone on this list (even just as an author, not personally)? How many?
5. If you know a person on the PC, 5a) ask them whether the conference is worthwhile (you may thereby find out on the fly whether they actually know that they are listed). 5b) If you don't, check whether the conference is listed on their CV if it is public.
6. Unfortunately, the often-cited killer criterion whether the conference is at an attractive place does not mean anything. Also good conferences like attractive locations. However, if the conference is running at a nice location while a pandemic situation is still going on, this is most definitely a red flag.
7. If they claim you are invited, find out whether they cover travel/accommodation and conference fees. If they tell you that you have to pay conference fees, this is a scam. If they say that the conference is free, but they do not cover the trip, it's an orange flag (but not necessarily a scam). Convince yourself that the expense of the trip would be worth your presence. Some high-tier conferences waive only the fees for "minor" invited speakers (e.g. speakers invited to special sessions or workshops, rather than all-out keynotes). For a keynote, you can expect to be fully reimbursed.
Note that sometimes sconferences (scam conferences) adopt names very similar to proper ones, sometimes even copying the precise abbreviation (which unfortunately is not protected, as a number of organisations share the same abbreviation). Some years ago, a sconference hijacked the abbreviation of a quite high-profile conference, located itself in a city in the same or nearby country (I forgot), showed similar-style entry page/photo and managed to convince the search engines for a period to put it on top of the search list. A colleague almost fell for it, but was wondering why all his usual colleagues would not appear.
So the list of invited speakers and PC is one of the best indicators of whether this is the real deal. Of course, if they outright lie, then it's just regular fraud, but usually sconferences live in the grey area of being formally legal, in that they do take place, but are worthless.
Good luck!
[List is extended as additional suggestions are floating in comments]
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: A good portion of reputable conferences are run by national/international "learned societies" (e.g. American Chemical Society, American Mathematical Society, Institute of Physics (UK), etc.). Although this isn't a sure-fire way to identify junk conferences, you can be reasonably sure that conferences organized by the well-known societies in your field should be reputable.
I mention this because
1. it isn't currently spelling out too explicitly in the other answers (@phil's answer does mention looking into the organizers),
2. the specific conference you mention in your question looks to be run by an organization that only organizes conferences, and seems to organize a slightly scattered selection of conferences (mostly vaguely "biology" but not a huge lot of focus). In my mind that's ringing alarm-bells.
The phrase "honourable speaker" is also ringing slight alarm-bells for me. It's pitched to imply some sort of prestige associated with it, while not really meaning a lot.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/19
| 518
| 2,255
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an Assistant Professor in the USA and I was invited to be a guest editor of a Special Issue for an international peer-reviewed Journal. I was asked to find 2 other guest editors. Can I invite my PhD student to be a guest editor? Are there any reasons not to do it? I thought it would look good on his CV. I will handle most of the papers, I will give him just 2-3 papers to handle so it won't take too much of his time. He has 2 papers published as first name on this topic.<issue_comment>username_1: In general there is no problem unless the journal editor objects - which I doubt. But tell them that it is a student you recommend. The editor may want some assurance that the student is "ripe" for such a task.
But, you are correct that this is good experience for the student.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: As someone who served as guest editor already:
I don't see a problem in principle by inviting/recommending an additional person (including students) for this job. I guess I would ask the editorial team, as @username_1 suggested already.
I would not invite a student for other reasons though:
Usually this is a lot of work, which blocks students from working on their thesis or related studies. This depends of course if the student wants to do it as an investment in a later career.
Moreover, I think it would be good to have a few years of experience in publishing, which helps you to select reasonable reviewers. This will be different for other fields, but from my experience, there were almost never any perfect fits to reviewers. It was rather hard to identify, who may have expertise in some exotic areas to review a certain paper. Here a few years in the business definitely help. I assume this would be much harder for students - or it would all come back to you rather than taking work away from you.
Keep in mind, even if you give them just 2 or 3 papers, this can result in some serious work, if reviewers don't react or you don't have any good matches from the start, ...
Finally, the statement to "find two other guest editors" somewhat sounds like you would be working with a predatory journal. Without knowing the actual journal, this is how I would interpret this situation.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/19
| 1,137
| 5,119
|
<issue_start>username_0: With Online Learning, I have prepared recorded videos that are equivalent to lectures. Therefore, I was planning to make the module more interactive. However, it is often the case that only 15% of students watch those lectures, 35% have watched some of the recordings, 20% attend online but have not watched any videos while the rest just never attends (until the last couple of weeks just before the coursework submission and they start to stress) a synchronous session in the morning.
Although I always send emails informing students that it is quite important to watch these videos so that the class discussion will be positive and impactful for their understanding, I always end up with some students who have not done their homework essential for our synchronous discussion.
Now, I know that some of you will say that it is those students responsibility to worry about their learning outcome. As a teaching lecturer, those students' satisfaction is important, and if they are not happy with such an arrangement, I am worried.
The problem is like in all democracy areas, and some students love this approach others do not. I find it difficult (and stressful) to please both extreme parties, especially that many do not wish to show their faces in online learning.
As you know, some like to be passively taught, i.e. using old lecture-style way where the lecturer do the thing online without student interaction unless they have a clarification question. I am currently having this issue where I do not know how to make the majority of students happy and learn actively.
I really value any good advice, suggestions, previous experiences you may share are highly appreciated by both students and teachers.<issue_comment>username_1: This is the online version of the [flipped classroom](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flipped_classroom), of course. But, I suspect that a lot of your students aren't familiar with the concept or how to behave. Like most everything else, you need to teach them what their responsibilities are. Probably they are most used to being "told things" and then working on their own. But that won't work here.
One possibility (the stick) is to hold a quiz at the very start of each synchronous meeting, based on the readings. Another is to start out asking individual students to respond to a question of yours. This could be at any time during the class.
But you should also probably publish a sheet that describes the expectations and what will occur (and what won't) in the online sessions.
To put a bit of carrot along with the stick, you could make the quizzes count "extra" toward their grades, so that answering correctly add something, but incorrectly doesn't penalize them. This works with the more motivated students, of course.
But the normal flipped classroom is normally a problem solving session where the problems are based on the previous readings/videos. These normally form the basis for a part of the grade, perhaps substantial. The face sessions aren't just for questions, but might begin that way.
But you probably need to make "coursework submission" more regular, so that it doesn't just come at the end. Students are busy and will ration their time and effort within the parameters they see. Tighten the parameters to see different behavior. Whether they "like it" or not is less important than if they learn something.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think username_1 has the right of it, when he says that you need more regular coursework submission. For me, interactive classrooms don't work very well because my students are spread out in many time zones right now due to covid, so a few specific suggestions:
* Lab attendance grade, or similar. Myself and my TAs hold weekly labs that are spread out at many different times, and attendance to at least one lab per week is graded. The applicability of this will obviously vary with what your class is.
* Regular small quizzes, like username_1 suggested. This was the first thing that came to my mind. They don't even need to be hard; if everyone who watches the video can easily earn 100%, well, that's actually your desired learning outcome.
* Weekly due dates. You don't say much about what your class is, but just this would probably solve a lot of your issues.
* Extra credit for other forms of participation. For example, I use a discussion forum on Canvas where students can ask and answer questions for each other. Find an arrangement like that, and give bonuses for using it.
* A bonus grade just for watching the video. Most learning management platforms seem to have the ability to track who watched what and for how long.
