Split (1)

train · 10.4M rows

date stringlengths 10 10	nb_tokens int64 60 629k	text_size int64 234 1.02M	content stringlengths 234 1.02M
2021/02/12	1,169	4,994	<issue_start>username_0: I recently had a postdoc interview (at a research institution) in which I wasn't selected. After receiving the interview outcome, I decided to directly email the panel a few weeks later asking for a feedback. One of the professors replied and invited me for a chat the following week. He said that he has other opportunities that are a good fit for my profile. I know that he's talking about the university where he's working and not the research intuition where I met him (with the panel). The issue, is that I checked the university's website and I didn't find any job postings. Can a PI hire a postdoctoral researcher without first advertising the job?<issue_comment>username_1: In most research-intensive countries and Universities, all academic jobs should be advertised. For many countries this is also a condition for issuing a visa for a candidate, if they need it. However, the meaning of "advertise" vary considerably: from publishing an advert on a well-known website like [mathjobs](https://www.mathjobs.org/jobs) or [jobs.ac.uk](https://www.jobs.ac.uk/), to pinning an A6 paper advert in a corner of a local announcement board. It all depends on the rules and customs of each particular organisation, and in some places there rules bend more than in others. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Many job postings are written after the candidate that will fill the position has been selected. This makes sense in academia - I usually want to hire people who were trained by people I know. University policies often require that postings are made for all positions though. It's therefore very common to interview for a position that hasn't formally been posted. Especially if you have fellowship money coming with you. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: > > Are all postdoc jobs advertised? > > > No. Advertising is a good idea, though. > > Can a PI hire a postdoctoral researcher without first advertising the job? > > > Practices vary widely from "never" to "whenever they have the money." Advertising is less likely if the hire is already affiliated with the university. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: No. Not all jobs are posted either. I do even not think there is an expectation that all positions are advertised. Then what exactly do you mean by “posted”? Every year I receive 10s of unsolicited emails from people asking if I have a postdoc position open. Clearly, these people do not expect me to post positions, else they would wait until I advertise. Since clearly these people are just going through mailing lists sending CVs almost randomly, they expect 1000s of people to possibly have unadvertised positions. Even when positions are posted, they are not posted everywhere: the mere fact that not all sites have the same postings is proof of that. Indeed it may not make much sense to post broadly as you might anticipate there are sufficiently many local or regional candidates qualified for the position. There might be language barriers or other factors that very legitimately restrict the pool of candidates. Hiring rules vary by institutions, but rule #1 of a PI who has someone in mind is to craft an ad (if required) that meet the local requirements while guaranteeing the preferred candidate is selected. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: In the US, and presumably some other countries, there are laws and regulations in place designed to prevent discrimination and bias in the hiring process. One manifestation is that jobs get posted in a large proportion of cases, though not always widely. Some postdoc positions arise out of situational opportunity. In such cases, the job is often created and then posted using language like "strong candidate identified". Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: In my experience in the US, it is not legally possible to hire a postdoc without advertising for the position, though as people point out, there is nothing to stop people from deciding before the position is advertised who they’d like to hire, and doing the advertisement in a pro forma way. I was kind of shocked to discover when I moved to Canada that this is not the case here. At least at my university, if you have the right grant funding to hire a postdoc, you can just do so without needing to provide any evidence to the university of having advertised the position or done any due diligence in your search. My understanding is that this is because postdocs, as a temporary position, are treated differently under employment discrimination law here (postdocs at Canadian universities have a weird status where the university considers them more like students than employees, or at least in a weird gray zone). Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: The very practical aspect of this is: Even if required by law, it could be that these positions are advertised but already filled. Signs of this are: * overly specific requirements * sometimes the publication period may be very small Upvotes: 1
2021/02/12	490	2,025	<issue_start>username_0: Currently an undergraduate in computer science, I am pursuing an Ms+PhD program in oceanography at some top US universities. I recently got feedback from a PI that I had an interview with before applying, who told me that my "application was ranked highly" and "[they] are currently figuring out funding situations", and that "If [I] find out about [my] own funding at a later date, [I should] please be in touch as this changes opportunities". Unfortunately I only found out about the effect fellowships and scholarships have on admission late into the game, and as such was only able to apply to the NSF GRSP and one other small fellowship. What can I do, one week before admission results drop, to improve my funding situation last minute? I am not a women or minority. I would be able to self-fund part of my PhD but was advised against doing so (and the departments won't allow it anyway).<issue_comment>username_1: > > What can I do, one week before admission results drop, to improve my funding situation last minute? > > > Nothing. If you do not like the results, try again next year. Successful application to doctoral programs at US universities requires many months of advance planning. Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It seems to me as if you will be offered a TA, possibly an RA, position. This will be sufficient and will cover costs and give you a stipend. I think the note about external funding is a "what if" so that if you do come up with something then you should tell them so that the funding you would otherwise get can go to another person. I wouldn't take it at all as something that requires action on your part at this time. If you were "ranked highly" then you should be fine. The message from them just seems to be informational and asking you to keep them informed as well. No additional action is needed or expected. Given the timing of grant proposals, nothing you could do now could affect a decision to admit you or not. Upvotes: 0
2021/02/13	1,208	5,057	<issue_start>username_0: I helped my PhD supervisor to secure a funding for an 18-month project in 2019. My supervisor got the grant in April 2020 and she asked me to consider doing a postdoc under the project. I was not very keen to continue doing lab research activity, yet I still agreed to take up the postdoc because of the uncertain job market during the pandemic. Since then I started to work on the postdoc project planning and budgetary control while preparing for my viva. I successfully submitted my final thesis in September 2020 and the postdoc contract officially started in November 2020. The offer letter stated the contract is valid for 6 months, renewable until the end of project. This condition is regulated by the university. As my 6-month postdoc contract is nearing its end, my supervisor asked me to liaise with the HR on extension. I hesitated to extend my postdoc because I lost the interest in doing lab research any longer. I also stumbled on a few job openings for research grant management elsewhere, which I am interested in applying. The foundations of most of my postdoc research activities has been laid out/completed by now because I started the project before I passed my viva, e.g. communications between the project stakeholders, organizing workshops, pilot reactor design & procurement. The tasks left are mainly the reactor operation and data collection. *Should I let my supervisor know that I would like to move on to a different career path, since the 6-month contract is nearing its expiry? Or am I obliged to extend the contract so that the project does not get stuck in the middle?* I feel the guilt because I had the experience of having to take over other postgraduate student's work because they left. I would appreciate advise from postdoc/project PI who experienced similar issue. Thank you in advance!<issue_comment>username_1: First, to be honest, I've never been in your precise situation. But I do have a 40 year career in academia behind me. I've been in good situations and bad situations. I stayed in a bad situation for too long once and it was a mistake. I had options that I didn't recognize at the time, to my dismay. I you have options that seem better to you than what you have now, then take advantage of it. Do not pass GO, do not collect $200. Go directly to your best option. There is little worse in your single life than wasting it doing something you'd rather not be doing unless there are no other options. You are at a natural point to change your direction. Just tell your PI that you now need to move on. If they can't understand the value of it then it is their problem. You only have one life to live. Live it fully. Live it happily. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: > > Or am I obliged to extend the contract so that the project does not get stuck in the middle? > > > Let's start with the easy question -- you are not obliged to extend the contract. A post-doc is inherently a time-limited position; both your funding agency and your university are (or should be) well aware that you could leave at any time. Your case is even more clear cut, in that the university deliberately structured your contract in such a way that they could cut you loose at any time. This flexibility cuts both ways. > > I feel the guilt because I had the experience of having to take over other postgraduate student's work because they left. > > > This shouldn't induce guilt; rather, you have created a new project that can be used to give a new opportunity to someone else. Sure, this might not happen and the work might be instead forced onto an already-overworked student, but that is not your concern. > > Should I let my supervisor know that I would like to move on to a different career path > > > Well, there are competing norms here. One (mostly in business) is that you should never express any thoughts about leaving until you have accepted another job. Another (mostly in universities) is that you should give as much notice as possible so that your advisor can make plans. Which of these you opt for will depend on your supervisor's personality. You should also check your contract to see what the provisions for leaving are -- renewing your contract for six months might not mean that you have to stay for the full six months. > > I also stumbled on a few job openings for research grant management elsewhere, which I am interested in applying. > > > The way you have written this makes it sound like you have only the vaguest idea about what this career path entails. If this is the case, I would caution you against becoming unemployed too soon; your job search may take some time. I'm not sure which position you are referring to, but "contract administrator" positions are usually bookkeeping positions that are not a natural fit for an academic, while "program manager" positions are generally rather competitive and might not be something you would be certain to easily get hired for directly after a post-doc. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
2021/02/13	1,696	7,286	<issue_start>username_0: I am a TA for a freshman course in the humanities at a US university. Due to pandemic restrictions, the class is entirely online and the medium through which students learn is Canvas. Lectures are pre-recorded by the instructor and posted to the course site, as are any reading documents or assignments. Students contact me in "real time" through email, course messaging, and virtual office hours (held via Zoom). Students complete some individual assignments and upload their work to the course site, but they have also been broken up into project groups and complete group work. It is their job to contact their group members and work together to submit assignments. I am not sure how to grade group work when: 1. It is clear that only one or two students did all of the work 2. Each student receives the same grade as everyone else in their group (something I cannot change per my instructor's request) I cannot force students to learn and I cannot change how learning outcomes are assessed. But how can I reward students for meeting objectives while not punishing them if students in their group do not contribute? --- Restrictions: * Changing the course gradebook and ways that assignments are graded is not a viable option because the instructor has asked me not to. * The instructor is very clear that neither they nor I are to intervene in group disputes. According to the instructor, "Students need to learn to work with difficult people." * I do not see the value of group assignments in this course because (in my opinion) students aren't meeting the learning goal if they only think about certain parts of the assignment. I also think it is unhelpful and difficult to put the burden of communication on the students during a pandemic with asynchronous learning. * I do not want to encourage the "good" students to do all of the work for the group just to get a good grade because I do not think that promotes healthy behavior toward group work. * The instructor is not open to negotiating how the course is run. Freedoms: * I am the only one grading assignments, meaning that I can come up with whatever grading scheme I want and have the entire class graded with the same metrics. * I can create content (handouts, etc.) and post to the course site as much as I please. Note: I've looked at [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/27154/how-to-make-group-work-work) question, which does not answer my question here but might help when I run a course as the instructor.<issue_comment>username_1: I suggest that you grade "the project" for its value and assign every student the same grade. If any student objects, refer them to the instructor. This recognizes an important fact. You may not recognize all "contributions", but the students might value some things more than others. Not every student needs to contribute to a "team" project in the same way. The same is true for real world projects. If you try to change things or devise some "scheme", then you will be the bad person, disrespected by everyone. The work is the work. Grade it. --- I actually think that "dividing up" the work makes it harder since the integration adds another step. I think that the so called "best" students do everyone a disservice if they do all the work. But if I give a project to a team and don't instruct them otherwise on process, then the team process is up to them. Respect that. --- I gave a lot of team projects. One thing I did was have peer evaluations of the form "Who were the two most helpful members of your team and why". That would be for a team of four or so. I once had the experience that the team was unanimous in praising one person who I thought was slacking because their contributions weren't visible to me. But he actually kept the team functioning and moving forward. It may be that you wouldn't want to hire him for is technical skills, but you almost certainly would as a manager of a technical team. But that is mere supposition on my part, so don't read too much in to it. Don't expect every student to learn exactly the same thing from a course. I once had another student in a class who I predicted would eventually be the manager of all the "geeks" since she asked the right questions. She focused more on "why" instead of "how". There are a lot of skills. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: *The students, and you, should know how work will be graded before* the assignment is assigned.** If you did not tell them that their grade will be based on factors other than the quality of the submitted work, then it is unfair to grade them on such factors. This is true regardless of your professor's requirements. On the other hand, if you tell them now that future work will be marked down if all teammates do not make a roughly even contribution, it is totally fair to enforce this on future assignments. Given your professor's requirements, you would have to assess the team for its ability to divide the work, and assign all students the same score. That said, personally, I would not recommend this. Fairly assessing the (dys)functionality of a team from the outside is not easy. Further, I would hate to put a good student in a situation where they have to choose between delegating to their incompetent teammate (and getting a bad grade for quality) or doing it all themselves (and getting a bad grade for teamwork). Sometimes the optimal distribution of work is uneven. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I'll address the scenarios you described in a comment: > > sometimes I can see explicitly who contributed to or edited a document (as in Google Docs). > > > This sounds like an unreliable method to determine who did what. Maybe the students had a meeting to work on an assignment collaboratively and only one of them uploaded the resulting edit? Maybe one student doesn't like using google docs so they emailed the file they worked on to their teammate, who uploaded it from their own google account? The only acceptable thing to do seems to be to ignore such information. > > Other times students (individually) submit pieces of their work, but if not all group members submit work, the result is a partially finished assignment. > > > Again, you are making assumptions that if someone submits something then they are the only ones who worked on it. That doesn't sound like a good idea to me. Credit for any submissions that have the names of all group members should go to the group regardless of who is doing the actual submission, unless the students are given specific guidelines to the contrary. > > I’ve also had students turn in work with only 3/4 group member names on it. In one such case, a student whose name was left off asked me which group they were in a week after the assignment was turned in, suggesting they didn’t contribute to the assignment they got a grade for. > > > This student should get a 0 for their assignment since they did not do any work and their name wasn't even on the assignment. If they ask for their name to be added to the assignment when there is clear evidence they didn't contribute, they are committing academic misconduct. You should report them to the instructor and ask what to do. Upvotes: 0
2021/02/14	562	2,591	<issue_start>username_0: What is a good academic word for verifiable by scientific data or experiments? Is empirical data a suitable word for that? P.S EDIT: my question is what is A single word for "derived through experimental data" (opposite to derived through observation) I mean that word should explain that it can be precisely reproduced by others as well because it's experimental data.<issue_comment>username_1: A hypothesis "testable by scientific experiments" would be a "scientific hypothesis." Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Data are "derived" from observations. Alternatively said, observations become data when we record them. Otherwise, they remain as observations. By example, the only reason we know what Galileo observed during his observations of the moon is because he recorded his observations in pictures, making them data. The next step in the chain is to "derive" a result. This involves analysis or interpretation. In summary, the chain is * observation - (to written record) -> data * data - (through analysis or interpretation) -> result The one word you seek is result. When you want to further qualify the level of effort taken in making observations, you can use words such as focused, directed, or even scientific as opposed to random or undirected. The phrase "unscientific observations" is not necessarily a "good" way to express the opposite of scientific. So, data obtained from directed observations have perhaps a higher standard than data obtained from random observations. Suppose instead that you need a qualifying metric that defines the trust that you have in a result that is obtained by the analysis of data from (scientific) experiments or observations. Consider these criteria: * verifiable - able to be found by others * certifiable - attestable * precise - reproducible * accurate - indistinguishable from truth * measurable - subject to quantification through observation * robust - impervious to unpredictable outcomes * empirical - derived through observation * first-principled - derived through reasoning You may make variations. For example, a verifiable and robust result is one that others can readily find and that has no ambiguities. A robustly verifiable result is one where the method that one uses to find the result has no ambiguities. A result obtained from experimental observations is essentially empirical by nature. First principled reasoning may be used to define the accuracy of the result. Replicate, certifiable experiments are needed to establish the degree of precision on the result. Upvotes: 2
2021/02/14	392	1,679	<issue_start>username_0: I submitted my article to a Scopus-indexed conference. A month later, they informed me that my paper was accepted and that all that was left to do was paying registration fees and present the paper in order to get it published. However, when I discussed this with my supervisor, he told me that I should have looked for Thomson-indexed journals/conferences. Can I cancel this? Are there any consequences if I do? Thank you.<issue_comment>username_1: As long as you haven't signed over any copyrights the paper is still yours. Yes, you can withdraw it. The organizers will grumble a bit, but you can ignore that. And even if you have already signed rights away you can ask to have them returned, which might happen or not. But don't make a habit of this. The reviewers spent some effort on your paper that is now wasted. The only other consequence is that your paper gets delayed. That could be a problem or not, depending on how many others are working in closely related areas. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: To be honest, this is not the nicest thing to do to conference organizers. Assume your paper is very strong and the organizers look forward to have that in their conference and you now you pulling it out will disappoint them (apart from the reviewer time being wasted). Now, if you have to make the choice between your supervisor and the conference organizers, your supervisor takes precedence. But in the future, you should check that ahead of time. Generally, it is not good form to submit and then to pull out without good reason. Legally, you can do so, as long as the copyright is not signed over. Upvotes: 4
2021/02/14	358	1,553	<issue_start>username_0: I am looking into sending out applications for M.Eng in Aerospace in Canada. I was wondering if it is necessary for me to contact a professor before applying as M.Eng is mostly project based and not research based course. And if I have to contact a professor, what is the best way to frame an email?<issue_comment>username_1: As long as you haven't signed over any copyrights the paper is still yours. Yes, you can withdraw it. The organizers will grumble a bit, but you can ignore that. And even if you have already signed rights away you can ask to have them returned, which might happen or not. But don't make a habit of this. The reviewers spent some effort on your paper that is now wasted. The only other consequence is that your paper gets delayed. That could be a problem or not, depending on how many others are working in closely related areas. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: To be honest, this is not the nicest thing to do to conference organizers. Assume your paper is very strong and the organizers look forward to have that in their conference and you now you pulling it out will disappoint them (apart from the reviewer time being wasted). Now, if you have to make the choice between your supervisor and the conference organizers, your supervisor takes precedence. But in the future, you should check that ahead of time. Generally, it is not good form to submit and then to pull out without good reason. Legally, you can do so, as long as the copyright is not signed over. Upvotes: 4