There are potentially many others, but all come down to that key of strongly incentivizing regular participation through the term. I'm personally against grading based on in-class participation; while I'm not an introvert myself, I'm very close with several people who are, and this sort of thing is torture for them. Unless a part of your classes learning outcomes involves overcoming fear of public speaking.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/19
| 805
| 3,379
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a last year PhD international student in engineering. I have written so far 3 drafts that I need feedback + approval to submit them for publication. I delivered the first draft almost 2 years ago.
My advisor is a really nice person, but he/she is lazy and he/she won't review my papers. I am close to graduate and I don't have any publications because he/she won't let me publish until he/she gives me feedback, which it seems that it's not going to happen.
I don't know what to do about this situation. I have tried many different ways. Asking politely, having "interventions" here we tell him/her how bad this is for our careers(because my other lab mates are in the same situation), sending constant emails texts or calls, and he/she always responds "I know I have been bad, but we are going to get it done soon" and then nothing happens.
I am getting depressed here, I already lost all the motivation. I have no idea what am I going to do when I graduate because who is going to give me a job/postdoc without any papers ( I actually have one paper from undergrad, but it is very basic), and since I am international it is even worse.
I would like to know if anyone has any advice, if maybe someone went through something similar and were able to move on. I am starting to consider to just finish my PhD ASAP, move on and start a new career on something else.
Thanks for reading.<issue_comment>username_1: This seems like a case in which a delegation from your group should ask for an intervention from a higher level. If it is a general problem in your research group then department heads and deans need to be aware of it.
You may not get the feedback you need, other than from each other, but the "permission to publish" needs to get resolved, perhaps as a demand from above.
It might also be possible, depending on the overall organization, for other faculty to intervene on your behalf.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, some academics do not realise that students need to move on very soon and the student's future depends on the supervisor's pulling their finger out. It is all too common.
In extremis you can submit these papers anyway. Now your supervisor may be funny about you including their name on the author list, and / or they may be funny about you leaving their name off. So choose one, as you are equally likely to be in trouble no matter what you do.
Now - if your papers are actually any good, they may be accepted, maybe in a second instance after making changes suggested by the referees. The point of acceptance is a good point to ask your supervisor if they want their name on it or not. Their answer will tell you a lot about their professional ethics, but no matter, just do whatever they say they want at this point.
If your supervisor is a real piece of work, s/he will email the editor and demand that the paper not be published. Since you have described them as primarily *lazy* I am assuming that they are not that horrible.
"It is always better to ask for forgiveness then to ask for permission."
"Nobody remembers the nice guy."
These adagia apply.
Finally - it could be that you are actually a crank and your papers are proving that Einstein was wrong and your supervisor does not know what to do with you. Please do not be a crank. You will only hurt yourself in the long run.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/01/19
| 867
| 3,478
|
<issue_start>username_0: In the future, I'm planning to pursue a PhD in computer science. Alongside making technical contributions to the field of computer science (artificial intelligence in particular), I'd like to give my philosophical take (or two) on where the field of artificial intelligence is headed.
My question is: **If I get a PhD in computer science, would I need to get a PhD in philosophy in order to contribute to philosophical outlets that discuss computer science topics? More broadly, if I write a good enough paper, could I contribute to philosophical outlets in general or would me not having a PhD in philosophy be a barrier?**
I was reading [this answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/110064/why-is-having-multiple-phds-frowned-upon) and this part stuck out to me (a comment on the first answer):
>
> I'm having a really hard time identifying a career path that requires
> two formal PhD's, unless one discipline is in the humanities and the
> other is in a STEM field, **and one decided to start with the non-STEM
> field.**
>
>
>
I'm starting with the STEM field here, so I'm not sure if in my case it makes sense to pursue multiple PhDs.<issue_comment>username_1: You don't need even one doctorate to contribute to any field. Publications accept or reject papers based on the papers not the "qualifications" of the authors.
Just write your papers and submit them. Of course you might also work to develop some collaborative relationships with philosophers who can also give you advice on things.
And at any large (and some small) universities, you can just wander over to the philosophy department, find their coffee lounge, and start up a conversation.
Doing actual research in philosophy, however, probably requires a somewhat different skill set than in CS, but you can develop that.
And don't confuse Opinion with username_2osophy. In any field, you need a basis for what you write for it to be publishable.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You don't need two PhDs. But you need to learn and build your research experience in the fields that you are interested in to be able to make good research contributions.
If your papers are good, people will not ask to see your diploma. However, if you want to become a professor and teach philosophy in a philosophy department, having a diploma would likely be required.
I think you would be interested by a field called "cognitive science" that is at the intersection of philosophy, AI, psychology, neurosciences and linguistics. In that field, researchers tend to have an interdisciplinary background combining at least two of the above disciplines. For example, I did my PhD in "Cognitive Computer Science" at UQAM in Canada, and although our main focus was Computer Science, I took courses in neuroscience as part of it, as well as we had some courses given by some philosophy professors, and I could have taken some linguistic course as well. In my project, I combined psychology theories with AI to build some system. If you choose such program or do some interdisciplinary projects, you can certainly learn and contribute in a few fields.
For your PhD that you are planning, you could choose an interdisciplinary topic such as something related to cognitive science, and find a supervisor in CS and a co-supervisor that is more involved in philosophy or other topics that you like. Then, you could build some expertise in both domains.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/01/19
| 1,079
| 4,546
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently received feedback for a university-intern seminar paper where the reviewer implicitly stated, that every academic paper needs graphics.
The paper was in the field of computer science.
I am aware, that graphics can contribute towards understanding an issue, however, for this specific topic I stood before the issue that
* Graphics I would have liked to use are copyright-protected, thus no option
* I am a bad drawer
* There seemed no fitting option to add computer-aided drawings such like diagrams (in terms of content, I do know how to use Latex)
Therefore, I concluded that I would not include any graphics in my work.
I have encountered several papers on the internet, that also included no graphics. Plus, naturally, mathematical papers would often also not need graphics depending on the topic, with computer science being an applied case of mathematics.
Are graphics in academic papers a real requirement or should I consider the feedback as a subjective need?<issue_comment>username_1: I think the reviewer was overstating the need. They are often helpful and sometimes essential, but not in every paper as you have seen.
But you might want to explore drawing programs more fully. And most composing systems from MS Word on up permit you to add graphics, sometimes by just cut and paste. Most graphics programs will create standard file format outputs such as png and jpg files that are acceptable in a lot of work.
For a school project, however, you need to do what is required, even if it is more restricted than normal.
Graphics are needed when they are needed, but not otherwise.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If you want to be a scientist (and I suspect this applies to Computer Science) then you *must* learn to do some graphic design, or have enough money to pay someone to do it for you.
Admittedly there are some fields of research where nobody uses graphics. But in the fields where I work, >90% of papers have 3+ graphics. One of the reasons for the graphics is that many of your casual readers are not willing to read your entire paper, but they are willing to look at nice-looking graphics. If you can make graphics convey the point of your paper, then you will communicate with those casual readers.
>
> Graphics I would have liked to use are copyright-protected, thus no option
>
>
>
It is customary to create your own graphics, even if you have a right to use other people's graphics.
>
> No option to add computer-aided drawings like diagrams
>
>
>
That is an option. For diagrams, I suggest you learn TikZ.
<https://texample.net/tikz/examples/tag/flowcharts/>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In (sufficiently) theoretical fields, such as theoretical computer science, parts of theoretical physics, or mathematics, it is completely fine to publish a paper without graphics.
Whether in the case of your specific paper, topic, or field graphics would have helped is a different question, and essentially impossible to answer here with the information given. On the other hand, if it is a field where papers with no graphics are reasonably common, there should be not a big issue in convincing the editor that graphics are unnecessary.