2021/02/14	2,488	10,462	<issue_start>username_0: From what I understand pre-prints have been common in some fields for many years because of some practical obvious reasons, for example very long lag time from submission to publication. However, it is clear that publishing in pre-prints is becoming more and more popular across many fields with the main reason of calling yourself first to a particular research/method/idea/etc. The only problem is that these pre-prints are not peer-reviewed, and even though they require a certain standard, which is quite low, nobody is really checking the credibility and soundness of any of it. People might rush through the scientific process to publish a pre-print because the scrutiny level is almost non-existent. Some of this has been already observed with pre-prints about COVID <https://science.slashdot.org/story/21/02/13/1558235/misleading-viral-claims-show-dangers-of-preprint-servers-researchers-warn>, I think there's even no verification on affiliations. The more pre-print papers are being published, the more these papers are being cited in peer-reviewed papers. They might be correct but nobody might check in detail as a reviewer or could even content since it's not "published". In addition, usually citations such as "in preparation" or "submitted" are not accepted by many journals. It just seems that this could trigger a vicious cycle in which more non-peer reviewed papers are being cited in permanent publications which then remains in print for years to come. Does the rise of pre-prints make science and publishing less credible? Does it increase the pressure to publish because it adds an additional tier to the publishing process?<issue_comment>username_1: > > Does the rise of pre-prints make science and publishing less credible? > > > No. Peer reviewed publications are still peer reviewed. People who do not know the difference between a preprint and a peer reviewed publication are not in a position to judge the credibility of science. > > Does it increase the pressure to publish because it adds an additional > tier to the publishing process? > > > No. "Pressure to publish" is about competition for jobs and funding. The number of publication options is not relevant. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: The people churning out garbage preprints are also churning out garbage papers in predatory journals which are "peer reviewed". The preprints aren't why these people are doing it. Being shit scientists driven by perverse incentives is why they're doing it. Also I cite preprints all the time from people I know (either directly or by reputation) and it's not a problem because I don't need reviewers to tell me if a paper is good. I can read. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: Peer review has never been a 100% reliable gatekeeper and plenty of incorrect results get published anyway. I am sure every scientist is aware of X result that was later shown to be incorrect. [Example from The Lancet on Covid](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/04/covid-19-lancet-retracts-paper-that-halted-hydroxychloroquine-trials). Science gets bad PR when it turns out to be incorrect. Since peer reviewed articles can also be incorrect, I doubt that the rise of preprints is having much impact. If someone is going to disbelieve science as a whole based on incorrect results, they are probably not going to distinguish between whether the science has been peer reviewed or not. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: No, some kind of concept of preprint has existed for a long time and has never devalued the concept of publishing research findings in research journals. Preprints are what they are. Perelman published his proof of the Poincaré conjecture in a set of three preprints. OK, exceptional example, but obviously this is not clear-cut. It would be like asking ''Are journal articles causing X?' or something like that. For example, Gödel originally wrote up his incompleteness theorems which we are all now familiar with and sent them to <NAME> in the form of a preprint prior to publication of his findings in a journal. It's not a big deal, I think people are just overthinking it. I read preprints all the time and find a lot of them very useful and interesting. Some of them are bad, but some journal articles are bad as well. As another example from pure mathematics, Bhatt and Scholze uploaded a preprint in 2019 which has not yet been accepted for publication due to the length and complexity of the document, but which has received 64 citations. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I agree with the gist of the other answers, which by and large refute the major concerns postulated in the question (though I can see where those concerns are coming from). I would add a major benefit coming from the increased prevalence of preprints, that of accelerating the open speedy dissemination of important research results. I'm old enough to remember when arXiv (the former LANL archive) became more broadly used than in physics. In particular, over my very limited time as a research mathematician, it went from used rarely in (pure) mathematics, by next-generation scholars in physics-adjacent fields, to much broader but not universal applicability. As it hopped from one subfield to the next, it much expanded the speed at which new results were disseminated. Prior, if you were well-connected in a field, you might hear gossip that so-and-so had achieved such-and-such, and very exceptionally you might receive a pre-publication fragment, which might be anything from a completed draft paper submitted, to a 3rd party's cryptic notes from a talk somewhere. There was generally a caution about over-sharing, to avoid being scooped as well as just for arcane cultural reasons. That also meant there was little incentive, in fact disincentive, to rush the word out about one's own achievements, other than to frankly claim turf. What was shared flowed really only to those well-connected (friend of a friend stuff), and there was no version control: "unpublished results" might float around in various contradictory incomplete versions and it was very hard to know what was accurate and complete. While in that environment, preprints did technically exist, they were not as prominent part of academic discourse. arXiv and other centralized servers, clearinghouses, etc. played a huge role in encouraging early sharing of results. Rather than scooping, they provided a way to "postmark" your achievements earlier in a long publishing timeline. They allowed a much wider range of scholars to be aware, read, learn, and build on recent research. And via centralized repositories, they provided version control. Of course, a "preprint infrastructure" like this did not and does not have all the elements of a full peer-reviewed publication pipeline, and is not a substitute. But it is an important, positive complement. Any effect in the direction of "decreasing quality" or "increasing pressure to publish" (as mentioned in the question) must also be complemented with considering the increase in quality (from more eyes, sooner, on important results), decreased pressure to rush out a poorly written paper (the preprint already announces it, so can take time to write "the paper" propertly), and faster and broader research collaboration. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Absolutely! It definitely creates an incentive to rush out papers. I worked in between applied math and engineering and I have noticed a trend in applied engineering journals in recent decade that these research papers will assume some abstract framework and do a bunch of math derivations and prove some type of convergence results in said abstract framework. At the end, everyone is left just wondering if there exists a single scenario in the universe that can fall into their framework. Eventually one will be found, in a couple of years, usually not by these authors, but then they get to claim priority because they worked out the theory first, and then they say "oh your example just happens to fall into our abstract framework!" It used to be, at least in my field, that demonstrating the applicability/usefulness was a priority. And it is usually very hard to show how math can be applied. Now it is about who can churn out proofs more in more and more esoteric setup. While this can be hard, I have noticed that they tend to be excruciatingly incremental. Of course, you wouldn't expect these papers to go through the review process, so here is what they do: team up with a big name. I suspect these "big names" have never even read the paper they purport to have wrote (given I personally know that many are not even an expert in the subject they are writing in), but as long as their name is on there, no matter how marginal the work is, it will be heavily cited. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: Preprints serve a very important issue of science, fast dissemination of results. Peer reviews never guaranteed the correctness of the results. Preprints also never say anything about the correctness. But traditional peer review is slow and sometimes have preconceptions about the research. First of all, slowness of peer review. Sometimes, your research is good if you are one the first in that area. For example, you applied an algorithm to a domain first time. preprint helps a lot in this case. This preconceptions about the research is also very important. I put a lot of effort to a review article in my PhD thesis. It was rejected 3 times from different journals. After 3 rejections, I talked with my advisor and put my review article as preprint. After this preprint, it was again reject 3 more times and I decided to not submit it anymore. Well, it is cited 107 times in google scholar as of 2021 February. Most of the citing articles are from journals with impact factor. > > A review of KDD99 dataset usage in intrusion detection and machine > learning between 2010 and 2015 Authors <NAME>, <NAME> > Publication date 2016/4/14 Journal PeerJ PrePrints > > > This means that: 1. You should never accept that article results are fully true even it is published in a very good journal. 2. Also, you should never accept that preprint results are fully true too. My conclusion: preprints are not lowering the quality and credibility of the researchers. It is actually increasing it. Upvotes: 1
2021/02/15	1,685	7,283	<issue_start>username_0: Say you are an independent researcher, with no affiliation and no famous co-author. Assume that you have authored a paper, which you believe is decently written and reports a method that is at least comparable with state of the art. Some reviewers at a reputable journal read it and acknowledge the merits of your work, suggesting only minor and addressable corrections. However the editors reject the paper. You attribute this to bad luck. Then you submit to a few other journals with lower impacts, and the editors desk-reject it, providing a terse comment or two. You know the work you've done, so you don't find the terse editor comments fair and unbiased. They sound more like a made-up excuse to you. Do all these rejections have anything to do with you being an independent researcher, not affiliated with any academic institution and above all, not having any famous co-author? Is there another reason behind the curtain? Like the editors asking among themselves "who the heck is this guy?! Where'd he come from?! Who is he to have his work published by us?!" Final edit: I voted to delete this post. It seems to have caused more mayhem than I intended. And I kinda got my answer anyway. My speculation was probably right. Many thanks to everyone who took part and apologies for any inconvenience.<issue_comment>username_1: Edit: since the question's been changed: Yes, journals are biased towards more famous authors. [Source](https://www.theguardian.com/education/2002/sep/18/science.highereducation) > > Another reason for the breakdown is the hypnotizing effect of reputation. When the names of eminent people and places appear on the top of submitted papers, says Florida physicist Hebard, "reviewers react almost unconsciously" to their prestige. "People discount reports from groups that aren't well known," adds University of Maryland physicist <NAME>. > > > This is mainly positive bias however, because there are way more institutions and researchers in the world than anyone can keep track of. I don't know the details of your paper, but assuming you are right that it is novel enough, has been receiving positive reviews, etc, but is still being rejected, I will hypothesize that there is something you're missing which is causing the desk rejections, e.g. an omitted authorship. There're other strange things about your description of the rejections as well. This comment is especially weird: > > A couple of other journals rejected without peer review, with stupid comments and excuses from the editors (I'm not one those scientist legends, but trust me, I know my field well enough to tell if a comment is a stupid excuse or not). > > > How can you know your field so well if you're a recent MSc graduate? Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It's probably more productive to change the way to think about this particular situation. --- To address the situation: To me it sounds like you're currently running into the problem that journals are highly selective. Many papers get rejected, all the time. The fact that your paper gets rejected several times in a row does not necessarily imply that there is no publishable idea within the paper. It may be that the current version of the paper is not quite good enough for publication right now, for reasons of writing, or experimental setup, or embedding in related work. Editors and reviewers may see this as a bigger deal than you, and it's quite possible that they're wrong and you're right (as well as vice versa). But it may also be that the paper is indeed good enough in its current form, but you just may have run into a few sets of reviewers/editors who read your paper on a bad day. The point is: what you are observing right now can easily be explained by bad luck. Take a good hard look at your paper in its current state, and be honest with yourself. If you are still convinced that the paper is good enough for publication, then don't let a few rejections stop you: dust yourself off and try again. --- To answer the question as asked: Officially: no. In practice, editors and reviewers have a direct interest in keeping the process fair and balanced. In the minds of most scientists, this fairness is what makes science great, and the reputation of a journal would quickly suffer if famous authors get preferential treatment. Therefore, I don't think that anybody would consciously bias their journal towards famous authors. It is possible that there is an unconscious bias. Suppose that an editor just had to reject thirty papers of cranks claiming to have unified quantum mechanics and general relativity, or (dis-)proved that P=NP. At the end of a working day like that, it is not impossible that this editor is slightly less ideally predisposed towards the 31st and 32nd paper by an independent scholar. They should be neutral towards any paper reaching their desk, but it is not entirely impossible that unconscious bias plays a small part. Notice that it is impossible to completely eliminate unconscious biases from the reviewing process. Earlier today, I happened to receive some very good news in my personal life. If I now proceed to review a paper this afternoon, it is quite possible that I am unreasonably friendly towards the paper, simply because I am smiling back at the world which is smiling at me. If my fellow reviewer happens to be in the middle of a messy divorce, they will be less friendly towards everything, including papers they happen to have to review right now. This human factor cannot be completely eliminated from the process (even though every individual reviewer or editor will try their best to do so), and therefore authors should also take the outcome of a reviewing process with a grain of salt. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Correct me if I am wrong, but your previous experiences with publishing are only the one paper you published before, together with your former advisor? Then, you might lack the experience necessary to know about the typical mistakes that lead to a (desk) rejection. Your results may be very good, but this alone does not make a good paper. Being proficient in scientific writing takes time and requires practice. Your former advisor is a few steps ahead and you might not even have noticed some small corrections from her/his side that made publishing of the previous paper much more likely. Famous researchers usually are particularly good when it comes to presenting/writing about their results. They make it easy for the reviewers to like their work. Beginners often make it easy for the reviewers not to like their work. This does not result from bias, but from scientific writing skills. And the editor also needs convincing, so pay attention to your cover letter. If you decide to go on alone, you might have to learn the lessons the hard way by facing a few rejections. An experienced person might be able to help. And please stop making the mistake of calling the replies you get after peer review "stupid". This is also a typical beginner's mistake. Sleep over the replies until you can look at them in a rational (not emotional) mood. In my experience, virtually all replies can be used to improve your work. Upvotes: 4
2021/02/15	857	3,159	<issue_start>username_0: I am writing a review article on common failure modes for a certain technology and to illustrate the different failures, I want to include a range of images from other publications. I have either obtained the permission to use the images or am using images from open access articles with a creative commons license. Some of the images I would like to use are (in the original source) part of a part of a single figure consistining of several subfigures (e.g. I would like to put only subfigure 2e from figure 2 into my paper). Does cropping a subfigure out of a composite figure already constitute a change or an alteration? If so, how should I attribute the changes in the image caption in my paper? Maybe this is really trivial, I nevertheless did not really find an answer anywhere.<issue_comment>username_1: [APA](https://guides.himmelfarb.gwu.edu/APA/image-figure) guidelines state adding the phrase "Adapted from". The relevant example shows: > > General Format 1 (Figure from a Book): > > > [Figure] > > > Note: Descriptive phrase that serves as title and description. > Reprinted [or adapted] > from Book Title (page number), by Author First Initial. Second Initial. Surname, > Year, Publisher. Copyright [Year] by the Name of Copyright Holder. > Reprinted [or adapted] with permission. > > > And for example [IEEE](https://guides.lib.monash.edu/c.php?g=219786&p=6610144) states the following: > > Always place the Image title/caption below the image > > > If you adapt, amend, or otherwise modify the image, indicate this at > the end of your caption > > > So adding that it is adapted seems like the correct thing to do here. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Image manipulation becomes problematic when one can judge them as fabrication (that is, the data visualised were actually never obtained through the methods you describe) or as falsification (whereby crucial information are lost) [1]. It follows that 'beautifying' an image to make them more reader-friendly (e.g. by changing colors) or to add valuable hints (e.g. arrows), or cropping an image to its essential parts while leaving out those sections that are irrelevant to your research would not be deemed fabrications or falsifications. If you can safely assume that cropping the figure does not lead to an omission of crucial information, then I think you are fine. I would, however, disclose the approach by adding a note that you cropped the image, and by giving a reasons as to why you did so. --- [1] See also this presentation, starting at p. 19: <https://www.elsevier.com/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/1028085/Researcher-Academy-Ethics-30-June-2020.pdf> Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I don't see anything special. A caption fitting the journal style but saying something like "taken from fig. 2e in ref #" seems perfect to me. You are not cropping the subfigure. But even in that case, and even if the figure would be data, you just add "spectrum, plot, whatever cropped" from.... Obviously what you let out should not contradict or shouldn't be much related to the point that you actually discuss. Upvotes: 1
2021/02/15	404	1,469	<issue_start>username_0: I live in Iraq and my postdoc application for a Dutch position has been accepted. Now, the PI has sent me an email: > > Dear XXX, > > > Ms YYY (in Cc) and Ms ZZZ will now start the procedure of your > appointment. Please let us know from which date you can be available. > Note that it may take about two months to arrange your residence > permit. > > > Kind regards, > > > I have ambiguity about the sentence: > > which date you can be available? > > > Does she mean the date on which I can start the job (for example as soon as my visa gets ready) or she means the day on which I will be available for HR calls? (for example tomorrow) Thank you.<issue_comment>username_1: Congratulations on your new job! They want to know at which day you can start the job, in order to include the starting date in your contract, which I presume ms. YYY and ZZZ are drawing up as we speak. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I would interpret this as: which date is it possible for you to come to the Netherlands to start the job. But I think the best approach is to give a slightly more details on when you are available for what. You could say "I'm available to discuss any issues around setting up on the job on X and Y days, between Z and W hours. I'll be ready to move to the Netherlands whenever my permit is ready/any time after April 12/let me get back to you in a week or two with a precise date." Upvotes: 4
2021/02/15	839	3,497	<issue_start>username_0: Eastern Europe is composed of the former Warsaw Pact, plus the European part of Russia (e.g. St. Petersburg). I believe Eastern Europe's higher education is influenced by the former USSR. On the other hand, there has always been a political tussle between the USA and Russia. Therefore, there should be some kind of stigma in the USA in recognizing Ph.D. degrees acquired from those countries. No? How is East European Ph.D. viewed in the USA? Are they considered on par with American PhDs or at least compatible with American education?<issue_comment>username_1: Of course it depends on the university, but Eastern Europe has some very fine (and very old) universities. My advisor was educated at Charles in Prague and worked there before his escape. I also know some excellent scholars in Poland and in Hungary. I can't speak personally about the entire region, but certainly, other things being equal, there should be no concerns. My advisor was among the finest mathematicians I've ever known and I've know some famous ones. A former student of mine, now a professor in CS, was from St. Petersburg. His father did important work in mathematics that is widely recognized. Of course I'm speaking of older people, trained in the "old days". The Soviet days, actually. Standards were very high in some fields at least. What has happened since then, I can't speak for. But many of these older academics came to the US since that time and would possibly be some of those you'd be appealing to. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I haven't observed direct stigma against Eastern European schools, but the big indirect problem may be that US academics are not familiar with your school When viewing large numbers of applicants or correspondents, this makes it hard to categorize things. Rightly or wrongly, there is often a need to filter more individuals than you have the ability to research in depth, so that can count against you. Note that this isn't restricted to one direction; I lived in Eastern Europe for years, and I had a friend who went to the US to study at Brown. Now, she was in the private sector, but was routinely frustrated that no one in her country had heard of her school, and therefore didn't place much weight on her educational achievements relative to how an Ivy League education would be assessed in the US. This is similar to the impact of studying at a respected, but small, regional school. There are many of them around the US, and within that school's geographic region you're likely to be interacting with people who are familiar with the school, or possibly even went there themselves. But in a different part of the US, the name of your school would impart no real information to the observer. Similarly, publications may be in a language US academics can't read, or may be poorly translated, or may be published in journals they've never heard of. In my experience it's very likely that academics will be inclined to judge you, your work, and your program, on their merits once you get past that initial filter. So if your goal is to work in the US, try to build personal contacts with academics in the US (e.g. at conferences, via email), try to publish in English, attend a school with some international recognition (in Prague, for example, you have CERGE-EI which is deliberately US-styled), and anything else that helps overcome that initial "I don't recognize any of this" when someone in the US reads your CV. Upvotes: 4
2021/02/16	2,322	9,965	<issue_start>username_0: For background, I'm a first year PhD student in a mathematics program. Basically, I can't tell if I'm "where I should be". As an undergrad, I read before class and lecture felt like a nice review. As a grad student, I can read before class, spend an hour or two pouring over a few pages, understanding every sentence, and the professor will breeze over it in 10 minutes. If I don't prepare, I'll be left in the dust, totally lost. Or, he will cover material with so few details it's hard to tell if I understand anything at all. Talking to classmates, I'm not unusual, but I find this very stressful because it's consistent and I'm not used to it. If it's typical to get lost and not understand the lecture, how can I tell if I understand anything at all? Is this just standard? Reading papers or attending talks is worse. I feel like I get things only at 'handwavey' level, without details or subtlety. I know this is normal so I don't stress much, but some day I will have to be giving talks, writing papers. How can I get there if without a firm basis? I think my fear is that I could be learning the absolute minimum and barely skating by -- which will bite me when it comes time to take prelims/do my own research -- or I could be doing perfectly fine and just stressing myself out. My question is, how can I tell? How can I gauge if I'm making typical or appropriate progress? My grades and homework are good, but this seems meaningless. I always receive full marks, even when I find errors in my own work later, and work comes back with no comments. Talking with peers helps a lot, but is hard with distance learning. Asking a professor directly seems like it would be awkward and unprofessional, and also how could they know? They don't grade the homework and we speak for maybe 20 minutes in office hours occasionally. What else could I consider? I've also read [this post](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/61194/how-can-a-new-phd-student-objectively-evaluate-how-well-they-are-doing), which is relevant, but the answers are directed at the research stage of the PhD. I'm still taking courses, etc. I've also read posts on imposter syndrome and I feel like my issue is distinct. It's not that I feel like an imposter, but more that I feel like I'm untethered and in la la land as Dan writes. I'm interested in ways to feel more tethered, and in understanding how common/typical this untethered feeling is so it doesn't stress me out as much.<issue_comment>username_1: I think you’ve hit on a subtle point here that plagues many mathematics students up to and including the advanced graduate level: evaluating yourself without external feedback is very, very difficult. In fact, it seems to me that the ability to evaluate your own level of understanding (in the context of studying pure math at least) and test when you understand a concept well, versus when you are just deluding yourself into thinking you understand, is a skill in its own right. And it’s a difficult skill at that, one which takes considerable time and experience to acquire. Professional mathematicians have developed all sorts of tricks and heuristics to achieve this: various sanity checks and other “unit tests” that we continuously run while working through new material to test our understanding and make sure we keep our mathematical feet planted firmly on the ground, instead of becoming untethered and flying off to some kind of la la land. At some point this becomes second nature and I would guess that most experienced mathematicians do it essentially at a subconscious level. But as I said, it takes years of practice to get to that point. What I would suggest is that you do two things: first, put it on your todo list to develop an ability to gauge your own level of understanding and identify misconceptions about material you’re reading or hearing in lecture. It’s an extremely useful skill, and thinking of it as an explicit thing you want to work towards in a deliberate way will surely help you acquire it faster and better. Second, until you’ve actually developed that skill and have evidence to support that, assume you don’t have it. That is, accept that there will be occasions (which become increasingly rare over time, typically) when you will absolutely have to rely on external feedback to tell you that you’re misunderstanding something, or to confirm that you’re not. I imagine people will be posting other answers here suggesting various tips and tricks for evaluating yourself. That’s all well and good, but don’t let such advice mislead you into thinking you can do without external feedback. You can’t — not yet, not at this point in your studies at least. So don’t be shy, go out and seek that feedback from your professors, peers, stack exchange or wherever else you can get it. And please get rid of the mindset that it’s “unprofessional” to seek feedback - nothing could be further from the truth in my opinion. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: First, let's eliminate a couple of ways that aren't helpful to tell if you're on-track: * Don't evaluate yourself by comparing your knowledge/ability to that of your professor (e.g., worrying that you spend two hours understanding something and then he is able to breeze over it in a small fraction of that time). Most academic staff were high achieving even by the standards of their PhD cohort, and additionally, they have several decades of additional experience since then. It is completely normal for PhD candidates to have difficulties with problems that academic staff can solve easily (for an example, see this [related question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/170569/)). * Don't expect to understand more from a talk than what is reasonable: By design, good talks do not usually go into heavy levels of technical detail. Going into deep technical details requires more time, and it requires an audience having time to "digest" the material. This is usually not possible in the timeframe allocated for a talk, so you will generally find that good speakers find ways to gloss over the technical details and present their topic in a way that gives the audience a good overarching understanding, but without the minutae. By design, this is sometimes a bit "hand-wavey". Usually a talk topic is backed up by an academic paper (already published, submitted, or under contruction) so if you want more technical details you can follow-up with a request for any paper the speaker has written on the topic. * Don't impose made-up impediments on asking for feedback: It may feel awkward to you, but there is nothing at all unprofessional about asking your teachers for feedback on your progress and standing. In fact, this is literally professional --- i.e., within the direct scope of the professional duties of the academics you are dealing with. For the lecturers of your courses, they are unlikely to be able to give much feedback beyond what your assessment results in the course tell them, but they might have some more insight on your strengths/weaknesses. If you have a supervisor or panel at this stage of your candidature, you can ask them how you are going. Now, here are some things that are helpful in evaluating whether you're on-track: * Other students are in the same boat: You mention that from talking to your classmates (I am assuming these are other PhD students) you are not unusual. That suggests that the difficulties you are having are standard difficulties at this stage of the program, and are not an indication of being off-track. * Your grades are good: You mention that your coursework is progressing well and your grades are good. That means you are learning the course material up to the required standard, which also indicates that you are on-track. The early part of the PhD program is often devoted to coursework and "upskilling" so that you come into the research part with a solid base of technical skills. The grades you get in your coursework are a reasonable indication of how you are doing in that part. * You are having trouble understanding papers beyond a superficial level: This is the only part of what you write that is a concern, and it is not particularly unusual at your level. For many students, first-year of a PhD program might be the first time they ever read academic papers (as opposed to textbooks, course notes, etc.), and it takes some practice to learn how to digest this material. Unlike textbooks or course notes, academic papers are less "self-contained" and they operate in a context of a wider literature on a topic. These papers often rely on context and referencing of other work to point to parts of the topic, so it is not unusual that you will miss details or subtleties when you are new to reading them. The main skill to develop here is to learn to "dig in" to the literature, read some of the papers cited by the paper you are reading, and so on, until you feel you understand the material in the paper under examination. I recommend you dig deeper in your readings until you feel that you have understood a paper at a reasonably deep level. That is a skill you will need to develop for your later research work. * You haven't failed any of your candidature reviews: You PhD candidature has a number of review steps where you will be formally evaluated, and these are points at which the department can identify weaker candidates. You mention that you have some kind of preliminary examination coming up later, prior to progressing to the research phase of your candidature. That will obviously give you some feedback on your progress. Presumably that preliminary exam has been held before, so perhaps you can have a look at some past exams and see how hard they seem to you. In any case, as things stand, you have not failed any candidature reviews, which means that there is no indication of being off-track. Upvotes: 2
2021/02/16	919	4,014	<issue_start>username_0: Most universities around the world are now requesting their lecturers to record lectures and post them on a repository. In my university, we use Moodle to store and share video recordings. My question is: what are the copyirights of my uploaded videos (say in UK and/or USA)? Do I have any rights once I upload my videos to the system? My question is motivated by a big discussion we are currently having in our Faculty (where Faculty means a group of Science Departments) on whether the University has total rights on our uploaded videos. If so, they want to recycle lectures even after lecturers leave (say, for another university) or die. I understand this can be seen as one of those questions whose answer is: check your contract, ask your manager, read the entire Constitution, ... My question relates to a general understanding of copyrights of video lectures. Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: If you, the faculty, want to retain any rights, I suggest that you (as a collective group negotiating with the administration) write them into a contract. You might be able to come to a royalty agreement, but I doubt much beyond that. If faculty are employees of the university then most of the IP created can be claimed by the employer, just as if you were employed by IBM in a research capacity. I don't think that universities (none in my experience) get in the way of a faculty member publishing books (or software, ...), but those are normally written at the full initiative of the author(s) rather than at the direction of the university. And since there are other alternatives for teaching a course than writing your own book, it is normally an independent activity. Lectures, however, like other explicit course materials, seem to be in a different category. The course materials were created by yourself, but at the direction of the employer. The university provides the infrastructure and the audience. IANAL, but guess that the above is a pretty general interpretation. Copyright law, however, is variable around the world and to some extent, so is the relationship between the faculty and the university. So, "your mileage may vary." Absent a formal agreement, the university will probably claim to own all rights including the rights to reuse such things in the future whether the faculty member is employed there or not and without additional compensation. It would be difficult, at best, to contest this view, I think. I would prefer a different interpretation, of course, in which the law would recognize that the faculty is the university and derives all function and authority from the consent and participation of the faculty. However, that is a late medieval view. Yes, I'm that old. If a university wants to maintain a high quality faculty and keep them happy and productive, I think they would be willing to negotiate some sharing arrangement. It would need to be formalized. An argument for such an agreement would, I think, be an improvement in the general quality of such things. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In the United States, and possibly in all Berne Convention nations, copyright exists in a creative work as soon as it is "fixed in a tangible medium." Sound and video recordings qualify as fixed in a tangible medium. In general, copyright belongs to the person who created the work. The exception is a "work made for hire," which belongs to the person or organization doing the hiring. In the United States, for something to be a work made for hire requires an agreement beforehand. In the absence of such an agreement, the work belongs to the person who created it. So, in the absence of a "work made for hire" clause in your contract, you own the copyright to your recorded lectures. Well, that was wrong. In the U.S., an employment relationship seems to classify work done in the course of employment as "work made for hire." Sorry. Enforcing such a copyright may be a different matter entirely. Upvotes: 0
2021/02/16	1,175	4,650	<issue_start>username_0: I am currently a second year student at an American mid-ranked liberal arts college, majoring in philosophy with hopes to attend a PHD program in philosophy (in the US) and become a philosophy professor. I have read all the advice I can find on graduating a year early, and there is some conflicting suggestions. I also find my reason for graduating early to perhaps be more compelling than some that I have seen be dissuaded on this site. To spit it out; I am a closeted transgender person, who, if I were to come out, would likely be disowned by my family whom I am currently reliant on for my tuition. I fundamentally cannot tolerate delaying being who I am any longer than I must to graduate undergrad. I need to graduate in 3 years as opposed to 4. Some facts about my application: * I have a 3.9x gpa, 4.0 in philosophy (which I hope to keep). * I will have taken 16-17 philosophy classes, including nearly every advanced course offered. * I conducted research last summer, am writing a paper this semester that will likely be published, will conduct research this upcoming summer, and will, both semesters next year, be conducting independent research. I will graduate with a sizable amount of research experience in just 3 years. * I have been deeply involved on my campus, and have achieved a lot extracuriccularly. (Don't want to dox myself with specifics, and know that extracurriculars aren't that important, but hope that this would diminish worries about youth/maturity and being someone just interested in my discipline). My big conflict at the moment is trying to figure out whether or not I should apply to PHD programs next year, or spend a year after graduation in a fellowship or job before going for my PHD. I suppose I may apply to both fellowships/jobs and some PHD programs next year, and then if I don't get accepted to the PHD programs I would do the fellowship and reapply to more in the next cycle, but I am really just looking for advice here. Thank you all for reading this mess!<issue_comment>username_1: 1. Talk to your current professors. 2. Assuming US, it's too late to apply for most good PhD programs this year. 3. The academic job market in philosophy is worse than abysmal. You should assume you will not find a permanent academic position. Moreover, the data suggests that your chances are even worse if you do not attend a top program - though it's not at all clear that there is a causal relationship. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: While the [answer of username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/162704/75368) is pessimistic and likely correct, let me offer different advice. If you want to study for a doctorate in Philosophy or any other field, then just do it. Delay is probably not needed nor helpful. If you can get accepted then start the study. Apply whenever you can to a variety of programs. Too narrow a focus can leave you without options. Yes, the job market is bad now, but who knows what it will be like in six years. You may find that you can't get hired at an R1 university, but that is not the only option open to you. Small colleges and even community colleges teach philosophy, some of them at a high level. No one can predict what jobs will be open to you when you finish. And it isn't impossible to move from a lower ranked place to a higher one if you are good enough and organize your professional life correctly. My opinion is that you make a mistake to assume all doors are closed and turn away from your goals prematurely. But you have to excel in what you to and you have to make appropriate professional contacts to move on. My situation was just the opposite. It seemed like jobs would be plentiful by the time I finished my (math) degree. But the market completely crashed and I had to make do for several years. I could have moved up earlier than I did, I think, but overall my career was satisfying. You only live one life. Make the most of it. Do not accept wooden nickels. --- At worst, a PhD (philosophy) will give you useful and marketable skills. You will learn to think. You will learn to write. You will have options that you probably won't have if you turn aside out of pessimism. But try to make it happen without an unacceptable debt load. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: If you have decided to get a PhD in the US, do apply to PhD programs during the application season of your last year of undergraduate studies. If you do not get an offer you like, reapply later. The number of years it takes to get your bachelors degree and your gender identity have no effect on this application timeline. Upvotes: 0
2021/02/16	836	3,000	<issue_start>username_0: I submitted my Master's thesis last December (2020), and it just been accepted (so in 2021), and the university will probably take many (maybe even 6) months before they actually give me the diploma (bureaucracy). On CVs and scholarship applications, what date should I be writing? I am somewhat wary of writing 2018-2021 as it makes it look like I took 3 years, yet I want to be rigourous. What is the accepted norm for what constitutes the "end" of the degree. This is especially true if I need to write months, as putting the final diploma date would add many months. Also, in the meanwhile until the university formally gives me the diploma, can I still say I finished the Master's as all my courses are complete and thesis accepted?<issue_comment>username_1: My (unofficial) transcript shows this (redacted and emphasis added): > > -------------- DEGREE EARNED MM/DD/YY -------------- > > > BACHELOR OF ARTS (DEGREE) > > > CUM LAUDE > > > WITH COLLEGE HONORS IN DEGREE > > > UNIV:150.0 TRANSFER: 37.0 EXTENSION: 15.0 GPA: 3.83 > > > Check your transcript (I've heard some universities don't do unofficial transcripts, so you may have to pay) for the date you should use. As I mentioned in the comment, this is probably a few days to a week after your thesis was accepted by your department. However, some universities only confer degrees on regular dates (i.e. the first of the month) or even once a semester. You should write whatever date your transcript says, which will be in 2021. The date the paper arrives doesn't matter at all (mine took three months). That said, if your university is one that won't actually give you the degree until June (since your thesis was accepted in February), it would be fine to note on your resume (if you feel it matters): > > MA, Basket Weaving > > > Feb., 2021 (requirements met; conferred June 2021) > > > Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: For most institutions, the degree date is the day that the university actually hands out the degrees, not the date that you fulfill the requirements for the degree. At all the universities that I am familiar with, this happens only at fixed times of year, and your degree will be on the first such date after you fulfill the requirements and submit the necessary paperwork. For example, my alma mater has three degree dates per year: people on the [standard schedule graduate in June](https://registrar.mit.edu/graduation/spring-degree-dates-deadlines), and [off-cycle graduation is offered in September and February](https://registrar.mit.edu/graduation/spring-degree-dates-deadlines/other-degree-dates-deadlines). I'm sure there are institutions that do not work this way, but in the US at least it seems to be fairly standard to have fixed degree dates. In either case, you should be able to readily find this information on the webpage of your university's registrar's office or equivalent, like the pages I linked above. Upvotes: 2