Note that similar arguments could be applied to other things, like examples, applications, etc.: Nice to have, they likely don't hurt, but not needed in sufficiently abstract fields of research.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Similar to username_2, I think graphics are important, although I think "casual reader" is not the right viewpoint.
Academics have to read lots of papers. But there are many more papers than you really have time to read. You have to learn a method for evaluating whether a given paper is really worth spending serious time to read. A good example is given [here](https://youtu.be/733m6qBH-jI?t=386) by <NAME>. As he says, just reading a paper from first word to last is a bad way to do it. Rather, you read in multiple passes, and you can decide halfway through whether it's worth continuing. What do you read in the first pass? The title, abstract, and you look at the **figures**. (And other "how to read an academic paper" lectures tend to make the same points.)
So this isn't really a case of readers being shallow. Rather, of readers having time that they could be spending reading a different paper, if they can't quickly see whether your paper is valuable to them.
You can do without graphics, but you'd better have an *amazing* abstract.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/19
| 6,401
| 27,198
|
<issue_start>username_0: When proctoring exams, I am regularly faced with the issue of students not writing their name and/or additional required information on their exam until time is up and I am collecting the exams. This happens despite reminders at the start of the exam, 10 minutes before time as well as on the exam sheets themselves.
I have several concerns about this:
* Even if I have no problem believing this is the result of stress and an honest mistake, I find that the way I currently handle the situation can create opportunities for less honest student to exploit or lead to other honest students feeling slighted/complaining. This is because the process of collecting copies turns into a ten minute mess where I am forced to focus on individual students rather than the whole room, while students who already have turned in are tempted to talk, pack their things and start leaving if collecting takes too long and/or appears disorganized to them.
* There is realistically no way for me to check that students are only filling in their name and nothing else. I do not want to have discussions about why student A is writing while I am chiding student B for the same thing, or whether student C in the back of the room is still working or just inscribing his name.
* From a classroom management point of view, it is difficult to enforce any time limit when multiple students are continuing to write after time has been called, and to ensure students stay seated in silence if collecting copies takes too long and appears disorganized.
I do not have control on the format of the exam itself, nor on the grading, so [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/145033) is not relevant. That said I am open to suggestions on how to prevent this occurring as a simple invigilator. I would like to focus on how to prevent such an occurrence from disrupting the process of collecting the exams.
Unless the situation requires otherwise, the process goes as follows. At the end of the exam, I ask students to stop writing and remain silent while I go through them with a cardboard box to collect all copies. This is quick and painless as long as all students are ready to hand in when I pass by. However, when students have to write their name as I arrive (on every sheet of paper, so this takes non-negligible time), this is very disruptive and quickly makes the whole collecting process a mess.
* I can stop at the offending student and wait for him to write his name everywhere before resuming my walk through the room. This can be too slow because exams can be more than 10 pages long and this deals with offending students sequentially, so the added hassle is also proportional to the number of offending students (annoyingly they most often will only start dealing with the issue once I am at their desk). This is an issue because in my experience, I can keep control of the exam room (limited talking, writing and general chaos) for five or so minutes before things really devolve. Realistically, if some students do not respect the no talking/no writing rules in this five minute period, it should not affect the exam outcome too much, but if the collecting process takes ten-fifteen minutes and I am forced to focus on individual students rather than the whole room, I can see issues arising and/or students complaining of unfairness.
* I can rip the exam out of the offending student's hands and shove it in the box, but I think this is too harsh a punishment, and that would not fly with the course head anyway.
* (What I typically do) Give a stern reminder to the student and continue on through the room, navigating back to the student some moments later to collect their exam. This has the advantage of not completely halting the process for a single student, but makes this process more complex for me as I have to remember who still has an exam. In my experience this is still the best solution but it is really a tightrope walk as 3-4 offending students can quickly transform the process of collecting exams into a cat-and-mouse game. Also, it is then not obviously clear to the other students why some students are not immediately handing out and are even seemingly allowed to continue writing while they have to hand in. It feels like this method is also the most prone to "losing the room" because it gives the impression to other students that handing out is "flexible". I have had this method lead to students ostensibly write answers as I am standing in front of them waiting for them to hand in.
* One other method I thought of, but which would only be applicable to exams with a limited amount of students is to carry two boxes, one where most students would put their exam in, and the other for exams of students who are "not ready" to hand in for one reason or the other. Then once all copies are collected, offending students are invited to my desk to sort their issues out (i.e. write their name on the sheets in this case). However I don't know how acceptable this is, and I would not want to deal with several students claiming the same answer sheet.
For context, I give exams to first- to fifth-year students and (surprisingly to me at least in the beginning) this happens in all classes. I proctor exams alone for up to 100 students at a time, and I typically expect two to five such offending students for one exam.
This is not an ideal situation to be put in the first place, and ideally the exam should be designed in a way that would avoid it. However, the current state of practice seems to allow this to happen to proctors in several higher education systems. The question is thus more focused on "people skills" to employ in that situation so as to limit the resulting disruption and limit the opportunities for cheating and/or legitimate complaints from students.<issue_comment>username_1: Even despite repeated reminders, exams can be a tense time. Some students may honestly forget, and it would be overly harsh to deny them their exam for this. OTOH, some students may do this deliberately as a way to game the system for a little more time, and that should be discouraged.
I'm not sure you have the authority to completely address this on your own, but perhaps you can document it in a way that helps distinguish exam nerves from gaming and nudges students towards following the rules. Something like this maybe:
Take two boxes, visibly distinct. Students who finish on time put their papers in Box A and leave. Students who don't finish on time put their papers in Box B (ETA clarification: after they have added their details, don't want to lose identification of papers), and are required to fill in an extra form that gives their name and explains why they didn't fill in their details ahead of time. (Give them this form at the point where you collect their exam, so you're not giving them an opportunity for even more writing time!)
You then have a record of who is doing this, and if you're invigilating the same students repeatedly (or if you can persuade other invigilators to do the same) you can distinguish between one-offs and those who make a habit of it. You then have ammunition to go to your course head/etc. and say "this is a problem, we need to address it". (Or not, if it turns out you don't have repeat offenders.)
From their side, the fact of being singled out and knowing that it's being recorded gives a bit of a behavioural nudge. It tells them this behaviour isn't within the accepted norms, it gives them the impression there might be consequences if it persists, and it also shows other students that this might not be a great idea to copy.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: In a similar situation, I have held time at the beginning of the exam to fill out the needed information. Once everyone is there, tell them to start writing their names on the test. You can see them all paging through the test quickly. Have them close their test and put their pencils down when they're done, and let everyone start the test when everyone's done.
I haven't done this with 100s of students, but it can be fairly obvious when someone is actually working not just writing their name (e.g. poking at a calculator).
You can also hand out only an answer sheet, and hold time for everyone to fill it out, then pass out the tests. (This is in the linked question.) This also is handy for reducing number of pages printed, especially if color costs more, sometimes.
**Finally, tell them *why* you need it on every page.** If it will slow you down grading (and getting them back to students), tell them! As Geoffrey's answer points out, they're not being malicious, probably just forgetting.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Here is the solution I am considering for the next sitting. In my university students are required to put their student ID on the table and we go through the room cross-checking them with the attendance list, so I can be quite certain the student ID will be within reach as I am collecting exams. I am thinking of carrying two boxes, one for most students to put their exams in, the other for "problematic" exams. If a student is not ready to turn in when I am there, just grab their exam along with their student ID, put them in the "problematic" box and invite the student to come sort things out when all exams are turned in (edit: meaning at most five-ten minutes later, and in the exam room itself).