2021/02/17	2,141	9,150	<issue_start>username_0: Recently I received this comment from an Elsevier editor "The manuscript does not reach the required quality standard of this journal.". Since then have been found some answers but also raise additional questions. Like the one I making here. (You can browse the initial question following this link [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/162679/the-manuscript-does-not-reach-the-required-quality-standard-of-this-journal?noredirect=1#comment437790_162679).) One of the criteria for acceptance of a paper is the one of written language throughout the text. Many times is found great published articles on more peripherical journals simply because the article does not comply strictly with the language minimum requirements for any other more reputable\* Journals. Spite all the work is properly done, explained, and demonstrated both graphically and mathematically. In my particular case, my written English inherits some of my native language (PT) sentence constructs, which may be confusing to those with native English (UK and US) writing skills. That said, and thinking also in terms of open-data and open-source access to all, how can a researcher, in particular a junior (newbie) research, can learn the language requirements for a specific scientific Journal? EDIT: Yesterday I forgot to add an essential and relevant fact to this conversion, which is: many and many scientific researchers don't have the opportunity to develop their research works in a team or even do it collaboratively. They have to rely on themselves to present their findings and defend their thesis. And everyone here is acquainted with the syndrome of "tunnel effect" when writing. So having someone, that can give a small contribution to unlocking someone else research writing, I see as a welcoming behavior that can only benefit the scientific community at the individual level. EDIT 2: in the midst of all these comments and answers, I found today, this small tutorial with some useful tips for non-native English researchers <https://www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/how-to/authoring-editing-reviewing/submit-for-non-native-english-speakers> EDIT 3: since the initial commit, I took the liberty and went requesting quotes online for proofreading and grammar. 400 CAD is quite a lot for a student, imho. It's not feasible.<issue_comment>username_1: I think your premise is wrong. Although an editor commenting > > "The manuscript does not reach the required quality standard of this journal." > > > can imply > > the article does not comply strictly with the language...requirements > > > I think it is more likely that standards for research quality haven't been met. Indeed, I regularly see high quality research published in top journals even though the writing is merely reasonable. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Journal editors know very well that most researchers' native language is not English, and that their language skill is not necessarily related to the quality of the research (many editors are non-native speakers themselves). But editors and reviewers do not wish to "guess" what you mean or spend extra time deciphering non-English sentence constructs. It is expected that you put in the effort to make the paper ready for publication. Besides good science and good figures that also includes clear and (mostly) correct English. If your English or writing skill in general is not good enough this is understandable, but you should seek help to improve the article before submitting the paper. By doing so you will also get better at it. A paper is a bit like a CV: if it looks sloppy and full of errors, people do not want to read it. Also, in my experience as a reviewer, authors who did not bother to provide a paper with decent figures and (mostly) correct English were usually equally sloppy in their research. Two excellent comments also give a partial answer to your question: * @username_1: Don't learn some particularly journal's requirements: Learn to write well * @henning: Language requirements don't differ so much between journals. Not enough, anyway, to make this a criterion for choosing a journal to submit your manuscript to. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: If I would review a paper of yours, and the paper would contain similar language errors as found in this question, then I would complain about the level of English too. Let's dissect: > > Since then have been found some answers > > > What does this even mean? What or who is the subject of this sentence? > > Like the one I making here. > > > This is a sentence fragment instead of a sentence, and also it is without an active verb (it just contains a gerund, which is simply ungrammatical). > > Many times is found great published articles on more peripherical journals simply because the article does not comply strictly with the language minimum requirements for any other more reputable\* Journals. > > > How about: "Many times, great articles are published in more peripheral journals, simply because the article does not comply strictly with the minimum language requirements of more reputable journals."? > > Spite all the work is properly done, explained, and demonstrated both graphically and mathematically. > > > "Spite" is not how one starts a sentence (one could consider "In spite"), and again, this is a sentence fragment. Turn it into "This holds, even if the work is [...]" > > how can a researcher, in particular a junior (newbie) research, > > > Is it "a researcher", or "a research"? Pick a lane. Preferably the correct one, but even if you do it wrong, at least be consistent. If you cannot be consistent with language within the same sentence, how can the reviewer trust you to be consistent with the science itself? > > how can a researcher, [...], can learn the language requirements for a specific scientific Journal? > > > There shouldn't be two "can"s. --- Reviewers and editors should be reasonably forgiving towards non-native speakers, and the further the authors' first language is from English, the more forgiving reviewers and editors should be. For instance, blaming far-East Asian authors for not knowing how to place articles is not nice, since far-East Asian languages do not have articles. However, this does not absolve authors of papers from the responsibility of writing their papers as well as they possibly can. English isn't my native language either, but I wouldn't dare to submit a paper with the level of English that your question shows. In the end, the paper is the final product. This is the way in which you present the science, and it is the way in which the wider scientific audience will get to know the science. Hence, if you do not put in the effort to present your science as clearly, correctly, and pleasantly as possible, the audience will not care about your science. You could conceivably wish that the writing wouldn't matter, but it does. Consider either improving your English language skills, or getting external advice from a native English speaker. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: There is no "checklist" for language requirements. It's up to the editor and reviewer(s) to decide whether your paper can be understood without doubt about what you are trying to convey. When a reader needs to guess what you mean, there is a lot of room for error - something you don't want, especially not in scientific publications. The minimum language requirements are likely in the area of a C1 level according to the CEFR definition, maybe you get through with a B2. Below that you should probably get some help from a proficient or native English speaker before you submit your manuscripts (or ask the journal for language editing service - many offer these for a fee). Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: While OP improves their English language proficiency (which takes time), they can use a language editing service to guarantee a certain standard of language. Grammar helper tools are unfortunately not a replacement for a mastery of the language. They often make suggestions that are irrelevant, bending the meaning, or simply do not capture what I have in mind. However, they can help fixing at least some glitches. The English used in papers is often not very good, but it does not usually have blatant errors. Especially if one is unsure about the language, I recommend simple sentences with fewer options to make mistakes. It does not sound very poetic, but at least reduces the probability of being wrong. English is in some respect simpler than other languages in that the conspicuous lack of declination/conjugation is replaced by a rigid word order for certain classes. Get some English grammar templates that show this word order and keep them beside your writing implements. Example: <https://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/adjectives-order> In an unclear situation, try to google similar sentence structures and see whether they appear anywhere. This will slow down your writing, but improve your confidence that what you write is correct. Upvotes: 2
2021/02/17	745	3,194	<issue_start>username_0: Considering situations where an individual academic track record is to be evaluated - whether by grant panel, job interview panel, promotion panel etc. If the individual were to make a statement along the lines of > > Prior to [date] I was suffering from an undiagnosed long > term health condition which did not result in absence from work, but limited my > output. This was both diagnosed and treated from [date] after which > my productivity increased substantially, as can be demonstrated by > XYZ. > > > Is this likely to be viewed favorably in evaluating the applicant's potential to deliver on the future grant/job/etc? Or is there a risk it could be viewed with suspicion given the applicant was still employed between those dates and the employer unaware of the situation? Suppose it were a mental health disorder, would it be better to say so, or keep with the more generic description above? Would the answer differ depending on which of the situations (job application, grant application) we're talking about?<issue_comment>username_1: I would suggest that you don't raise the issue, for a couple of reasons. First is that you don't know how it will be read. Some people might see it as an invalid excuse, rather than a valid one. Others might wonder whether it will affect your work in future. It is impossible to say. Saying such things won't, in particular, give you an advantage. Second, it is natural for a person's productivity to increase over time and natural for an application reader to weigh the more recent work more heavily then the older work. That effect can occur even for someone with no health issues. I doubt that the change after the date of diagnosis would be noted by a typical reader unless you point it out. This is really opinion, of course. If you are healthy now, focus on how you will continue productivity going into the future. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In Australia, you would be specifically prompted to provide this information in pretty much every type of application under "career disruptions" or in a section about "relative to opportunity". It would be considered normal to make a statement similar to your example. There would be no need to identify the type of disorder. Whatever it is, your reader isn't likely to know much about it. The exception might be if your research area is a disorder you've personally experienced. How you handle this depends a lot on your local culture. I'm not aware of other places that confront this head-on the way the Australian system does. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I don't know what country this is but, in general, I strongly advise against this. Academia might seem like a collaborative space of kindred spirits (and it can be!) but the situations you're describing aren't necessarily good situations. For how great academia can be, it is also a cut-throat hierarchy with a hazing structure similar to a fraternity or a sports team. There are times where you can disclose personal information like this and it could be well received. The evaluative settings you describe are not those times. Try not to give them hazing material. Upvotes: -1
2021/02/17	499	2,137	<issue_start>username_0: On their CV, how should an associate professor go about making a bullet point accomplishment that they "designed / wrote / created / produced" student exams? that is, devised several pages of questions (and corresponding answers) meant to test students' knowledge about the subject or sub-field. How does this verb change for an assistant professor who serves a higher rank professor, but who was given lee-way or freedom to similarly also create/write exams from scratch as they see fit?<issue_comment>username_1: A common model used for creating instructional materials is the [ADDIE model](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instructional_design#ADDIE_process). Its five phases are: * Analyze – Gather information about one's audience, the tasks to be completed, how the learners will view the content, and the project's overall goals. * Design – Write a learning objective, identify and break down tasks to be more manageable for the designer, then determine the kind of activities required for the audience in order to meet the goals identified in the Analyze phase. * Develop – Create the activities that will be implemented. * Implement – Test all materials to determine if they are functional and appropriate for the intended audience. * Evaluate – Use formative and summative assessment to assess the project's elements and revise them if necessary. Use the verb that most accurately describes what you actually did. In your case, it might be "develop assessment instruments." Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: All that I really can say is what will not describe "creation of exams". In some versions of English, "writing an exam" would mean "taking the exam" in other English. That is, being an examinee, rather than an examiner. "Setting an exam" in some contexts is understood as "creating the exam", but seldom in the U.S. It is not typical, but I'd think would be relatively clear in most versions of English, currently, to say "created exams" or "composed exams". (Nevertheless, people looking at the CV would think, "hm, what? Of course. Why is this person mentioning this?") Upvotes: 2
2021/02/17	1,028	4,273	<issue_start>username_0: I have a postdoc interview at the end of the month. I found a researcher's profile that's been working on the same research project I applied for. I am thinking of sending her an email or a LinkedIn message (I've already connected with her). But I don't know if that's ethical to do that or not, I am afraid that it will look like I am asking for more information as an advantage on other candidates. I want to basically ask her a particular question about the project. The job's description mentions that they're using a method X on a tool Z. But this confuses me because I know it could mean a lot of things. I actually emailed the PI (\) way before I applied asking for a clarification and the potential similarity with an approach I have already used. I needed that information to decide if I'll apply or not, but she didn't reply to me email and I applied either way. Now that I am invited for interview, I still need to know more details about the method X and the relationship with tool Z. Is it unethical to send such detailed question to a researcher working on the same project before the interview? (\) Her email wasn't listed in the job description, so I used the one in the department<issue_comment>username_1: There are no ethical concerns here. You don't need to go into an interview blind about the project. It is possible, of course, that people have been asked not to correspond with people in the pipeline other than officially, but that is up to them. You can ask. But the tone of your mail will determine whether people think you are looking for information or for an advantage. You can also ask after the interview, of course, but before you need to make a decision. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: For every job I've contemplated I have gone out and done what I consider to be the necessary due diligence. If you have connections, use them. If it involves cold-calling a person or two to ask questions, do it. Fun story - I was considering moving from technical staff to management and an interesting position opened up. My due diligence consisted of answering two questions for myself. (1) Did I really want to be a manager, and (2) was this position the right position to step into management. In the course of a week I talked to about 10 different people, some staff, some managers, some trusted confidants. I decided the answers to (1) and (2) were affirmative, so I applied. The day for the interview arrived, and I walked into a room with 6 people, the interview committee. I had talked to every single one during my process. Not surprisingly, the interview went very well. So, yes, go and ask. There are no ethical issues at all. Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Note that many universities follow strict procedures for selecting candidates. Especially, if they are state-funded, they have to adhere to objective and transparent procedures. Contacting your potential peers or future bosses outside formal channels may be perceived as gaining an unfair advantage over other candidates. This is a big no-no and may backfire. To stay on the safe side, I would ask your primary contact for the interview to clarify your questions. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: First I think there's an important point to mention, even if it doesn't answer the question: in theory the interview is a two way street, i.e. not only the PI wants to know if you're the right person for the job, you also want to know if the job (and the PI) are right for you. There would be nothing wrong with asking some details about the job during the interview, and the decision to take the job (should it be offered) doesn't have to be made immediately. I have seen academic job ads where canvassing is explicitly prohibited, for example see these "instructions for candidates" from [University College Cork](https://www.ucc.ie/en/hr/recruitment/candidates/): > > Candidates should note that canvassing will disqualify and will result > in their exlusion from the competition. > > > However I don't know if this kind of question would be construed as canvassing or not, and normally if this was the case at the institution where OP applies it should be mentioned clearly in the job ad. Upvotes: 2
2021/02/17	726	2,870	<issue_start>username_0: I am now in panic. One of my paper got accepted by journal. However, I am stuck with the copyright from two figures I have used in my research paper. These two figures ( these two from open access internet source and free to the public). I just simply thought that I will acknowledge/reference their organizations in my paper and that's it. After I read the copyright requirements from journal, I realize that I need to write and ask for permission from third parties. I already write emails to them but it might take a long time or even they don't answer my email. In there website, it is said that :"All materials that appear on ADB's official website, adb.org, are its exclusive property unless otherwise indicated. ADB encourages users to print, download, or copy information, documents and materials from the website exclusively for personal and non-commercial use". my research paper is now in the production stage ( pass all review processes) and needs the last step of proofreading. Is there any chance that I remove these two figures from my accepted manuscript? Or what should I do now. I know it's my mistake and this one is my first research paper, I don't have any experience in publication. Please help me , I really appreciated for your advice.<issue_comment>username_1: Normally, this is something you would normally arrange before the submission. There may be no perfect solution at this stage. Deleting figures from an accepted manuscript is not advisable, as it may make your conclusions unjustified. Normally, journal's won't allow significant modifications after the review. However, a few ideas to consider: 1. If figures are simple sketches, you can make your own and submit them. 2. If figures are plots, you can [redraw](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/123847/redrawing-a-schematic-diagram-image-schematic-circuits-to-avoid-copyright-infrin)/reproduce them. 3. Depending on the copyright laws in your country and copyright policy of the publisher, you may be able to reuse a small portion of text/figures from the original publication under a [fair use](https://www.copyright.gov/fair-use/more-info.html#:%7E:text=Fair%20use%20is%20a%20legal,protected%20works%20in%20certain%20circumstances.&text=Nature%20of%20the%20copyrighted%20work,purpose%20of%20encouraging%20creative%20expression.) policy. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I suggest that you inform the editor immediately of the problem. Some publishers will act on your behalf to obtain (and possibly pay for) copyright license. It is worth an ask. But the editor needs to be informed in any case. Don't delay. You would need their permission to delete as it may affect the readability of the paper. And the solutions suggested by [username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/162742/75368) may be open to you of course. Upvotes: 2
2021/02/17	505	1,811	<issue_start>username_0: I submitted paper to a journal of Elsevier. Now it has been 1 month from submission with status: "with editor". Is this normal? And should I contact the journal to ask about the long time of that status?<issue_comment>username_1: Normally, this is something you would normally arrange before the submission. There may be no perfect solution at this stage. Deleting figures from an accepted manuscript is not advisable, as it may make your conclusions unjustified. Normally, journal's won't allow significant modifications after the review. However, a few ideas to consider: 1. If figures are simple sketches, you can make your own and submit them. 2. If figures are plots, you can [redraw](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/123847/redrawing-a-schematic-diagram-image-schematic-circuits-to-avoid-copyright-infrin)/reproduce them. 3. Depending on the copyright laws in your country and copyright policy of the publisher, you may be able to reuse a small portion of text/figures from the original publication under a [fair use](https://www.copyright.gov/fair-use/more-info.html#:%7E:text=Fair%20use%20is%20a%20legal,protected%20works%20in%20certain%20circumstances.&text=Nature%20of%20the%20copyrighted%20work,purpose%20of%20encouraging%20creative%20expression.) policy. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I suggest that you inform the editor immediately of the problem. Some publishers will act on your behalf to obtain (and possibly pay for) copyright license. It is worth an ask. But the editor needs to be informed in any case. Don't delay. You would need their permission to delete as it may affect the readability of the paper. And the solutions suggested by [username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/162742/75368) may be open to you of course. Upvotes: 2
2021/02/17	668	2,811	<issue_start>username_0: 29 year old male, considering applying for PHD programs that begin 2021 or else 2022. Have I left it too late to apply for a PHD that begins in 2021? I know this question is fairly general, but it seems that in the U.S, deadlines for most PHD programs have passed. I'm curious if it's the same in Europe.<issue_comment>username_1: Unlike in the US, there are no "application seasons" in Europe. PhD positions are announced throughout the year, and every vacancy has its own deadline. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Academia in Europe is very diverse. This answer is for the case of Germany. There are two ways of doing a PhD in Germany. You can either join a coordinated program, or you find a PhD advisor under which supervision you will work outside of such a program. Coordinated programs all have their own deadlines. For joining them in October (fall), deadlines between March and July appear to be common. However, doing a PhD outside of a coordinated program is the norm in Germany. There are no seasons for the deadlines for them, and the application you will write is for the funding - getting into the PhD program is then normally the easy part. Scholarships may have deadlines, but more common is the case that you are employed by your future university in the research group of your PhD supervisor while doing a PhD at the same time, and each suitable position has a different deadline. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Answer valid for France only. PhD programs in France require to already have a master's degree (or equivalent); filling the position is controlled by the PhD advisor(s); funding is usually secured by the advisor before advertising the position (\). This means you have more time to apply because your clock starts after funding was obtained. There is no official PhD season, but in practice most PhD start between September and ~February, based on the previous year graduation of master's students. In my case I applied to the position in early October and started the PhD work and getting paid in December. However, I was officially enrolled in the "doctoral school" only in late February. You should probably assume a 4-month delay in case your advisor is less versed at playing the bureaucracy than mine were. Hence, February is not late for France gor a start in autumn. I would even guess most open positions are not published yet. (\) funding sources that I know of officially grant PhD positions based on the strength of the research project that the advisor submits (alternatively, more general project funds allow for PhDs/postdocs). However, I do know unofficially of one case where funding went to a project based on the CV of the candidate that would fill the position. I do not know is that is common or not. Upvotes: 2