With some care I think no confusion between unnamed copies should be possible (because they are intertwined with the student cards), and I should be able to go through everyone nearly uninterrupted. That being said I wonder if students could make receivable complaints about this approach.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: What I usually do (the usefulness depends on the room layout and the number of students) is to tell the students to give the exam to the right so that the rightmost student has all the exams. Then the rightmost students should come forward and give me the exams. This makes the collecting process rather quick amd in my experience, people have "too many exams" in their hands to look at some answers, find their exam and alter their answers. It would be (in my classroom layout) be visible for me if someone woould in this phase look at some exam and copy answers.
If there is a student who is still writing, it will be visible as the students in their row will (most of the time) look nervously at them. I can look at them and say something or go to them and look what they are writing (more answers or just their name).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I agree with Anonymous Physicist, exams should allow for plenty of time for all students who have studied the exam subject well enough to complete the exam well within the set time. The reason is that even good students who have mastered the subject 100% can sometimes start attacking a question in the wrong way and then have to start over. You want to eliminate these problems so that the exam result reflects better how well a student has mastered the subject.
Exams designed this way allow the proctor to be quite strict with the deadline. Most students will have handed in the exam paper in well before the deadline. The students who are left at the end are students who know that they were struggling with the subject and they can accept that time is up much easier than in case of a student who expects to do very well and is racing against time after e.g. making a false start.
The proctor can also walk past the students around half-time and see if the the required information has been filled in and ask the student to do so now if it hasn't already been done. This half-way intervention is much easier to do if the exam isn't a race against time. It's also advisable to announce at the start of the exam that there is more than enough time, that the required information should be filled in first, and that you'll be checking during the exam if this has been done.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_6: It's best to discuss this with the whole team (teachers and proctors) and agree on a policy.
I think what is missing from your present policy is a clear announcement of consequences.
Before the exams are handed out, announce that exams, or pages, that do not meet the requirements for naming will be discarded (if that's the case). Mention the requirements (e.g. the student's name and ID must be on the top left of each page).
When the exams are about to be collected, once again announce that exams or pages that do not have (whatever the requirement is) will not be graded and ask the students to take some time to make sure that their name and ID is on the pages as required. Say you won't stop at their table but that they need to check it now.
Then collect the exams and just take them in, don't stop.
A policy like this will only work when supported by the teachers and other proctors. Students need to know what to expect and need to know that there are real consequences for not meeting requirements. You cannot decide these consequences, so you cannot make a policy work on your own.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: At my university, we are so fed-up with this attitude that we are working on a system of stickers with a unique-use student identification number that each student would paste on her or his exam sheet at the time the proctors check for identification, signing a double of that sticker as a proof of taking part in the exam. This would furthermore ensure complete anonymity for the students. At the finish time, there would thus be not emotional blackmail of that kind.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: **Have the students stand up when the exam is over. Have them walk forward row by row and put the exams in the box.**
A trick one of my professors used was to have students stand up when the time is over. This lets all the students check their name/student id was on each page but would make it difficult to add very many words to an answer. If a student truly forgets they can quickly add their name during this time, or spend a few seconds writing using your desk if need be.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: As you collect the exams, if you encounter a student who forgot to write their name, tell them to wait and not write anything on their paper until you've collected the other exams. Once you've collected all the other exams, most of the students can leave, and the remaining students can fill in their names as you watch. This way,
* you avoid appearing like you're giving some students extra time,
* you're not making the other students wait, and
* you're providing students an incentive to fill out names beforehand (if they don't, they have to stay longer).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: I had a class with a similar issue when I was in school. The professor addressed it my semester by putting it on the syllabus that when time was called you must put down your pencil, and that pages of the exam without your name on them would not be graded. Anyone continuing to write would be failed on the exam. Every student was required to sign and return the syllabus acknowledging they'd read and understood the policy, and given a reasonable amount of time (a full week) to do so and turn it in.
Before every exam the professor and/or proctor would get the entire room's attention and remind us that before we solve any problems we should go through the exam and put our name on each page, and pages without names would not be graded.
With such an absurd amount of warning it became hard to argue anyone forgetting to do this was not in the wrong. In school, as in life, there are times where you are repeatedly warned to do something requiring trivial effort or face consequences and at some point you need to be responsible for your actions.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: At the end of the exam time, tell everyone "pencils down".
Once everyone is still with pencils down, announce "You have 1 minute to write your name (and other information) on each and every page of your exam. If your name and class isn't on your exam at the end of this minute, your exam will still be collected without your name on it, and you will not be graded. This is your last chance. Start now."
Then wait 1 minute. They state "pencils down" again.
Now collect. Anyone who doesn't have their name and class written literally had a minute to do nothing but that, with consequences spelled out, and time dedicated to only this task.
That 1 minute should save you more than a minute. It is plausible that someone might spend that one minute doing a tiny change to an answer they worked out in the gap, but it isn't going to have much impact.
This is different than warning them 10 minutes before the end, because at 10 minutes before the end they still nominally can do work, and are focused on the exam (and possibly barely hearing you).
The goal is to parallelize the "fix" period, instead of making it sequential, and giving students who have forgotten to do it a sanctioned period to do it in.
A student who realized their mistake at "pencils down" might not feel comfortable opening the exam to write their name without your explicit permission, as that is viewed as cheating. So rather than giving permission individually, you give it to everyone at once.
(Feel free to modify the "1 minute" based on your experience of how long it takes to actually write your information on each page.)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_12: If it's really only 2-5 students in a room of 100, there's no need to alter the process for the majority of students.
When the allotted time for the exam is up, walk around with the box and collect the papers as usual. If any student says that they need more time "just to put their name on all the papers", collect their papers into a numbered envelope and give the student a card with a matching number.
After collecting all the exam papers, dismiss the class and invite the offenders to your desk to fix their papers as you watch. Keep a list of names and ask your professor if there are appropriate repercussions for repeat offenders.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_13: I am surprised that no one has suggested the frame challenge in the already existing 12 answers, so I will do it:
### Do not force the students to write their name on every sheet
Students are in time pressure during exams, and having them waste several minutes of exam time doing a task that does not count for exam completion adds stress to the situation. Additionally, **it is unfair to students with long names**. This might sound like a joke, but the difference between writing an 8-letter name 10 times, or a 30-letter name 10 times is considerable, and the psychological effect of being still stuck writing your name again and again while everyone else is already working on the exam questions is even worse.
There are other ways to ensure that the individual exam sheets are assigned to the correct students, such as keeping them stapled. If the sheets need to be separated for correction, having each exam stack have an individual ID printed on all sheets (optimal, but probably time-consuming for the instructor), or having the students write a shorter identifier on every sheet (student ID, or even seat number) also works.
The vast majority of exams that I have done in my life (and all the exams that I have organized as an instructor) did not require students to write the name on every sheet. Minimizing the amount of "administrative work" that students have to do during exam time will also minimize your problem of students wanting to do the administrative work outside exam time.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_14: Setup the test the same as printed standardized testing in secondary school.
Create a cover page that has spaces for students to fill in their personal details on the front. In the corner, place a large stop sign that "DO NOT CONTINUE UNTIL DIRECTED". If you don't have control over the design of the test, print this on A3 paper, folded over the exam forming a book.