2021/02/17	1,251	5,080	<issue_start>username_0: I have dropped out of 2 MSc in CSE programs because of my health issues and lack of proper math background. You can check the full story from my previous question. * [What should I do now to go ahead and restart my aspirations to become an appropriate candidate for a Ph.D. program?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/159935/100406) Now, I am facing a new decision dilemma. One of the professors from the Faculty of Life Science of a university in eastern Europe just hired me to work with him on a project. The project I would be working on is related to data science and algorithm development. He is also interested in taking me as a Ph.D. student under him. I can start a Ph.D. under him in 2022 if I agree. Suppose, I enroll and complete my Ph.D. under him. Would I be facing any kind of trouble in the future for leaving my 2 previous MScs incomplete? I have been having a lifelong ambition in working in academia in the USA. Would any problem arise in the future regarding these 2 incomplete MScs? Another question is, how would it look like if I want to work as a teacher in the Faculty of Engineering in the USA, but have a Ph.D. from the Faculty of Life Science?<issue_comment>username_1: Leaving the masters unfinished isn't a huge problem. But moving from a Life Sciences Doctorate to Engineering is a big step and would need a lot of justification. You don't say which university in Europe so it is hard to guess at their reputation. I won't predict that it is impossible, but I think you will have a hard time convincing people unless you have produces some substantial papers that are pretty technical. Is getting an engineering doctorate in Europe an option for you instead of one in life sciences? Or some sort of joint degree. Tough road. Uphill all the way, I think. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: A friend of mine did a PhD in biology with a focus on genetics and bioinformatics. A number of years later after various postdocs she ended up as a computer science professor. A typical story? Frankly, I suspect not. But it does happen. On the other hand, if your dream is to be an engineering professor, the surest and most direct route to doing that (which still is by no means certain to succeed, and leaves plenty of obstacles to overcome and potential points of failure along the way) is to pursue a PhD in engineering. My impression is you are trying to fit a round peg into a square hole with this life sciences PhD scheme. A PhD is hard enough for people who are doing it in the discipline they are actually passionate about. Doing it in a discipline you don’t care much about just because somebody is offering you a position will only compound the difficulty, and will potentially put you in a situation where your skills are mismatched with your responsibilities and likely career opportunities. As for the degrees you didn’t complete: I don’t know what kind of trouble you are imagining this might cause so I can’t really address that question. But generally speaking, if you satisfy the formal requirements to be a PhD student, you can be a PhD student. So if you are concerned, check with the university you’ll be attending that those dropped degrees don’t disqualify you. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: If you face a problem at all, it is likely to be difficulty in gaining entry to a PhD program. If your professor has already decided to accept you as a student despite knowledge of your previous non-completion of studies then you appear to be "over the hump". Once you have entered the program the only problems will depend on your performance in that program rather than what came previously. If you were to enter and complete your PhD program then your non-completion of previous programs will be irrelevant. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Kind of a lot going on here. I read OP's other thread, and pulled this tidbit I'd like to address first: > > due to my undiagnosed clinical depression and, apparently, insufficient math background, I dropped out of two Masters in CS programs from two different EU universities > > > I do not question your health issues (welcome to the academia club!), but it is striking that within the same breath you suggest its either depression or a lack of a mathematics background...in a CSE program. Isn't it possible that your (supposed) lack of maths backround did the heavy lifting here? That said, to address your specific question of would you face any future difficulty after leaving two MSc programs? Not if you can explain the situational, academic, and life factors that led to this. But lets be clear, you won't be applying for faculty at Stanford. You're looking at 2nd/3rd tier universities, which I attended, loved, and led to lots of success - nothing wrong with that. As for the agreement between Faculty of Engineering vs Faculty of Life Sciences, this might bring up some scrutiny, but I've found that this is less of an issue if you can demonstrate you are a good fit for the position. Upvotes: 2
2021/02/18	1,407	6,013	<issue_start>username_0: About my background: I finished my master's six months ago with a `cum laude` in Europe (A tier 1 university) and my research was very theoretical and I did invest a lot of thought into it. I like it a lot. Even though it was challenging, I was motivated. Therefore, I like to research a lot, I really do. Because of my dedication, I was approached by my professor for a Ph.D. position. He listened to my interests and gave me some advice and some facts. According to him, people don't consider hiring people for a Ph.D. in the area I was interested in unless they have a solid background. Then, he offered me a Ph.D. which is not related to what I did in my masters. I would say it is more applied than fundamental. I didn't do all courses related to that topic before to understand it fully. He promised to change the topic a little bit so that it fits my interests. I did a literature review and I found questions to solve. He assigned me a daily supervisor who works under him. Let's call him DS (Daily Supervisor). I had heard not very good reviews about him earlier. People under him tend to finish their Masters and Ph.D. later than they originally are supposed to. He doesn't have a hold of concepts when it comes to research but at the same time has a lot of ideas that are scattered all over the place. He confuses me all the time. When I came up with my research questions more towards my interests, he really tried forcing me to consider finding questions related to the more applied stuff and more towards its application side which is not my strong point because simply I don't have a solid background in it. Both the main professor and DS had some clash of ideas. I am a direct person and if I don't like something I complain. They did find a direction for me and again promised that I would do something of my own interests after a year. Now. I feel like I am trapped. My main professor is very considerate. I am thinking of asking him if I can do a post-masters here instead of a Ph.D. and do some TA work for the next six months and I will ask him to recommend me for some work abroad related to A for my next Ph.D. The main professor still thinks I am creative, I have an analytical mind and also he trusts me. He may consider writing me a good recommendation. However, I may really hurt his trust that he has in me. Although I am really grateful I have this position and I can repay my loans, I am always in a position to complain. And, practically he reviews my results for the papers I want to write. It may affect it significantly and I wouldn't have any papers before I apply somewhere else. I am really confused about what to do. The more I want to make the communication with my prof and DS transparent, the more they get me confused and I feel like a very bad student even though at the back of my head I know I was a `cum laude` student. Please give me your feedback on what you would do if you were me.<issue_comment>username_1: Based on my experience, there are a few points to consider before making your decision. 1. You do not need a solid background in a topic in order to conduct research on that topic. If what you studied during your master's degree is related to the research area, and also you are a promising potential PhD student, then you are also a good choice for an advisor. 2. Finishing your master's or PhD later than the standart study period is not necessarily a bad thing. Instead of this information, I would check whether the past students of DS have had good publications, got acceptance in good postdoctoral research programs etc. Ultimately, if you want to develop a career in academia, your best bet is to have strong publications instead of finishing your studies quickly. 3. Your research ideas are not mutually exclusive with your supervisors'. If you really want to conduct research on a topic, you can still do it. But if the topic that you want to work on is not related to the ongoing research project, then you cannot expect your advisors to drop their work and help you out. After all, they are paying you with the money they get from the funding, and they got that funding only because they promised to conduct research on a specific topic. 4. Being a good student does not necessarily mean being a good researcher. Yes, good researchers are generally good students, but there are many examples of world-class researchers being mediocre students, and vice-versa. You should not feel like a bad student, but maybe you should put some effort on being a better researcher. I tried to be as generic as possible by giving examples from your situation. These are neither specific to your university nor to your advisors. If you believe that you can find just the right research project to participate in, then by all means, quit yesterday and start looking for that project. But I highly doubt it. Wherever you go, you will have to learn brand new things (theoretical or application) related to your master's studies. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: First of all, put aside your cum laude moniker. You are not in undergraduate anymore, you are in graduate school, and while you were miles ahead of your peers before, you now find yourself in a mix of your intellectual peers. This should be expected. Second, there is no reason to be shy about raising your concerns in full disclosure to your advisor(s). The alternative is that you eventually leave anyway, so why not be brutally honest? Your 'confusion' may stem from a lack of clear direction and path forward. You can mitigate this by forcing yourself to write down you academic goals, and devise a plan to meet them, within reason given your advisors' interests and capabilities, of course. Most of these things can be solved through communication; but unfortunately in higher academics communication can be difficult. If you decide to go a different route, just make sure it is for your reasons and not those that are circumstantial. Upvotes: 3
2021/02/18	1,111	4,628	<issue_start>username_0: My Master's thesis is due in a week and I am currently writing up all of my results. To my horror, I have just found a paper that seems to explore virtually the same concept as I do, although they appear to generate results that differ slightly from my own. How should I treat this? In my defense, the other paper has only been cited four times according to semantic scholar, but I can't simply ignore its existence despite not having used it to write my own paper. Edit: this is a master's thesis and my current plan is to add it to the related literature section and mention how and why the two models generate some different results.<issue_comment>username_1: This is up to your advisor and any committee that is involved in accepting the thesis and or the completion of your degree. "Only four citations" doesn't sound like a good thing, however. If I were on your committee I would wonder whether this is parallel work, and hence fine, or if you should have seen this paper a while ago and adapted to it. It is a serious issue that may have a good outcome for you or not. Speak to your advisor. My reaction, in the worst case, other than deceit, would be to send you back to the drawing board to see what extension you might make to give your work a bit more heft. In the best case, parallel work is common and should be accepted for graduation purposes, even if not for publication. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: When was the paper released? If it is very new (few months old), then maybe it won't be considered a big mistake. (because it is "just" a thesis) But the evaluation of the whole thing depends on how strict your supervisor is. So ask them. Question: is there any minor difference in the hypothesis/experiment design between your thesis and the paper? then you could incorporate it more easily and could reflect on the differences in the outcome. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: You will need to speak to your advisor about this matter, but if the paper is relevant to your research (and it certainly sounds like it is) then you are correct in your view that it should be incorporated into your thesis. If one week is insufficient to do this, I recommend you seek an extension for submission from your supervisory panel. It should not be too difficult to secure an extension in this circumstance, and it is likely that your panel will want you to do the extra work to incorporate this work into your thesis. The golden rule of all research work is to make it as useful as possible for the reader. Adding reference and discussion to this other paper sounds like it will certainly improve your work and give relevant information to the reader about the state of the field. Finally, in regard to the "horror" you are experiencing, it might aid you to learn that several highly aclaimed researchers have had similar ---but far more horrifying--- experiences of this kind. The most famous case I am aware of is [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gottlob_Frege), an eminent German philosopher and logician, who wrote his Magnus Opus on logic and arithmetic, only to be informed by [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand_Russell) that one of the core axioms on which the entire theory was based was inconsistent (and therefore the entire theory was invalidated). It is instructive to read the history of this matter (see e.g., [here](https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/the-machine-in-the-ghost)), and it is a fascinating story in the history of mathematics and academic publishing. Russell later remarked on the immense integrity of Frege in dealing with the disappointment of finding out that his life's work was wrong: > > As I think about acts of integrity and grace, I realise that there is nothing in my knowledge to compare with Frege’s dedication to truth. His entire life’s work was on the verge of completion, much of his work had been ignored to the benefit of men infinitely less capable, his second volume was about to be published, and upon finding that his fundamental assumption was in error, he responded with intellectual pleasure clearly submerging any feelings of personal disappointment. It was almost superhuman and a telling indication of that of which men are capable if their dedication is to creative work and knowledge instead of cruder efforts to dominate and be known. (Quoted in van Heijenoort (1967), 127) (Quote taken from the [Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, History of Russell's Paradox](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/russell-paradox/#HOTP)) > > > Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2021/02/18	695	3,159	<issue_start>username_0: I'm International Student applying for technical courses to universities in the UK and the USA, this might seem like a frequently asked question but I'm genuinely curious in knowing whether a Statement of Purpose (SOP) does carry any weightage when you meet the minimum requirements for Graduate Admissions (Msc). I've seen peers with great GPA's but poorly crafted SOPs make it to top schools. Would it be possible for someone to walk their way in with just words using a flashy SOP? Top universities get a myriad of applications, especially high demand courses. Does the admissions committee get ample time to review each applicant's SOP? or Do they have an Application Screening Process after which they review only the most salient applications?<issue_comment>username_1: The Statement of Purpose possibly carries weight toward admission to a graduate program. Meeting the minimum requirements for acceptance may get you past an initial screening, but many departments have more applicants than they have space in their program. (I hesitate to say "most" or cite percentages since that could change from year to year, but you can often find this information on a program's website.) In these and other programs, the whole application packet - including the Statement of Purpose - may be considered by individual reviewers and/or a committee of reviewers before initial offers of admission are decided. Given two similarly-qualified candidates, it is conceivable that they would admit the one with a more compelling Statement of Purpose. It's not easy from the outside to guess at an institution's internal processes, the number of applicants that year, or what they'll weight more heavily in your packet. While you may know anecdotally of people who are admitted with terrible Statements of Purpose, you don't know others who were rejected. You also don't know whether this year will be different. Given that, while you could gamble on a subpar Statement of Purpose and meeting the minimum requirements, prudence suggests putting some effort in so that you might stand out compared to your peers. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This will differ between countries, universities, and individual departments. I believe that it is hopeless in pretty much all places to "walk your way in with just words using a flashy SOP" if their results are not good, but if there is a limited number of places and it is between otherwise about equally qualified candidates, it may well play a role. When I was MSc admissions tutor in the UK, by the way, I got the impression that many SoPs were written with lots of help from other persons, sometimes in stark contrast to other information in the CV and transcripts, and I didn't find them very informative in general, as it seemed everyone can come up with a sparkling SoP. So I differentiated using other criteria as much as possible, and I think that ultimately (because there was never a precise limit on the number of offers I could send out) an SoP never made a difference for students I had to decide on. But I'm not saying that everybody handles things in this way. Upvotes: 0
2021/02/18	774	3,384	<issue_start>username_0: Consider that a paper is published in a journal. It contains some insignificant errors which are not worth asking for an erratum. I was wondering in such a case would it be acceptable to fix those errors in the preprint version (for example on arXiv.org)? Since in this case it will be sort of a “post-print” version of the paper and technically an improvement on the paper, would it create a problem with the journal in a typical situation? Edit: Let’s assume that the editor agrees that the errors are too minor for an erratum. What I want to know is if there will be any legal issues and more importantly: if it is a good idea scientifically?<issue_comment>username_1: I would write the editor of the journal explaining the errors and the necessary corrections and asking what they want to do. If they agree with you that the errors are too minor to warrant a published erratum they may want to post the erratum on their journal page, or wherever the article is available for download. If they choose to do nothing, ask about fixing the preprint on arXiv (where you would of course refer to the published version). I once corrected a minor error in a paper in a second paper I published several years later on the same topic. I've no idea whether anyone ever noticed either the first error or the correction. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: This isn't a good idea. The problem is that once you make a change, if it's spotted, nobody (including you, six months in the future) knows what else might be different. E.g. a reader downloads the manuscript from the journal's website, prints it out, and covers it all over with comments. Next day they go to arXiv and download the manuscript. Then they notice that there's a word in the arXiv version and the published version that's spelt differently. It's obvious which one is correct, but still: given that one of the manuscripts has been revised, what else in the manuscript could've changed? Without crawling through the manuscript with a fine-toothed comb, they would have no way of knowing if there were any non-minor changes. If it's really insignificant, just don't make any changes. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: There is nothing wrong with updating a paper on the arxiv after it has been accepted or published, from a legal point of view. The paper on the arxiv is not necessarily identical to the published one. (In fact, it is rather the opposite: Changes introduced during the copyediting process are usually something which you are not supposed to include in the journal version.) Whether this is a smart thing is a different question. As has been pointed out, people might get confused if the published version and the arxiv version differ, especially if they differ in terms of content: If someone cites the arxiv version, it might be that the same result is not contained in the published version, yet the reference might be at some point changed to the published paper. However, this is something which can (at least partly) be remedied by putting a suitable comment on the arxiv. (Note that there are plenty of papers where the arxiv version differs from the published version, mostly because the authors did not bother updating it. Not that this is recommended, but it is common, so people often are aware that those versions differ.) Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
2021/02/18	853	3,696	<issue_start>username_0: Let's say I want to be a college professor, but the field I am interested in is known for having an unbelievably bad job market (worse than usual). We're talking people coming out of top 5 programs not being able to find jobs at liberal arts colleges. To add, let's say I would prefer to be working in a very specific region (e.g. northeast), which narrows my options further. Is it feasible, after my PhD, to try to get adjunct work in my desired region, while also having a "day job" in something totally different? In other words, working a <= 40 hr/wk job to pay the bills, but teaching two classes or so at night at a college nearby? While publishing independently on any remaining free time, maybe? Or do the demands of adjuncting make this setup basically impossible? Is it difficult to find adjunct work even in a major city?<issue_comment>username_1: First, adjuncts get paid almost nothing unless they have exceptional skills in some narrow field. Skills far beyond those of the typical recent PhD graduate. Those who try to live on adjunct pay have an impossible schedule and are unlikely to have health, etc., benefits. However, some people I know, have made a success at it because the money means little to them and they already have a very secure research position in industry. They teach a course per term "just for fun", rather than for any significant boost in income. That can be a viable lifestyle, but you have to love your day-job for it to make sense, and it needs to give you the freedom to spend several hours a week on your hobby - teaching. The latter isn't a problem for many unless they are in some pressure cooker environment. These folks don't interact heavily with other faculty, however, since their work day doesn't give the freedom for that - not face to face anyway. They publish, but more as a result of their full time research position than their adjunct position. They are probably limited to undergraduate teaching, which can be challenging, and are unlikely to have supervision over theses, and such, though it may be possible in a few rare cases. Find a stable position of some sort and then ask around for teaching opportunities. But, I suggest, that you draw your main income and also satisfaction from that day job. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: The modern STEM adjunct professor is probably not the job that you're expecting it to be. Most schools that actively hire adjuncts do so because they've successfully commodified academic education. You'll be given a course to teach and a course package from a major publisher (which includes a textbook, a code for the online component, lecture slides, and a tool for creating self-grading homework assignments and for building tests). You'll be expected to deliver this unit of education to students. Any students that are performing poorly will be managed by academic advisors from another unit - you'll be required to open support tickets so that the advisement team can try to keep them on track to graduate. This is necessary because the incredible turnover of academic faculty means there's basically no longer term relationship between teachers and students. There are exceptions - jobs at larger universities teaching specialty stuff for medical or engineering schools. Unless you're actively recruited for this you will not get these jobs. If you're still interested it won't be hard to find a position - just send your CV to the local schools and they'll probably get back to you the next time they're hiring for fall. Many of these schools will also have evening classes for working students, which is also good for the working professor. Upvotes: 0
2021/02/19	2,374	9,925	<issue_start>username_0: I am currently halfway through my first postdoc (a two-year position). I have a Ph.D. in physics, published 3 papers during it, and since this postdoc is in a slightly different field, I still haven't published anything. I am moderately comfortable in my original field, meaning that if I work for some months on something, it will most likely render some sort of publication (usually in Journal of Physics A/B or Physical Review A). However, my current situation at work is very stressful. I have less freedom than I thought I'd have to work on my own ideas, and the research environment is very dull. I find myself working on problems that might be simply too hard, and perhaps I can't solve them. I started to wonder what will happen if I turn out not publishing anything during these two years. When I was struggling in my Ph.D., thinking about dropping everything and becoming a monk, I heard from many experienced researchers that it was OK if my Ph.D. was crappy. That the Ph.D. is not the "big filter" in the life of a researcher... And that this is the function of the first postdoc. They told me this is a decisive moment because people will not hire you afterward if you do poorly. In your Ph.D., the fact that you're still more of a student than a researcher usually saves you some explanations, but for the first postdoc, the lack of publications looks really bad when applying to a follow-up position. This is naturally very simplistic (a postdoc might not publish anything simply because his/her research group is non-existent, the boss is crazy, family problems, etc). However, if I were myself on the board analyzing applications, I cannot promise I wouldn't consider the lack of publications as a red flag. If this filter is true, it makes the situation of someone who just happened to be unlucky in his/her first postdoc quite depressing. Maybe they will have to give up academia and go to industry, even if they don't want to, just because no one accepts them. As I really don't want to move away from academic research, I'm starting to get very anxious about this topic... Well then... Is my stress justified? Will I be able to find another postdoc after this one even if I don't publish?<issue_comment>username_1: > > That the PhD is not the "big filter" in the life of a researcher... And that this is the function of the first postdoc. They told me this is a decisive moment because people will not hire you afterwards if you do poorly. > > > This is a myth. > > Will I be able to find another postdoc after this one even if I don't publish? > > > Not publishing during your 2 year postdoc will not be a decisive factor. So what is the big filter? Your overall publication record. To get academic research jobs, your publication record must be larger, better quality, and more relevant than the competition. Only the hiring committee knows what the competition has done. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Like many other things in academia, this depends. Having an unproductive postdoc is a point that will definitely come up with any future hiring committee. I’ve sat on a few myself (CS departments) and productivity is considered at every period of your academic life. Of course, if a candidate had a stellar PhD it will make up for it to an extent, but it’s entirely possible that such a candidate will be passed over in favor of a candidate with a less impressive PhD but a more consistent performance overall. Such “performance gaps” always raise questions - does this indicate an issue with working independently? Working in a group? Another point to consider is reference letters. Your postdoc host is not likely to write you a glowing letter if you are unproductive, which will hurt your chances of landing a position later on. That being said, research does not always result in publications. If you made progress on an important problem and have at least a preprint/workshop publication, this may be enough. Hence, your focus should be on productivity rather than on the end product. A postdoc is also an excellent time to show your commitment to the research community. Organizing workshops, taking on higher-ranking roles in program committees, setting up tutorials, writing a useful blog... All excellent ways of putting yourself out there and making yourself more marketable. Of course - research should absolutely come first, as it is the main evaluation criterion. Remember - you successfully completed your PhD, you can (at least according to empirical evidence) succeed in this as well! Good luck! Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: ### Sort of. Yes, the first post-doc is one of "the big filters" of becoming a professional academic, but not for the reason you're supposing. The simple truth is that the vast majority of PhD students don't get hired into jobs in academia at all; at my university, the ratio is something like 90% of PhD students find jobs in industry afterwards, rather than in academia. As a result, simply getting a post-doc job at all represents crossing a big filter that weeds out the vast majority of PhD students, regardless of your performance during it. You might still fail at the expectations of the people who hired you and not progress your career in academia any further, of course, but simply by getting a post doc job you've already progressed your career past the first major hurdle. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: > > I started to wonder what will happen if I turn out not publishing anything during these two years. > > > It depends on the field, on your career aims, and on whether you have any other outputs — apart from papers. In science, papers are the most common metric for academic output, but they're not the only thing. A totally failed postdoc may end your academic career, either by ending your motivation to continue or by not being hired, but it doesn't have to be. Getting a faculty position is very hard. Getting another postdoc is much easier. Papers are not the only possible academic output. Alternate outputs are highly field dependent. I worked on a project where I produced enough material for 4-5 papers, but only managed writing one first-author paper in four years, because we were perpetually stressed by non-paper deliverables to the funding agency. We were setting new standards on how to do things, publishing detailed reports and datasets of 2–50 TB. Probably by working evenings and weekends I could have written 1-2 more papers, and this may have been needed if I'd had the aim to become a tenured full research professor, but I chose life instead. But I had a good recommendation letter, an award at a conference, and success in subsequent job applications, albeit in government institutes rather than academia. Nobody asked me "why only one first-author paper in four years?" — they were familiar with the project I'd worked on and impressed with its outputs and my role in it (pity but understandable that we didn't write more papers). Or maybe results from a postdoc are instrumental in getting a field campaign approved, but you run out of time/money before it happens. Probably your supervisor will be happy. In conclusion: lack of papers may mean trouble, but not necessary. Whether it means trouble may depend on your career aims and on if you have produced any other results rather than just papers, and certainly also on the field. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Disclaimer: my background is in fundamental science with a strong attiguity to applied science. A rather stupid thumbs rule is that an excellent PhD publishes 1 paper per year, a PostDoc/advanced researcher 2 papers per year, however ... Postdoc? Publishing? Who cares. A PhD student is a student that does 100% of his time research, then additionally some other things like TA and learning new skills: that's the PreDoc phase. Then, you are a PostDoc, where you spend 100% of your time doing research, and in your free time you do some other things, like teaching, learning new skills, supervising PhDs and so on. Additionally, you should start to demonstrate to be a good fundc catcher and a decent project manager as well, so you spend some of your free time from all the activities above to write proposals. Yes, you have additional free time, unfortunately it is imaginary as in algebra: it exists, but you see it only because of some weird effects (like burnout and so on...) There is a transient of 1 nanosecond, when you get your Doc/Dr title, in that time you are a researcher free to investigate and spend all your time in research. Anyhow, if during your postdoc you manage to get fundings for whatever projects/phd, your publication record will take care for itself in the near future. If during your postdoc you manage to: * spend some time (1-3 months) visiting another group with respect to the one you are affiliated, building relevant connections or at least putting some solid grounds towards a joint publication; and * submitting at least one paper as first author in 2 years, or a patent; or * getting relevant funds (roughly equivalent to one year of your salary + research costs, or at least for 6/12 months for a side project of a PhD student in your group); Then yes, your chances of getting another PostDoc or an Assistant professorship or equivalent are higher than the PostDoc not completing any of the above mentioned things. Papers? they will come, but a human being can publish one paper per year working full-time, if you are required to publish two/three papers per year either you get funds to have some PhD/postdoc to work for you or ... you give up: [Taylor](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Winslow_Taylor) was a rather poor scholar, a person can complete a certain task x working 8h per day for 6 months, but no person will complete 2 tasks x working 16 hours per day for 6 months. Upvotes: 1
2021/02/19	530	1,962	<issue_start>username_0: I would like to add this plot to my article but it has lots of colors which I'm not in favor of. This figure represents a continuous value as a function of the number of sources that has been calculated for two different categorical parameters (prior knowledge and number of voxels). I appreciate your ideas on how to modify and enhance this figure. ![Figure](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Gkc82.jpg)<issue_comment>username_1: If you don't want to use colors, you could use patterns instead. Here is an example: ![enter image description here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/b8h9M.png) [Image Source](https://blogs.sas.com/content/graphicallyspeaking/2017/10/30/fill-patterns/) Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: This graph looks like it would be a lot more readable as a line graph: [![enter image description here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/xF4jC.png)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/xF4jC.png) [Image source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Simple_line_graph_of_ACE_2012_results_by_candidate_sj01.png) Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The use of pattern, per username_1, is a great solution. It appears that, for each group defined by prior knowledge (excellent, good, poor), the # (Sources x Detectors) increases (the vertical axis) in every category of Number of Voxels. As the number of voxels increases, the # (Sources x Detectors) goes up in each group defined by prior knowledge. To convey this information, the patterns could be selected so that the pattern for excellent is, for example, dense dots; the pattern for good is less dense dots; the pattern for poor is light dots. Here is a graphic of data like your data made using excel (clustered column chart). By the way, the figure legend is probably easier to understand when placed at the right and read horizontally or beneath the horizontal axis. [![enter image description here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/gf4Ap.png)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/gf4Ap.png) Upvotes: 2
2021/02/19	1,357	5,637	<issue_start>username_0: I completed my masters in mathematics in my home country in June 2020. I didn't had success in 4th semester of my masters with PhD Applications. So, I thought I would try next year in both my home country and abroad (Europe). I didn't apply earlier to any of my home country's universities. So, I started studying for the qualifying exam in my home country while side by side studying some more mathematics to apply for PhD programmes abroad. But I fell in depression and wasted 1 month and 1 week in stomach infection till now. The depression problem: I took the exam for PhD admission in my home country in December and received the result in early January. The result was lower than I had hoped for, although I don't yet know if I've been accepted. My father is using this to make cruel comments to me, hurting my mental health. This contributed to me being depressed and missing several application deadlines for European universities. I completed only one application on time. Since then I have received medical help for my mental health problems and for 1 week I could not study due to pretty bad stomachache. Question 1: Should I email the professors which will be sending letter of recommendation, and tell them what I have been doing since I completed my masters in June 2020? It would be only list of topics I have studied till now. Question 2: If so, should I also include episodes of depression along with stomach infection? Question 3: If so, should I also describe the reason behind the depression?<issue_comment>username_1: This is a tricky one. In my opinion, informing the people responsible for giving out letters is always the right thing to do. Let them know what happened, what you did, what you are currently working on. That is a must. Talking about mental health and difficulties you faced is correct when you can make sure it does not seem like a pity call rather proving how you are successfully battling your challenges. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: A letter of reference is what the professors want to say about you as a potential researcher. Not about your grades, courses etc. You can of course tell them about your problems, but I highly doubt that they will include such information in the letter. It would be awkward if they did. On the other hand, your CV is also not the place for these personal problems. If you think that your depression and stomach problems are relevant, then you should mention them in your cover letter. Keep in mind that most of the time, what you have gone through will not affect the decision process. Instead of focusing on why you have failed, it is much better to highlight your potential and what you can achieve. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: If you talk or write to anyone about depression or family problems, make it a mental health professional. They can provide actual help. But as for contacting potential letter writers, bringing them up to date, include not only what courses or other study you have done since they last interacted more directly with you, but also something of your future plans and goals. In many places you will be asked to include a Statement of Purpose (SoP) with the application. If you haven't already written this it would be good to do so. It includes your short and long term goals and how you are well situated to achieve them. Then, include some of the essentials of that in your notes to potential letter writers so they have a better sense of where you want to go. But you won't be accepted anywhere based on your problems. Look forward and convince people that you can get there. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: First, I agree completely with Arno's answer [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/162519/79875). The logic from that answer applies to these questions as well. Specifically... > > Should I email the professors which will be sending letter of recommendation [and tell them] what I have been doing since I completed my masters in June 2020? (It would only list topics I have studied till now)? > > > Those reviewing your application may be interested to know what you have been up to during the past year. The answer appears to be "studying." So, it may be worth listing this briefly in your application somewhere. Just one bullet on your CV, or one sentence in one of your essays. To your question: I see no harm in also providing this information to your letter writers. For the most part, their letters will focus on what they know about you directly, not what you say you did after graduating. But, it's definitely a good idea to stay in touch with your letter writers, and mentioning your recent activities is a natural thing to say in this context. > > [Should I] include episodes of depression along with stomach infection? > > > No. It's usually better to declare victory rather than make excuses. In your case, there is no need for excuses; it is quite straightforward to say "since graduating, I've been studying topics X, Y, and Z." This sounds much better than "I've been trying to study, but between depression and illness I haven't made much progress." Why volunteer these extra details? > > [Should I include] the reason behind the depression [issues with my father]? > > > Definitely not. This is very much oversharing. It is understandable that you want to discuss your difficult circumstances and are seeking forgiveness, validation, and/or reassurance. But you should have this discussion with your family, friends, or therapist, not with your professional references. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2021/02/19	1,472	6,367	<issue_start>username_0: Edit: I rewrote the question based on the [associated discussion on meta](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4871/93566). Context ------- Google created a ["knowledge panel"](https://support.google.com/knowledgepanel/answer/9163198?hl=en) about me which appears when my name is searched in Google. It consists mostly of a link to my Google Scholar profile, a couple of my publications and a picture of a person who has the same name as me. I want to replace the erroneous picture so I claimed the panel, and this involves an apparently strict [identity verification process](https://support.google.com/knowledgepanel/answer/7534902?hl=en). In particular, this verification process requires the person to prove that they can edit the content of at least two of the profiles which appear in the search results for their name. Problem ------- I provided proof that I can edit my professional webpage hosted by my institution and my Google Scholar account, but my claim was rejected (after 3 months). When I asked for clarifications I was told that: > > the login screens to your web profiles that you submitted in your verification application did not match with the social web profiles that appear on the first few pages of search results next to your knowledge panel. > > > I don't understand what this answer means, as my institution-hosted webpage and my Google Scholar scholar profile appear as first and third link in the search results. The issue seems to be about the definition of "social web profiles": > > acceptable web profiles on SRP are Facebook, LinkedIn, Soundcloud, Instagram, YouTube, Twitter, Official website. > > > * This list doesn't even include Google Scholar, although it's the source of the knowledge panel so to me it wouldn't make sense if they don't count it as a valid profile. * This list includes an "official website", but I suspect that they don't accept an institution-hosted webpage since it's harder and less standard to check a proof of ownership. Of course I contacted Google support, but so far their answer has been disappointingly vague. They were not even able to answer the simple yes/no questions of whether my academic page or my Scholar profile counts as proof. I assume that a professional webpage and a Scholar account are probably the two most common types of online "profile" for an academic. I've seen a few other academics' knowledge panels, according to my observations these always include at least another social media profile, such as a twitter account. Since Google employees/contractors themselves cannot explain the rules precisely, I suspect that there is some subjectivity involved. This is why I would like to know if any academic succeeded securing control of their knowledge panel without any social media account. ### Question Is it possible for an academic to successfully claim their Google knowledge panel only with an institution-hosted webpage and a Google Scholar account? If yes, is there an effective way to prove ownership of the institution-hosted webpage? My experience tends to show that the answer is no, but I want to check because it looks like their criteria are unclear. In other words, I don't know if they apply the same criteria to everyone, that's why it would be useful for me to know if anybody else succeeded in this way. I might also not have provided the kind of proof that they expect for a professional webpage or misunderstood their (vague) instructions, so I would appreciate any tip from fellow academics who went through this process. ### Side notes I don't have a clue why: * They implement a strict verification process for the knowledge panel which depends entirely on the Scholar account that I already own (and didn't have such a verification process). * Their system picks up a random picture instead of the one on my Scholar account. Thanks to the people who explained the problem with my original question [on meta](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4871/93566). In this version I tried to target the specific problem that I have as an academic, I hope it's now clear that I'm looking for other academics' experience with this.<issue_comment>username_1: After multiple emails with Google support who didn't seem to understand the problem (or didn't want to), I finally obtained a clear answer: currently their verification process doesn't even consider that showing ownership of the Google Scholar account is a valid proof: > > > > > > Sorry but you didn't answer the question: is Google Scholar a valid profile for the verification process? yes or no? > > > > > > > > > In regards to your concern, Google Scholar is not a valid profile for the verification process. > > > I didn't manage to obtain a clear answer about showing ownership of an institution-hosted webpage, but if even a Scholar account is not considered valid proof (even though it's the source of the knowledge panel), I assume that the institution-hosted webpage is certainly not a valid profile either. Thus the answer is no, it is not possible for an academic to successfully claim their Google knowledge panel only with an institution-hosted webpage and a Google Scholar account. Update: my claim was eventually accepted after I submitted my LinkedIn profile as single proof. Normally this is not sufficient according to the instructions, so I'm not sure what was the main reason for the acceptance. It's possible that me repeatedly pointing out the problem by email was a factor. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: ### Consider talking to your university's lawyers. As an academic, you're associated with a university, and that university should have legal staff working for them. Since Google's misrepresentation of you might affect the university's reputation, it's possible that you might be able to get your university's lawyers to send Google a Cease and Desist letter instructing them to either take down your knowledge panel, or update its contents to be accurate. While I'm not certain, I imagine that Google would likely be far more responsive to a legal letter written by lawyers than it would be from a request from lone individual - especially if you're located in jurisdictions like the EU where you have legal rights over how your data is used. Upvotes: 2