Warn students: (1) they must fill out the information before starting the test and (2) they cannot open the test packet until the time indicated. Take away exams from anyone who opens the packet before you start the test, they receive a 0. Physically shred a blank copy of the exam in front of them, so it is made clear what will happen.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: **If entirely avoiding the situation is not practically doable in the short term, one approach to limit the impact on the management of the whole class is to separate the collection of most exams from the handling of offending students.**
Several practical implementations of this have been proposed, with the basic idea of identifying problematic copies and/or students without interrupting the collection process, before inviting those offending students to come sort out their issues with the proctor.
If the class is sufficiently small and the proctor is confident that students will respect their injunction to stop writing, the proctor can simply not collect problematic copies and handle those separately once class is dismissed, as suggested in [JoshuaTS's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/161609/63112):
>
> As you collect the exams, if you encounter a student who forgot to
> write their name, tell them to wait and not write anything on their
> paper until you've collected the other exams. Once you've collected
> all the other exams, most of the students can leave, and the remaining
> students can fill in their names as you watch.
>
>
>
If students are required to have some form of ID on their desk and the proctor is confident that it will be easy (and allowed!) to reach for, even for offending students, another possibility is to collect problematic copies along with the corresponding student ID in a separate box, before inviting those students to come fix their copies with the proctor, as suggested in [username_3's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/161580/63112). The goal of grabbing the student's ID is to match the exam to the student as quickly as possible so that problematic copies do not get mixed together in the box, and *not* to keep the student's ID for longer than it takes to fix whatever is wrong with their copy.
>
> In my university students are required to put their student ID on the
> table and we go through the room cross-checking them with the
> attendance list, so I can be quite certain the student ID will be
> within reach as I am collecting exams. I am thinking of carrying two
> boxes, one for most students to put their exams in, the other for
> "problematic" exams. If a student is not ready to turn in when I am
> there, just grab their exam along with their student ID, put them in
> the "problematic" box and invite the student to come sort things out
> when all exams are turned in (edit: meaning at most five-ten minutes
> later, and in the exam room itself).
>
>
> With some care I think no confusion between unnamed copies should be
> possible (because they are intertwined with the student cards), and I
> should be able to go through everyone nearly uninterrupted. That being
> said I wonder if students could make receivable complaints about this
> approach.
>
>
>
If those solutions are not satisfactory, a third way to do this is to carry extra envelopes to put the problematic copies in with matching tags to give to offending students. Again, once other copies are collected, those students are invited to come sort out their issues with the proctor, as suggested in [username_12's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/161636/63112):
>
> When the allotted time for the exam is up, walk around with the box
> and collect the papers as usual. If any student says that they need
> more time "just to put their name on all the papers", collect their
> papers into a numbered envelope and give the student a card with a
> matching number.
>
>
> After collecting all the exam papers, dismiss the class and invite the
> offenders to your desk to fix their papers as you watch.
>
>
>
This last implementation takes a bit more preparation but should be universally applicable.
**This basic approach also allows to log those occurrences and interact with the offending students.**
If the proctor deems productive, they can discuss whether instructions were clear enough or try to convince students that this situation should be avoided in the future for their own sake. Logging occurrences in front of the students or requiring them to provide a written explanation may have enough of an impact in this stressful situation to motivate honest students to improve their behavior in the future, as [<NAME> puts it](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/161569/63112):
>
> Take two boxes, visibly distinct. Students who finish on time put
> their papers in Box A and leave. Students who don't finish on time put
> their papers in Box B (ETA clarification: after they have added their
> details, don't want to lose identification of papers), and are
> required to fill in an extra form that gives their name and explains
> why they didn't fill in their details ahead of time. (Give them this
> form at the point where you collect their exam, so you're not giving
> them an opportunity for even more writing time!)
>
>
> [...]
>
>
> From their side, the fact of being singled out and knowing that it's
> being recorded gives a bit of a behavioural nudge. It tells them this
> behaviour isn't within the accepted norms, it gives them the
> impression there might be consequences if it persists, and it also
> shows other students that this might not be a great idea to copy.
>
>
>
More importantly, logging those occurrences provides concrete evidence to support proposals to adapt the exam organization if necessary. It can also be used to identify repeat offenders, as both username_12 and <NAME> respectively propose:
>
> After collecting all the exam papers, dismiss the class and invite the
> offenders to your desk to fix their papers as you watch. Keep a list
> of names and ask your professor if there are appropriate repercussions
> for repeat offenders.
>
>
>
>
> You then have a record of who is doing this, and if you're
> invigilating the same students repeatedly (or if you can persuade
> other invigilators to do the same) you can distinguish between
> one-offs and those who make a habit of it. You then have ammunition to
> go to your course head/etc. and say "this is a problem, we need to
> address it". (Or not, if it turns out you don't have repeat
> offenders.)
>
>
>
Upvotes: 1 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_15: Excellent solution implemented by a professor I had during the Bachelor: he printed the lines for name/ID/etc on the BACK of the exam.
The exam was then distributed and had to be kept face-down (with plenty of time to fill ot the student info on the back) until he gave the "start".
When the time was over he gave the "stop" and all the paper MUST be flipped IMMEDIATELY for his aidees to collect them.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/01/20
| 1,079
| 4,841
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an Industrial Ph.D. and the company involved in my Ph.D. provides data for my research.
I signed an NDA with the company since the data comes from proprietary source I cannot disclose.
The main problem is that when I write articles I cannot disclose anything about this data (I am in the Machine Learning field), and this decreases the validity and reproducibility of my results.
It is really frustrating. Any Idea on how to tackle this problem?<issue_comment>username_1: There are a few solutions:
* Use a different dataset for your paper. For example, if you design a new data clustering algorithm but cannot use the company data to evaluate your algorithm, you may find alternative datasets that could be OK to use just for the purpose of writing the papers. I have done this for some industrial project.
* Some companies may accept to release anonymized or transformed data. You may try to discuss this with the company to see if this is a possibility.
* Some journals and conferences may request that you share your data and code publicly. But some other may not be so strict about this. Choosing appropriately conferences/journals may help.
* You may add some text in your paper to explain that data cannot be made available due to a NDA. Reviewers may be satisfied by this explanation or may not be, but it can be good to do that.
* You may consider submiting in conferences where there is an industry track. Your paper may be more well-suited for this than for the regular track.
I would also add that doing academia/industry collaborations is great but not all companies have the same level of openness toward publishing papers. It is generally better to make things clear about how paper can be published as early as possible in a colloration. When looking for a new industrial collaboration, I will always talk with the company first about whether or not I can publish papers and what are the requirements to make things clear. Some company will ask you and even push you to publish papers, while others are against it. I even talked with a company that allowed to publish a paper but did not allow to publish the developed algorithm... (which makes no sense...as you then cannot write paper with just an introduction/related work and then a result section without describing the algorithm/method).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I am in a bit of a dilemma about whether this deserves a separate answer, as it is similar to the first suggestion in [Phil's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/161589/4249), but I do think it is slightly different.
In any research field, therefore also in Computer Science and Machine Learning, we should strive to offer theories and approaches which generalise well to (m)any conditions and data. So I would suggest **validating your results on more than one dataset**:
* the company-provided one as this was the motivation for developing your approaches.
You could try asking for permission to describe the characteristics of the data, and maybe include a (single, or a handful of) representative example(s). This might often be possible, as one single sample has little value and could be anonymised if needed.
* publicly available data, to facilitate easier comparison with other approaches.