2021/02/19	701	3,081	<issue_start>username_0: To be specific, my application field is physics. And I am from a country where students are aggressive on standardized tests like gre's since we put much emphasis on training for these tests. I was talking with peers about whether to send my Physics GRE score to my target physics schools which is 800/990(67%) as a computer science undergrad student, and they told me don't do it because, given my nationality, admission committees will set a higher bar for me and a percentile below 85% is a minus. That arose the question in my mind that I know it's normal that in US graduate admission process, admission standards for international students are set higher than those for domestic students, but do graduate admission committee View International Applicants country-wise? I asked my peers about this, and they say that's a widely accepted speculation among them, so I am asking here to verify.<issue_comment>username_1: After multiple emails with Google support who didn't seem to understand the problem (or didn't want to), I finally obtained a clear answer: currently their verification process doesn't even consider that showing ownership of the Google Scholar account is a valid proof: > > > > > > Sorry but you didn't answer the question: is Google Scholar a valid profile for the verification process? yes or no? > > > > > > > > > In regards to your concern, Google Scholar is not a valid profile for the verification process. > > > I didn't manage to obtain a clear answer about showing ownership of an institution-hosted webpage, but if even a Scholar account is not considered valid proof (even though it's the source of the knowledge panel), I assume that the institution-hosted webpage is certainly not a valid profile either. Thus the answer is no, it is not possible for an academic to successfully claim their Google knowledge panel only with an institution-hosted webpage and a Google Scholar account. Update: my claim was eventually accepted after I submitted my LinkedIn profile as single proof. Normally this is not sufficient according to the instructions, so I'm not sure what was the main reason for the acceptance. It's possible that me repeatedly pointing out the problem by email was a factor. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: ### Consider talking to your university's lawyers. As an academic, you're associated with a university, and that university should have legal staff working for them. Since Google's misrepresentation of you might affect the university's reputation, it's possible that you might be able to get your university's lawyers to send Google a Cease and Desist letter instructing them to either take down your knowledge panel, or update its contents to be accurate. While I'm not certain, I imagine that Google would likely be far more responsive to a legal letter written by lawyers than it would be from a request from lone individual - especially if you're located in jurisdictions like the EU where you have legal rights over how your data is used. Upvotes: 2
2021/02/19	330	1,462	<issue_start>username_0: I've received an offer from university A and I'm waiting for a decision from university B (both prestigious). Would it be sensible to inform university B about my offer from university A and tell them that I would still be interested in their program, or would university B think that I would probably not accept their offer and hence not make me one. To clarify, I haven't yet decided which university I would choose.<issue_comment>username_1: You really only need to tell the "other" university when you accept an offer and won't consider another. The effect of telling B is unknown, but also unnecessary. Don't confuse issues. When you accept an offer, then inform any others out of courtesy. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: We can’t predict the effects of your telling B about the acceptance to A. This can depend on small details, including the precise way you phrase your email to them. However, broadly speaking, departments try to recruit the best students; have some flexibility to offer better terms to some applicants than to others; and use that flexibility in a strategic manner based on information that they have about the applicants’ situation. The knowledge that you were accepted to A is certainly relevant to that sort of strategizing, and can in theory affect department B’s decision on how attractive of an offer they want to make you. In some situations it could lead to a more generous offer. Upvotes: 2
2021/02/20	1,030	4,653	<issue_start>username_0: My PhD supervisor discourages me from initiating a collaboration with people outside of our group. He never explicitly told me that I could not do it, but I can realize it from his reactions (e.g., digressing the conversation, asking me to wait for now, or suggesting me to talk to someone in the group first) whenever I bring up a discussion about the possibility of external collaboration. The fact is that my research topic is relatively new and is different from what other people are doing in our group, so none of the group members (including my supervisor) can actually help me, and I have to go all the way through my research on my own. I was wondering how I can settle this? One time I also tried to discuss this issue via email. I sent him an email saying that I prefer to collaborate with researcher X from university Y for these reasons, but he never replied to me. Any suggestions are very welcome.<issue_comment>username_1: The answer would depend in part on the kind of collaboration you have in mind. Without recommending a particular course of action, your options might include one or more of the following examples: 1. Meeting for coffee or other relatively informal discussion to discuss research; 2. Establishing semi-regular meetings to discuss research ideas; 3. Agreeing to proofread outlines or proposals for substantive work; 4. Agreeing to proofread substantive work; 5. Agreeing to co-author research not directly related to your PhD work; 6. Agreeing to co-author research that is directly related to your PhD work; 7. Providing technical assistance or advice specific to your research; 8. Being named as a member of your advisory panel; 9. Providing infrastructure or other assistance relevant to your research; 10. Providing data specific to your research. An important judgement call for you is deciding which of these you should probably get approval from your advisor for, which you should simply advise your advisor of and which are really none of their business. In some contexts, for some people it may be appropriate to engage in any or all of these. The answer to this will depend on a lot of things, including your own working style and theirs, and the academic culture in the department, institution and country you are working in. In most systems PhD candidates are encouraged to consider 1-5, and while it may be good protocol to share things openly with your advisors not everyone would seek approval for this kind of engagement. 6-10 would probably depend on the policies, norms and protocols particular to your institution, discipline and context, noting that some of these may entail formal changes to the administrative arrangements around your candidature while others may not. I hope that helps! :-) Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Since you wrote that you are funded by a project, I'd like to mention one possibility, without knowing whether that's really the reason or not. Project funding, especially for more applied funding schemes (e.g., EU Horizon 2020), typically come with obligations, such as reporting, or having to work on certain problems that were promised to be worked on in the funding proposal. This is possibly a reason for why you are working on a topic that neither your advisor nor other group members can help you with: because it has been promised in the proposal for some reason. Now as you mention your best bet to get support is by collaborating with externals. Scientifically fruitful collaboration is often quite dynamic: the actual research question addressed may change a bit during the collaboration, and in particular it may move away from what was promised in the proposal. From a scientific point of view, this is how great ideas are developed, but you end up getting results that your advisor (grant holder) does not know how to sell as fulfilling the obligation that comes with the project funding. Also, you may end up getting results that your advisor may be unable to use as a proof of competency for future funding proposals, which is important to maintain the flow of funding. Both of these would be problematic for your advisor, which is why he/she may be unwilling to give up control over what you are doing by letting you collaborate with someone not under his/her control. Also, once a collaboration has been started, if would be problematic for your advisor to ask you to end the collaboration if he/she later gets the impression that the focus of the collaboration is not what he/she needs or wants - at that point your potential collaboration partner already invested time, which has to be respected. Upvotes: 2
2021/02/20	1,107	3,968	<issue_start>username_0: Assuming you add one master's degree (Master of Science) like that: ``` FirstName LastName, M.Sc. ``` What is a proper way to add two independent1 master's degrees (both Master of Science)? Do you just add them both to the end? ``` FirstName LastName, M.Sc., M.Sc. ``` 1 independent: Different universities, different fields, 2x 120 ECTS = 240 ECTS in total. Not the result of a [double degree program](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_degree). --- Just to be clear, I am not looking for recommendations, if or when I should decorate my name with academic degrees. I do not even plan to do it on a regular basis. Even in my country, you don't do it very often. But if there is this one single time in my whole life where I should do it, then I want to do it right. That's all I am asking for: Are there rules or good/best practices on how to do it with two M.Sc. degrees. Example situation: If you get mentioned on someone else's thesis as an examiner or as a supervisor the names will be decorated with degrees. A german doctor with three doctoral degress can either be `Dr. Dr. Dr. FirstName LastName` or `Dr. mult. FirstName LastName`. This example shows two possible rules: 1. You can stack titles/degrees. Just add as much as you have. That's from where I derived `FirstName LastName, M.Sc., M.Sc.`. 2. You can condense - at least multiple doctoral - degrees by adding `mult.` to the mention of one single title/degree. I have never seen this in combination with other degrees.<issue_comment>username_1: Unless you are in a place that regulates academic titles, you can do pretty much as you please. But you could qualify each with the specific field or university if you feel the need to list both. > > FirstName LastName, M.Sc.(Basket Weaving), M.Sc.(Basket Burning) > > > Distinguishing by university, rather than field will probably confuse people, thinking you have two masters in the same field. Qualifying with both is probably too unwieldy. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You don't. Even in academic circles, writing "<NAME>, MS, MS" just looks silly and pompous. Instead, simply write "<NAME>, MS." In the same way, you would not ask people to call you "doctor doctor" if you had two PhDs, nor would you write "MS, BS, BA" if you did a dual degree in college but subsequently got a master's. You may want "credit" for your two different degrees, but this is not the purpose of the initials. Rather, you can list both degrees separately on your resume, or describe yourself in a bio as having "two master's degrees." Granted, this answer is from a US perspective; it is possible that this would look less silly to members of other cultures. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: There are some indications that one could use `MMSc` to designate a double 'master of science'-degre. [Here](https://forschung.boku.ac.at/fis/suchen.person_uebersicht?sprache_in=en&menue_id_in=101&id_in=153281) is an example of a profile who calls himself `Dr. ... MMSc`. As for the rationale behind that, I may cite this Wikipedia section on representing plurals in acronyms: > > In some languages, the convention of doubling the letters in the acronym is used to indicate plural words: for example, the Spanish EE.UU., for Estados Unidos ('United States'). This old convention is still followed for a limited number of English abbreviations, such as SS. for "Saints", pp. for the Latin plural of "pages", paginae, or MSS for "manuscripts". > > > This approach of pluralizing acronyms is quite common with academic titles in German, e.g. `DDr.` for "Doktor Doktor", or `MMag.` for "Magister Magister". Thus, `MMSc` would serve as an analogy. Interestingly, <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMSC> does state that the acronym may refer to "Double Master of Science, an academic degree". And if you google around, you find some examples of such usages. Upvotes: 2
2021/02/20	1,816	6,688	<issue_start>username_0: Do research papers have a Public Domain Expiration Date? simmilar of what happens to literature books For example, let's consider a research paper of <NAME>: *XVIII.—Experiments on Colour, as perceived by the Eye, with Remarks on Colour-Blindness, it is stored in here: [link to www.cambridge.org website](https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/earth-and-environmental-science-transactions-of-royal-society-of-edinburgh/article/abs/xviiiexperiments-on-colour-as-perceived-by-the-eye-with-remarks-on-colourblindness/5E589C9929D114B96CB9325E8FF0CAB3) It says: "Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1857" and if I want to purchase the article, it would cost me: USD35 This is an article published more than 150 years ago. How long do I have to wait in order to download it and use it for free?<issue_comment>username_1: In the US, at least, nothing published in the 19th century is likely to still be under copyright. See <https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-duration.html>. For the UK it is similar but very slightly longer in a few cases. See: <https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/library/copyright/duration>. Other places will differ, but probably not by a lot and most likely a shorter time under copyright. But you still need to cite old works, even when they are out of copyright. Maxwell's work is most likely to have lost copyright protection about 1950 since he died in 1879. Any academic library should be able to provide a copy of such works, even if it has to borrow them from other libraries. Librarians are very good at finding such things and are generous about sharing them. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Well, regardless of the actual copyright situation, you can* get it for free even now. Just use the DOI ([10.1017/S0080456800032117](https://doi.org/10.1017/S0080456800032117)) and use it at a, erm, (possibly not 100% legal) "Black Open Access" site called Sci-Hub. (The domain changes constantly, but it currently seems to be [this one](https://scihub.wikicn.top/)). As regards a legal response, my guess is the following: Suppose that it is the UK's Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 that is applicable in this case. [Section 12 of that act](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/section/12) tells us: "Copyright expires at the end of the period of 70 years from the end of the calendar year in which the author dies" when it comes to "literary works" (inter alia). If I remember correctly, there is a low threshold regarding what constitutes an original "literary work", so I would not worry about definitional disputes with reference to that research paper you linked to. As I am sure that the author has already left the earth more than 70 years ago, I would assume that the copyright has already expired. However, I am sure that [Law Stackexchange](https://law.stackexchange.com/) has gathered more knowledge on the legal situation than I have. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: From your question: > > This is an article published more than 150 years ago. How long do I have to wait in order to download it and use it for free? > > > From a comment you posted: > > Yes, I know I do still have to cite it, but I can't download it or use it for free. I have to pay even when it was published in the 19th century > > > As username_1 and username_2 note, the original work probably isn't under copyright. But even if copyright has expired, there's no guarantee anyone will make it available for free. In particular, there is no obligation on the publisher to provide free (or indeed any) access to it. In this case, there is a link to a PDF version from the [Semantic Scholar](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:123930770) page. Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: @username_1 gives good advice on the copyright situation. As far as downloading that particular paper and using it for free goes, you need wait no longer: the Biodiversity Heritage Library has a copy [here](https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/13309732#page/311/mode/1up). Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: In general there are two issues. 1. For a number of years, there may be copyright restrictions on what you're allowed to do with the paper or writing, even if you had free open access to a copy of it. 2. After copyright expires, you can do.pretty much what you like with it - but you may find you can't get hold of a copy of the paper without paying, or other contractual agreement, simply because while copyright doesn't exist on it any more, the specific copy you access may have been provided to you as part of a contractual agreement, or may only be provided to you as part of one. (But, if you acquire a copy without entering into a contractual agreement, then there is no way for a third party to legally demand/require that you act any particular way with it, or that you don't copy, modify, use or circulate it) What that means is for example, if you copied an out of copyright version held by some pay-for-use library, because that's the only copy, they could sue you for breaching their terms of use, but they couldn't re-impose copyright on the material, or on other people. Its not clear to me if public policy defence would in some times or jurisdictions mean they couldn't keep control or sue for alleged loss due to copying it, because that seems to potentially breach public policy - the entire aim of copyright law which allows financial benefit from control, for a limited number of years, not forever. There's surely case law on that, and from memory there have been cases where this has happened. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Arithmetica is an Ancient Greek text on mathematics written by the mathematician Diophantus in the 3rd century AD. It is out of copyright but why should you get it for free? Either someone has to print it (they have to make a physical copy, and make a profit in order to stay in business), or they have to maintain a website that make such texts available. They are not obliged to let people access their website for free - why should they be? Just because you can legally copy something without infringing copyright law, doesn't mean you can force the legal owner to hand it over. --- Example Suppose my great, great, great ... grandfather was <NAME>. I have inherited an unpublished novel of his. I am not required to publish it. I can keep it in my private collection and never show it to anyone. It is not public property - it is my property. However, If I was reading it in public and someone photographed the pages as I turned them, they would not breach copyright laws. Upvotes: 1
2021/02/21	1,406	5,580	<issue_start>username_0: (Preface: I'm just an undergraduate, so none of this actually matters; it just seemed an interesting case study.) About years ago, a lab published a very unexpected result (in, I should add, a predatory journal). Last year, another lab produced some evidence to support the paper (in, I should add, an even worse predatory journal, which doesn't matter except that they might not have heard of some of the issues in peer-review). I failed to replicate the original results. There seem to be some subtle but serious issues with the original paper that might explain this; but I don't intend to publish this rough work. In particular, the method used in the original work is notorious for false positives. I recently found out from funding reports that the other lab is still working on the phenomena and are probably done with their data-taking by now. Is it even remotely good practice to send a quick email to the other lab with concerns? (I wouldn't be concerned about bad work in C- journal, but this has some recent relevance.)<issue_comment>username_1: I’m sorry to say that unless your own results can be verified through peer-review and you can explain why you cannot reproduce the original result but another lab can, an email alert from an undergraduate would instantly go in the trash and/or spam. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It would be fine to contact them and say that you tried X and would like their help figuring out why you did not get result Y. Assuming you are right and they are wrong might be considered rude by some people. Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Whether a researcher has an ethical obligation to act is field dependent: I know no field that requires a researcher to reveal their research beliefs; researchers are ethically free to keep their research private. (Perhaps with some exceptions which demand disclosure to the state. And some well-defined contexts, e.g., [human experimentation](https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical-principles-for-medical-research-involving-human-subjects/), as noted in a [comment](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/162865/ethics-of-warning-other-labs-about-possible-pitfalls-in-published-research/162874?noredirect=1#comment438421_162874).) Researchers may feel they have a moral obligation to share. Email is appropriate for an informal, under-developed idea; a technical report for a more formal, better-developed idea; and a peer-reviewed publication is appropriate for formal, developed ideas. (Draft reports/submissions can be shared by email.) When emailing peers, I recommend positing that your theory must be wrong, because it contradicts the work of peers, and that you must have made a mistake. You can then ask where you are mistaken, where you have misunderstood their results. In seeking clarification, rather than raising concerns, surely no one can fault you. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Referring to @username_1's answer ("an email alert from an undergraduate would instantly go in the trash and/or spam"); if you are working under the supervision of someone else, even nominally, it would be a good idea to run your issues by them first, for two reasons: * you might be mistaken, a more senior person in your field might be able to confirm or disconfirm your results fairly easily; * politically, it would be a good idea both to get a more senior person on your side (you might even ask them to make the first contact), and to avoid dragging someone who is supervising you into a potentially sticky political situation without their knowledge. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: (Sincere apologies if this bumps the post back to the frontpage - perhaps it should have been an edit). I just came across this [blog article](https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2021/06/02/why-i-blog-about-apparent-problems-in-science/) by Andrew at Columbia, might perhaps be some particularly interesting persepective for anyone stumbling across this question, especially considering the goldmine of discussion in the comments. Setting aside the weird specifics in this question, the notion of emailing authors directly about their work seems to be a surprisingly divisive (and, frankly, awkward and unpleasant) issue even among the real professionals. For example: > > You write that it would be a downside if the original authors show the criticism to be incorrect. No, that would be an upside! If I’m wrong, I’d like to know as soon as possible. The downside is the potential for an unpleasant social interaction, for example getting a nasty email in reply. I’m not saying it’s rational for me to want to avoid such a downside; it’s just the way it is. It’s my impression from reading Nick’s post that he feels the same way. > > > And: > > Besides, making authors aware of criticisms isn’t only about incentivizing better research, it is also about incentivizing accuracy in criticisms. > > > Two alternative routes to email that weren't discussed here, but might be useful to mention for posterity: 1. Asking a question on the article's PubPeer page might be a more or less offensive option, depending on context. 2. It may also be useful to note that journal editors are still (for now) able to act as effective go-betweens nowadays, especially to prompt formalizing discussion into "Comment on:" articles - which has the advantage of being registered in the scientific record, and usually includes a high-quality "author's reply" section. Upvotes: 2