About the comparison: it not only allows future works to compare with yours, but also allows your work to be presented in comparison to state-of-the-art, strengthening your contribution. As an *additional perk*, this demonstrates that your approach is general and not dataset specific.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I sometimes used to supervise undergraduate dissertations through the process of agreeing an NDA with an industrial partner company. The university's internal IP team would usually carry out the initial drafting of the NDA. The university IP team's draft would invariably subject students and academic staff to restrictions onerous enough to be damaging to the dissertation process and to the student's subsequent graduate job search. In every case (\*), it turned out that the industrial partner company did not particularly want those onerous restrictions, and was happy to agree to my request that they be dropped from the final version of the text of the NDA. In your case, the NDA is already signed, so that ship has sailed. However, my experience leads me to believe that, if you and your supervisor ask the company to release you from the requirements of the NDA for a particular publication, there's every chance they'll say "yes". (But make sure to get that "yes" in writing, and from an officer of the company who has legitimate authority to say it.)
(\*) At least, in every case for which I was supervisor. Some colleagues in my group supervised projects for which it was otherwise.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/20
| 687
| 2,379
|
<issue_start>username_0: Thanks to Google Scholar, you can follow citations of an article you are the author.
Is there any way to that for an article you are not the author?<issue_comment>username_1: Search for the paper on google scholar in the "Search" field.
In the search results, it will say "Cited by" below each hit, and if you click you can see the citations.
Moreover, once you see the list of citations, there is an option "Create alert" on the left which allows to create an alert alerting you when the paper is cited.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Whlie [username_1's response](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/161604/how-to-follow-an-article-citations-when-you-are-not-the-author/161607#161607) is correct regarding *Google Scholar*, one could add some other possibilities (as your question seemed open-ended), such as the following:
Altmetric / Dimensions
----------------------
Find the relevant Altmetric page of the publication and click on "Alert me about new mentions", which includes scholarly citations as tracked through *Dimensions*. See this screenshot:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/uOxOF.png)
Semantic Scholar
----------------
Find the relevant publication and click on "Alert", as in this screnshot:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/qou38.png)
Microsoft Academic
------------------
Go to the relevant publication and click on "Follow"; this is, as far as I know, *not* an e-mail alert, but it allows you to track the newest developments regarding that publication through your profile menu. The "Follow"-button looks like this:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/qWJr9.png)
Web of Science
--------------
Open the details page about the given publication and click on "Create a citation alert" on the right-hand side:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/FFC64.png)
OpenCitations API
-----------------
If you want an automated process via an API, use `https://opencitations.net/index/api/v1/citations/{DOI}` ([here is an example](https://opencitations.net/index/api/v1/citations/10.1177/1369148118786043)).
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/20
| 692
| 2,961
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently applied to an economics pre-doctoral RA opportunity at a North American research university. I was asked to do a 7-hour empirical exercise, which I did (took me closer to 10 hours). Unfortunately, I was not asked to proceed in the interview process.
I did ask for feedback (or just the solution set for the empirical exercise), because I wanted to figure out where I went wrong and how I can do better the next time around, but the hiring manager informed that they aren't able to provide any kind of feedback.
I found this to be extremely frustrating and somewhat annoying -- I don't care that I didn't get the job, but I think it's wrong to ask applicants to perform many hours of uncompensated labor and not even provide an answer key! **Is this the wrong way to think about things?**
Really appreciate any insight or guidance you might have.
Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: Having applicants do a 7 hour empirical exercise seems unusual to me, in academia, but setting that aside, I don't think them not sharing feedback on an exercise for a job application is a problem. Consider:
* The purpose of the exercise is for them to decide if they want to hire you, not to educate you further.
* If they're requiring something like this, I presume the position is fairly competitive. In that case, there could be a lot of applicants doing this. 10? 100? Do they all get feedback?
* If they give feedback, and the information is put online (which seems like an inevitability), then future applicants can essentially cheat on their exercise, unless every new hire gets a completely new exercise, which is a ton of work for precisely zero gain for them.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Unfortunately for applicants, academic job environment is very competitive: there are tens, hundreds or sometimes thousands of applications per post. The employers (Universities) are often overwhelmed with the number of applications. Their recruitment processes are designed to optimise their own convenience, not the one of the applicants. To put it bluntly, they have too many people who want to work for them to care about the feelings of those who is not successful this time.
Universities often make it clear that they won't provide feedback for candidates who were not shortlisted for the post (i.e. not invited for the interview). You could assume that they are supposed to provide feedback for those who bothered to prepare and attend the interview at least --- but in practice it happens less often than not.
Even though this behaviour is common, you are right in thinking that it is wrong. It is very frustrating to spend 10+ hours preparing the application, several days preparing to the interview and actually attending it -- just to never hear from them again. The good news is (at least) that if this place has a selfish and unfriendly attitude to candidates, you probably don't want to be there anyway.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/01/20
| 515
| 2,184
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am filling out a reference form for a student I supervised on a medium sized project who is applying for graduate studies.
The student is great, of all that I have supervised in this way they are significantly the best on a number of metrics.
They are also the only student who has ever applied for graduate studies.
It has a bunch of questions where i am ask to rate them on there e.g. analytical ability.
One of the questions on the form is:
*"Rank relative to others you have recommended for PhD studies"*
with options like To 1%, top 10% etc.
The last option is *"No Basis for Judgement"*.
Since they are the only person I have recommended for a PhD program, that seems like the correct answer.
Since I don't have anyone else to compare them to who I have recommended.
But I am wondering if I am I am interpretting it too literally.
and I should actually be answering this question with my total assessment of them (though there is another field for that); or with comparison to people who could have but didn't ask me for a reference; or to the set of people i expect would exist.
Especially I worry that saying *"No Basis For Judgement"* might be taken as a red-flag by the program administrator.<issue_comment>username_1: I think that this is common enough that it won't raise any flags. But if you have a chance to explain why then it would be better.
Of course, logically, for this particular question, because of the specific wording, *Top 1%* is actually accurate. But it is a bit misleading.
I think either is honest and that an explanation is warranted if possible.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Usually you can supply context either as comments on the form or as a separate letter. This is where you can explain you “no basis for judgement”. It is not uncommon (although maybe so for this specific question): you may simply not have the historical pool of students to make an informed comparison.
You can use comments or a letter to simply restate what you just included in your post, and this should be enough to justify an honest opinion AND provide useful additional information for a committee.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/20
| 1,158
| 4,735
|
<issue_start>username_0: I just got hired for a TA role as an undergrad. Normally, I would refer to a professor as *Professor LastName* if I'm talking to them in a "professor" capacity, or as *Dr. LastName* if talking to them in any other capacity. However, given the closer role I will have this semester, and that many grad students (all the other TAs) generally call professors by their first name, I'm unsure of what proper etiquette should be.
I know generally asking is the best solution, but there are very few times where the professor stands on their ego enough to say "you must call me by my title", even if they prefer the title to their first name. The prof in question is particularly prone to this sort of behavior (based on hearsay), hence the reluctance to email.
To clarify some comments, I normally stick to calling any professor by their title. However, every other TA is calling the professor by first name (although they are all part of his group). The entire situation of an undergrad being a TA is unusual enough. I don't have the familiarity with the prof that the other TAs have, but it also feels awkward to be the only person calling the professor by their title.<issue_comment>username_1: This has a cultural element so it varies. Some places tend to be quite formal and others not so. My perspective is the US.
But as an undergrad you probably shouldn't make assumptions and use a title until told otherwise. Of course, you can also ask.
I normally expected my undergrad and even master's students to be fairly formal as I think a certain separation is helpful to them since it is occasionally necessary to be an authority figure. But I accepted things like "doc" or Dr. B" from those who worked closely with me.
When I was in the PhD program I was the only one who called many of the faculty by their first names (not my advisor, though). My fellow students (also TAs) were all more formal, but I was a special case, joining at an older age with a young faculty. I insisted my own doctoral students called me by my given name. But many of them resisted, wanting to be more formal.
But, if you are working closely with a faculty member it is good to just ask.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: In my environment (Italy, engineering university), I would expect students to refer formally to me as "prof. X". In many cases (PhD students, master thesis students that I supervise, etc.) I will ask them to call me by first name.
So, my suggestion is: start formally, unless the professor tells you otherwise.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: This is an extended "specify the country" comment, but as it expands the perspective of the two answers I see, here we go. The question is country-, discipline-, and also community-specific. Across Europe, there are maths faculties in which "Professor X", or even "sir" will ring too formal, and there are those where omitting the whole "your excellency the archchancellor" just once may rub someone the wrong way. It also sometimes happens that a direct question "how should I address you" may put the person in question in an uncomfortable position, especially if they are socially awkward (and I do know such rare extreme cases among mathematicians, but this is something rather easy to spot), making for a bad first impression.
If that would be the case, or if you feel that in your environment defaulting to the professor's full title is not the way to go, I would advice to *observe other people* in your position at your faculty, and ask them about it. You note that other TAs are older, but they will have more insight in what's done and what's not than we could: you can't go wrong following the local norm, the keyword being local.
Also, let me say that in my language the professor/doctor lost most of its teacher/scientist distinctions that your question implies, and instead convey seniority - and thus a misplaced "doctor" may be (mis)construed as an affront. But clearly your environment is different, so I wouldn't worry about that layer of complication.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I'd recommend simply asking. "Excuse me, I don't want to be rude at any point, but how would you like us TAs/me to refer to you?" I've done this before and it's perfectly fine.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Be formal with Dr or Professor until they tell you to use their first name.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: There are some deeply rooted prejudices that may be at play, depending on your discipline, so it's best to just ask what they prefer.
Start from information given by the professor. How do they sign their emails? If they sign them "Firstname", you should ask if it's ok to address them as "Firstname".
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/01/21
| 943
| 4,078
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently wrote an editorial article which referenced several national (UK) reports. These are typically freely available as pdf files online via institutions like the British Medical Association, the General Medical Council and so on. They are not published articles in peer reviewed journals but are major and important pieces of work. When I referenced these reports in my editorial, I initially referenced them as online sources (with date accessed, date published and the URL where they are available from).
During the course of peer review and submitting to journals, one of the national reports (from 2015) disappeared from its URL which was not permanent. The organisation probably removed it as it was old. I had saved a pdf copy of the report. It was no longer easy to find a copy online and the one place I found it was not a professional website URL (just some person's blogging site or something like that).
My question is, to future-proof my article from reports like this disappearing from non-permanent URL, can (and should) I load my "hard copy" pdf into a repository and provide a permanent location to the report. This can be done with OSF, Zenodo etc and it would then be permanently available with a DOI.
Otherwise any URL cited can just be changed or the report can be made unavailable any time.
Alternatively, should I just leave the "date accessed" as an old date (from a time when the report could be accessed) and readers would understand than the reports might not be there in future?<issue_comment>username_1: It would depend on the policies of the preprint server, but I'm not aware of any that would accept a "preprint" submission from someone other than the reports' authors.
A better long-term approach would be to contact the British Medical Association and ask them to register their own DOIs for these repots. They already register DOIs for their journal articles, so it's not such a huge stretch to think they could do it for reports or other less-formal publications. Of course, that would mean they would have to commit to making the reports persistently available, which it seems like they don't want to do.
In the short-term, using the "date accessed" format for your citation should be sufficient.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Online sources are "liquid". Some have thus suggested to "freeze" them as durable PDFs and to make them available in a repository as supplementary material ([I might have seen this suggestion here](https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2015.1096619)). This ensures transparency and replicabilty.
So, I would say: Yes, the approach you think about seems fine. There should not be any legal issues if the documents were publicly shared from an official organ.
([Here](https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/JMKOAS) is one example of a Dataverse which contains "frozen PDFs" to support the findings of a research article that relied on many web sources.)
---
By the way, there is a terminological issue here: I would not call it a **preprint**. This label would indicate that it was an original manuscript written by you that has not yet made it to the publication stage at a scholarly journal. But you mention **data repositories**, and this is correct. To be sure, some of them also allow you to post pre-prints. But for the present context, it is their function as data repositories that counts here.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It would be very good to upload the reports in a repository, for the reasons you give. You can do it provided this is not explicitly forbidden by a copyright statement on the reports. If the copyright status is absent or unclear, do it anyway, the worst that can happen is that you are asked to remove a report. (This once happened to me after I posted financial data on journal subscriptions on my blog, but these data had never been made public before.)
Asking the authors may not succeed, why would they do it now if they did not do it previously? On the other hand, it would be nice to inform them after you post the reports.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/01/21
| 2,721
| 8,208
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've been going over a few papers from the '60s, broadly in physics sub-disciplines. The image below from 1963 shows a very typical style of plot which I've come across frequently.
I'm guessing this was made by hand with some sort of template, as the letter spacing and alignment are not perfect. And I guess the curved lines were made with spline rulers?
I really like the minimalist aesthetic these plots have and was hoping to replicate the formatting for my own work. I'd be interested if anyone has any further insight on what tools were actually used to make these plots back then, so I can look them up and get more info on formatting details (fonts, spacing, etc.).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/rcuYn.png)<issue_comment>username_1: Those were typically made with [lettering guides](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lettering_guide) and [French curves](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_curve) (I'd have liked to take a few pictures of mines, but I cannot recall where I put them: hundreds of hours at high school spent using them1), drawing with [technical pens](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technical_pen) like *Rapidographs*. In certain cases, you could have also used [dry transfer letters](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dry_transfer). As a drawing desk, a [drafting machine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drafting_machine) was typically used (you can also buy tabletop ones).
In many cases, graphs and drawings were made by professional graphic designers, and that's why many old pictures look so good.
1A typical homework punishment in drawing classes for anyone who made too much noise in class was to fill an A3 sheet with text written with the smallest lettering guide.
**Addendum:**
I could find the lettering guides:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/PCdDb.jpg)
And while digging for the lettering guides, I could also find a graph paper that I drew when I was at high school using rapidographs and dry transfer letters, and with a tabletop drafting machine . It's a graph paper I used to plot the frequency response of amplifiers. Not exactly what you want, but just to give you an idea of what a non-expert could do with those tools.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/kzS8Q.jpg)
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This is less of an answer per se, but you mentioned you'd like to replicate the formatting for your own work. This can be done by hand if you want to, using the information in the top answer (thanks Massimo!).
However, if you're familiar with python, you can get pretty close to the original (minus the imperfections from handwriting, which admittedly do add a certain charm).
Here's my attempt -- the spline is wrong obviously, but I wasn't sure which technique was used to get the one in the original image.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/AUlfl.png)
And the code used to make this (feel free to edit for clarity/style/...):
```
import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import matplotlib as mpl
from matplotlib.ticker import MultipleLocator
from scipy import interpolate
# various formatting parameters
label_fontsize = 10
tick_fontsize = 10
linewidth = 1
major_xtick_length = 15
minor_xtick_length = 7
major_ytick_length = 7
minor_ytick_length = 0
mpl.rcParams['font.weight'] = 'normal'
mpl.rcParams['axes.linewidth'] = linewidth
mpl.rcParams['lines.linewidth'] = linewidth
mpl.rcParams['xtick.labelsize'] = tick_fontsize
mpl.rcParams['ytick.labelsize'] = tick_fontsize
mpl.rcParams['xtick.major.width'] = linewidth
mpl.rcParams['ytick.major.width'] = linewidth
mpl.rcParams['xtick.minor.width'] = linewidth
mpl.rcParams['ytick.minor.width'] = linewidth
# get data, one extra point for fitting the last spline segment
depth_meters = np.array([0, 5, 19, 33, 41, 57, 65, 150]) # x
zenith_degrees = np.array([24, 27, 25, 23, 16, 10, 5, 0]) # y
# spline plotting, 300 = number of internal points
xnew = np.linspace(depth_meters.min(), depth_meters.max(), 300)
tck = interpolate.splrep(depth_meters, zenith_degrees, s=0)
smooth = interpolate.splev(xnew, tck, der=0)
# this is how it looks on the graph, not sure if this is the real conversion
depth_attenuation = depth_meters / 5
# create figure
fig, ax1 = plt.subplots(figsize=(5,5))
# make dots
ax1.scatter(depth_meters, zenith_degrees, s=30, facecolors='none', edgecolors='k', clip_on=False)
# and smooth line
# plot as solid line between 2nd and 2nd last data point
xnew_solid = [x for x in xnew if x >= depth_meters[1] and x <= depth_meters[-2]]
smooth_solid = [s for s, x in zip(smooth, xnew) if x >= depth_meters[1] and x <= depth_meters[-2]]
ax1.plot(xnew_solid, smooth_solid, c='k')
xnew_dashed_1= [x for x in xnew if x < depth_meters[1]]
smooth_dashed_1 = [s for s, x in zip(smooth, xnew) if x < depth_meters[1]]
ax1.plot(xnew_dashed_1, smooth_dashed_1, 'k--', dashes=(10,2))
xnew_dashed_2= [x for x in xnew if x > depth_meters[-2]]
smooth_dashed_2 = [s for s, x in zip(smooth, xnew) if x > depth_meters[-2]]
ax1.plot(xnew_dashed_2, smooth_dashed_2, 'k--', dashes=(15,3))
# labels
ax1.set_xlabel('D E P T H ( M E T E R S )', fontsize=label_fontsize, labelpad=10)
ax1.set_ylabel('Z E N I T H A N G L E ( D E G R E E S )', fontsize=label_fontsize)
# ticks
ax1.tick_params('x', which='both', bottom=True, top=False, direction='in', labelsize=tick_fontsize)
ax1.tick_params('y', left=True, right=True, direction='in', labelsize=tick_fontsize)
ax1.tick_params('x', which='major', length=major_xtick_length)
ax1.tick_params('x', which='minor', length=minor_xtick_length)
ax1.tick_params('y', which='major', length=major_ytick_length)
ax1.tick_params('y', which='minor', length=minor_ytick_length)
ax1.xaxis.set_major_locator(MultipleLocator(20))
ax1.xaxis.set_minor_locator(MultipleLocator(10))
ax1.yaxis.set_major_locator(MultipleLocator(5))
# second x axis
ax2 = ax1.twiny()
ax2.set_xlabel('D E P T H ( A T T E N U A T I O N L E N G T H S )', fontsize=label_fontsize, labelpad=15)
ax2.tick_params('x', which='both', bottom=False, top=True, direction='in', labelsize=tick_fontsize)
ax2.tick_params('x', which='major', length=major_xtick_length)
ax2.tick_params('x', which='minor', length=minor_xtick_length)
ax2.tick_params('y', which='major', length=major_ytick_length)
ax2.tick_params('y', which='minor', length=minor_ytick_length)
ax2.xaxis.set_major_locator(MultipleLocator(4))
ax2.xaxis.set_minor_locator(MultipleLocator(1))
# plot limits
ax1.set_xlim(0,120)
ax1.set_ylim(0,29)
ax2.set_xlim(0,24)
plt.savefig('60s.png')
```
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: Just for fun, in addition to [Mc Cracken answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/161660), it's quite easier to reproduce the figure in gnuplot. I've tried some fitting to better match the original figure.
Otherwise, the `set mono` does almost all the job.
```
$data <
```
EDIT: A bit better with small caps for the labels:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/LS5Sj.png)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I'll add that there was often a photographic part of the process, with photographers specializing in such processes making a fine living. They could use high contrast films, like diazo film, made for the job, and touch up the negatives.
For graphs in particular, one could use grids in nonreproducing blue, removed in the photo stage.
Figures were submitted to journals as photographic prints, well into the early '90s.
To add to the lettering techniques, stencils were only one way to do it. There were also lettering pantographs, like shown in <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technical_lettering#Mechanical_lettering>, which would make it easier to get the right sized text to fit in the elaborate art work already in place. I also recall seeing a lettering machine, which looked like a big version of the old Dymo embossing label makers, but have never seen that actually used.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/01/21
| 899
| 3,696
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is there some sort of unwritten rule in academia that you shouldn't mention your own name explicitly on presentation slides? I have seen this time and time again, if you cite work in the middle of the talk and it happens to be your own work, people abbreviate their names. For example, they only write their first name. 'Miller' is abbreviated to 'M.', but all other names are spelled out in full.<issue_comment>username_1: In conference presentations, there is a bias against mentioning one's own name because the speaker knows their own name and doesn't realize their audience has forgotten who is speaking.
It's not an unwritten rule; it's a common mistake. If you are citing your own work, do write your own name correctly so people can find the reference if they want to.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: There is nothing wrong with mentioning your own name in full in citations on your own slides, and nobody would think anything of it if you did. However, there are a number of reasons why people do this.
1. Replacing your own name with initials is a subtle way of emphasizing that it is *your* work that is being cited. You can think of it as a “humblebrag”.
2. Since you are usually talking about your own work, you end up citing yourself a lot. Replacing your name with initials simply saves space, especially if you have a long name.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: In my experience in pure mathematics, it seems to be somewhat of a norm not to write your full name when citing yourself and just use initials. I have seen this on many conference presentations or any other talks using slides.
When giving a blackboard talk it has the advantage of using less space on the board which typically is a scarce resource.
On the other hand, I have also seen the occasional talk where this "rule" was not followed and I do not think that this left a bad impression on anyone.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: To the question, briefly: Abbreviating as described is common in math, but I can't imagine anyone reacting negatively or at all to variations in something so minute.
An alternative motive from a mathematician's perspective I don't see in the other answers or comments:
My surname is fairly common. So I use just an initial in my slides when referencing theorems I've worked on as a concise clarification that I am the person referred to. I'm not aware of anyone else sharing my surname in my field of specialization, but that's hardly a guarantee. This has nothing to do with encouraging memorizing my name, as that's in a header/footer on virtually every slide.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: That depends.
I saw one prof get credit for someone elses work by putting his name on the slide and pointing to the other persons results!
Why do you want your name on the slides?
Isnt the title page on the first one enough?
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_6: The bias is against self-aggrandizement, and that's what helped establish the norm username_3 [mentioned](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/161644/7319) in their answer: If you cite yourself a few times, and you use your name, it is as though you bring people into a room where you show them many images of your name. Of course that's not the contents of the presentation, but there is at least some element of that. So, symbolically, you self-deprecate by limiting your self-mention to a single letter. Your full name on the first slide of the presentation is actually common, though (so people know who's giving the talk if they've forgotten or don't know what's on the schedule today); there's no bias - that I know of - against that.
Upvotes: 2
|