2021/02/21	820	3,490	<issue_start>username_0: Some background on me: I graduated in 2020 with my BS in Accounting with a minor in Mathematical Sciences from a non-special public university. I decided I wanted to make an educational career change with only 1.5 years of undergrad schooling left. Mathematics courses I took in that time were calc 2, calc 3 (taught myself calc 1), differential equations, linear algebra, and real analysis. I got A's in all of them. I was lucky enough to be admitted into an MS in applied math program in my state at a relatively well known private school in the tristate area knowing I didn't have a serious shot at being admitted to a PhD program. This first semester I am taking topology, numerical linear algebra for big data, and probability theory. I am concentrating in data science but still taking more pure mathematics courses as electives. I plan on sending out PhD applications for the Fall 2022 cycle during the fall semester of 2021. At that time I would be enrolled in foundations of algebra 1 (which is just abstract algebra), functional analysis 1, and numerical analysis. I am hoping to do a research project with a professor this upcoming summer. With that said, I know some of the very important things for the application are the letter writers (of which 1 professor at my school is pretty well known). Other than that, I plan on retaking the standard GRE which i did not do well on the first time, and potentially taking the subject GRE. What would this community say my chances are at being admitted to a top 50 university with funding? I know it's kind of a hard question to answer but if theres any other info I can provide please tell me. I would also accept any advice you could give me. I will most likely just be looking to apply to pure math phd programs while planning to do my research in a more applied area. Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: If you mean a TA by "funding" then you would probably be fine. But it is impossible to say until you apply. Make sure you have good letters of recommendation. But "free ride" funding is not so obvious. A TA normally comes with free tuition as well as a living stipend. And note that the GRE is being de-emphasized now in many places. But it is the application that gives you real information. Apply to a variety of places to give yourself more options. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Although some people might reasonably think that "pure math" courses are irrelevant to your larger goals, I would claim that the popular distinction between "pure" and "applied" math is both scientifically meaningless, and potentially hazardous to people trying to get started. Having fluency with basic ideas of abstract mathematics ("algebra", "topology", and such) is inestimably useful. Illiteracy in these things makes it impossible to really know what the substance of many "applied" conversations may be. The ideas in "pure/abstract" math are not at all disjoint from "the real world". They were all motivated by the desire to understand things. Yes, some self-styled "applied math" people pretend that all they need is computer time, and some self-styled "pure math" people pretend that whatever they do is disconnected from reality, and is practically useless. This is all silly, in my opinion. In particular, having a basic grounding in "abstract" math will make you a far better candidate for any reasonable math program, whether eventually aiming at something "applied" or "not". Upvotes: 2
2021/02/21	2,651	11,263	<issue_start>username_0: Last week, I had a postdoc interview for a "senior" role. They call it senior because they've asked me to lead on a (perhaps the) research problem. For the interview, they asked me to prepare a 10 minutes presentation where I propose a research plan. My presentation focused on a particular case with a detailed plan. I proposed to work on a particular case simply because it's all I can do at the moment (in terms of my current knowledge and research experience from my Ph.D.). They complimented my presentation and the fact that I have a clear plan. But they did say that they want someone to work on the research problem from a general perspective and then perhaps at the end, target a particular case. The researcher is also expected to show leadership during his research when working on the project. The issue is the general case will require a lot of reading. The interview was really good and I have answered all of their questions. But they didn't ask much to be honest (I guess it's because my presentation was technical and focused on the particular case and not the whole problem). But I wasn't expecting an offer because our research goals weren't the same. Now that I gave some background to why I am hesitant, I will get to my question. The PI sent me an informal email just two days after the interview, saying that I did a good interview and I should expect good news. The next day, he did say that he's going to offer me the position (again informally) and that I need to accept so he can send a formal letter. I told him that I am interested but I have another interview next week in which I've confirmed my attendance. I said that we can start the formal procedure next week after my next interview. He basically said that you have 2 days (before my next interview) to accept otherwise he will move to the waiting list. It's my first time receiving an offer, is this normal? To give 2 days as a deadline knowing that I asked for more time for my second interview? Note that a 5 day-deadline is more than enough to have an idea about both postdoc positions! Update I want to thank you for answers. Really good points were mentioned that help see things from both sides (candidate's and the PI's point view). For this particular case, I decided to quickly decline the PI's offer informally.<issue_comment>username_1: In negotiation theory, such a tactic is known as an [exploding offer](https://www.crawfordthomas.com/blog/exploding-offer-hurts-recruiting/), and its adverse effects are well-known: rushing people into hasty decisions and giving them the feeling that they're disposable can create distrust and a flawed work relationship. It also signals desperation, which will damage the PI's brand if the word gets around. Such offers can happen, but they are definitely not the norm, and could be interpreted as a red flag. Proceed with caution. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: I think that the PI is pressing you improperly. I'd suggest replying that you need to have the details in writing before you can formally accept an offer. You can say that you are interested and "inclined to accept" but without making a definite decision prior to having the actual details. This is likely to give you the time you need for the other interview. And if it isn't acceptable to the PI, then I'd worry whether everything is proper or not on their end. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Just to provide a somewhat different perspective to what has been discussed already, I'd say that what you have just described is very common (no comment on whether its morally suspect or practically counter-productive). I was given a short time limit to accept both my PhD position and the one postdoc I had that was secured via a normal advertised position. While the same tactic wasn't quite used when I got my faculty position, they did want an informal commitment shortly after the offer, even if they accepted that it was conditional on successful negotiations of the conditions. Generally the explanation given is that the recruiter wants to not keep others on the list hanging around too long. Of course, the other reason is to try and get you to take this one rather than bothering to interview at the other and therefore secure a superior worker for what might be a less good position for the worker. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: This means one of two things: 1. The PI has a certain set of needs right now and wants them met. Your needs are irrelevant. This will be the case for the duration of your employment - they'll be a decent boss until they need something and then that thing will be more important than anything you've got going on. This is a reasonably common PI mindset and most of them will respond to pushback - if you're assertive and can manage their expectations and needs this could be an ok fit for you. 2. The PI is cynically abusive to staff. This is a test. They want anyone assertive to get filtered out at this stage, because you'd just quit later in the face of abuse anyway. This is a shibboleth to identify postdocs who can be used and discarded. There is no way to make this job work for you. This PI is rarer but tends to be hiring a lot (for obvious reasons) and so you'll see them more than you would expect on the job market. It's better to not work for either kind of PI if you can avoid it. Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: I wanted to also provide a different perspective, which adds to [username_3](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/162884/4249)'s answer. I was recently in the interview panel for a postdoc position. The first two candidates both performed really well, and first choice was a close call, with another great candidate following. It is common in the UK to extend an informal offer to the 1st candidate within a day or two of the interview. The first candidate was offered a generous (too generous?) two-week deadline to respond. 15 days later, he responded in the negative. The second candidate was very surprised when we got in touch 16 days after the interview... 3 days later he apologised saying that he unfortunately already accepted another offer. Now, the funding for this particular position was time-limited: it expired on a fixed date, regardless of when the candidate started. Advertising for a position generally takes at least 5+ weeks: the position needs to be advertised for at least 2 weeks, and there needs to be at least 2 weeks between informing the shortlisted candidates and the interview date. A week or two are usually lost in between -- and often, new hires can only start in 1-3 months time, or even longer if they need to get a visa sorted. Add to all of this that over the last year, due to covid, the Universities' budget is much tighter, individual research groups get less (or no) discretionary budget, there was even a hiring freeze in play for a few months. I'll let you draw your own conclusions from this. 2 days certainly seems very insensitive to (you) the candidate. But if this is the second time the position is advertised in a similar situation to above, the PI likely has a fire burning under their chair as well. On the more practical side, I would suggest: * If you really do not think the position is a good fit for you, reject quickly. You have expressed many doubts. Also, as many answers point out, this kind of pressure at the offer stage might indicate negative things about the PI. Or the PI might be under a lot of legitimate stress to fill the position in this call, and is yet to learn how to handle it better. You need to decide what you think is more likely. * If you think the position might be a good fit, tell the PI that you are happy to start the formal paperwork. Then go to the other interview. Under no circumstances cancel the other interview unless you have a signed contract -- and if it's just a video call anyway, just attend it. The paperwork will likely take a week or so -- and if you have a point of negotiation, like salary, it might take a few days longer. If you want to "be nice", accept the contract if everything seems in order, and reject the other offer quickly if it comes. If you want to prioritize your own interest, and don't care about leaving a slightly negative impression -- wait to see if you get an offer for a better position. And then reject the current offer ASAP. If this is before the paperwork was signed, great, just let them know that you accepted a better offer in the meantime. If this happens to be after the paperwork was signed... well, let's just say that most PI's will understand that forcing somebody to stick to a contract for the duration of their notice period is just causing more delays and does not benefit anybody. Also, most PI's don't remember that one guy they never worked with a year later. Don't do this if the 2nd offer comes in much later. But, if you do this within a few days, it should still leave the PI plenty of time to contact their second choices. If they send the rejection e-mails to their backup choices that quickly, especially without a signed contract for you, they should improve their hiring process. (You decide which duration of "much later" and "few days" makes you comfortable) Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: If the company desperately wants you, they will wait for you. (A university waited for me a full year after I just finished my grad school.) If you desperately want the company, you will accept promptly. You do not seem to be in that situation, rather a feely-touchy one. So your response should be of that kind too. I would tell them that I was honored to be considered for employment and that, for your final "yes" you would need to see the details of the offer. Upon seeing the details you can negotiate the parts that are not agreeable to you. In the meantime your second interview will happen and you will know whether it is worth waiting for the second company to possibly offer you the job, etc. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: You're thinking from your perspective, with information you have. There might be another candidate available, as good as you, but you seemed (bit) more promising AND they want to fill position ASAP. 2 days is not much, but not 2 hours as well. If you came to interview, you should have been ready to accept it. If not, why waste yours and others time, especially if they clearly indicated before, that they'll think they'll give you an offer. Imo, it's more of a "take it or leave it" offer. You (and a lot of people here) might think it's "insensitive" or "too quickly", but if you've been on the other side of the table, You'll get my point- either candidate wants to work with you or no. No one needs doubter, "window shoppers" or CV builders, who'll probably leave the very moment the better opportunity arises. You can try stalling of course (by say, asking for written offer or saying you'd like to have another call and schedule something for 1 week later or ...), but don't think it'll change for you much, because apparently they either want you to accept or move on and you need to make that decision now, not in 2 weeks from now, when there will be second answer available. Upvotes: -1
2021/02/21	549	2,275	<issue_start>username_0: With the pandemic going on, most schools have either decided to make both GRE and its subject tests optional. In all likelihood, would there be a big chance that this is the finishing hammer for the GRE, and make a lot of institutions move away from it?<issue_comment>username_1: This will vary by institution in the US. Some will return, others not. It is likely to depend on how the experience of making predictions about success of applicants turns out without it. If the other indicators prove adequate there will be little pressure to return. But, I suspect that many, if not most, will return to using it since, for the institution, it give some information at little cost or effort. Hard to predict the future, of course. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: My U.S. grad program in math had already been reducing attention to GRE subject test for years, due to its manifest uselessness for predicting success in our grad program. (I've been involved in grad admissions here almost continuously since about 1985, and have been Dir of Grad Studies in math for two stints, so I've really paid a lot of attention to this.) Until the pandemic, we did tell our own undergrads to take the subject test GRE, since many places still did expect it. In fact, faux-ironically, until recently, we did tend to wonder why someone would not have taken the subject test GRE if they had any idea what they were doing... in terms of preparation for or application to grad school in math in the U.S. A number of other good programs had already, in recent years, downplayed the significance of the GRE subject test score for their applications, so we ourselves had come to "wonder less" why someone might not have taken it. With the pandemic, and the at-least-temporary vanishing of the GRE subject test, we have more-unabashedly stated that we don't care about a subject test GRE (nor any other part of the GRE). I would speculate that other math grad admissions in the U.S. have also figured out how to not pretend that the subject test score is a good predictor of success... all the more that it (documentably, both anecdotally and other) never was, and the last year or so has necessitated making decisions without it. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
2021/02/21	385	1,614	<issue_start>username_0: I am writing a computer science paper, and as part of what I did, I have a set of tests I used to evaluate my results against existing methods. In terms of preliminary raw data, I have tables of hundreds of values of which I then take statistical parameters (e.g. mean and standard deviation). From a scientific perspective I feel I should include the actual results that I got, such that if I forget something in my writeup, e.g. the mode, other researchers can look at my data and corroborate or criticize my results. Basically it seems good form to have all the data in the paper. But if I do include the raw results I will get a good couple of pages that are nothing but numbers on a table. Which seems bloated for an article and I suspect reviewers won't like it I am not sure how I should handle this.<issue_comment>username_1: Talk to your editor. Their job is to help you disseminate supplemental information, while keeping paper to style and readable. As Libor mentions in comments, modern journals accept wide range of supplemental materials, and either will host the files (CSV) or suggest the ways to deposit it Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: No. Hundreds of values is too many for a table in a PDF document. Imagine the frustration of someone trying to convert those numbers to a spreadsheet. Depending on the situation, you might choose to present the values as: * A plot * A table in a CSV file * A database Any of which could be published by the journal or a repository. In some cases summary statistics like mean are sufficient. Upvotes: 1
2021/02/22	678	3,138	<issue_start>username_0: I got a review from a reputed Elsevier journal. There're three reviewers, one decided recommend acceptation, other recommended a minor revision and the last one recommended a major revision. Overall, is it a major or minor revision then?<issue_comment>username_1: It's up to the editor to make the decision. Their job is to read the reviews and decide if the criticism is substantial enough to justify a major revision. If the editor is lazy, they might resort to shortcuts, such as: follow the least favorable recommendation, or take the average of all recommendations. But that is a poor practice. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: As far as you are concerned, your work cannot be accepted in current form but may be if you address the comments raised by the reviewers. (A good editor will make this explicit and expand on what they require and what they recommend.) The question of "major" vs. "minor" is mostly internal (between reviewers and editor) and has two basic functions: 1. If it is a very selective journal, editors may decide that a major revision is unlikely to be successful within a reasonable timeframe and reject the paper at this stage rather than waste the time of everyone involved on a second round with uncertain outcome -- there are enough excellent papers submitted that can be published with only minor changes. 2. Related to this, major revisions are more involved and take more time than minor revisions, so the deadline for resubmission will be longer (months instead of weeks). Whether a revised manuscript will be sent for another round of reviews is the sole decision of the handling editor; while it's virtually guaranteed for a major revision, it may or may not happen for a minor revision based on the specific comments, the responses to them, and how confident the editor feels about evaluating themselves whether the comments have been addressed adequately. TL;DR: As an author, revision is revision; if you absolutely have to distinguish how it's been logged in the system for some reason, look at when you are asked to submit the revised version at the latest. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: It depends on the reason for the differences. Often, especially with multi-disciplinary work, one reviewer will not have the knowledge required to assess every aspect of the paper. The editors may pick reviewers from several different specialties so that between them, they can cover the whole work. In that case, getting one "major revisions" and two "minor revisions" probably means that there was a serious problem, but only one reviewer had experience in the relevant field necessary to recognise that problem. Obviously the editor should then treat the outcome as "major revisions". But if the work is within a single discipline and all the reviewers have the knowledge necessary to assess the whole work, it's possible that all of the reviewers noticed the same issue but they disagreed on how serious it was, in which case it becomes more of a subjective judgement call for the editor to decide whether Reviewer Two is being too harsh. Upvotes: 1
2021/02/22	2,334	9,922	<issue_start>username_0: A master's student did research under an advisor. As part of the research, the student had collected and processed a lot of data and finally published the thesis as well. After a few years, the advisor took a small portion of said data from the master's thesis and published a paper. The student is not a co-author nor was prior consent sought to use that data. However, the advisor added the student's name in the acknowledgment section. Is there anything wrong on the advisor's side? After all, the advisor had also actively guided the research and collection of data and may feel they have a right to use that data without the consent of the student. The student played no role in publishing the paper except for the fact that a part of the student's published master's thesis data was used for this journal publication. The student was hence not added as a co-author but was acknowledged.<issue_comment>username_1: A paper should not be published without the consent of all the authors. Collecting and processing data may or may not make someone an author; it depends on the details and the discipline. We cannot evaluate this for you. If you live in a jurisdiction where data is not protected by copyright law, then technically anybody who gets a copy of your data can publish that data wherever they please. <https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/11359/can-you-copyright-data> Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Note: the answer below makes an assumption about what you meant by "processing" data. I am assuming you mean that the student collected the data and then analyzed them to extract useful information and this is the information that was then put in context by the advisor and published. If by "processing" you just mean filling out a spreadsheet or otherwise making the data available for analysis as opposed to actually performing the analysis, then that's different and my answer does not apply. --- What you are describing sounds to me like a clear case of academic malpractice where the advisor is stealing someone else's work. I may be misunderstanding the situation, but you wrote: "the student had collected and processed a lot of data". This means the student did all the work of data collection and analysis. I realize this may depend on your field, but I struggle to imagine a situation where the person who did all the data collection and analysis doesn't merit authorship of a paper that is based on said data and analysis. So yes, from what I can understand and the details you gave, the advisor is absolutely in the wrong. The student should not only have been consulted, but more importantly, the student should have been an author. The fact that the advisor had actively guided the research and collection of data is irrelevant. That's what advisors are supposed to do and that's why, at least in many fields, papers are published under both the advisor's and the student's name. In my field, biology, this would typically have the student as first author and the advisor as last and corresponding author. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: The ethics of what your advisor did can't be answered well without knowing the exact specifics of what you did and your field. If the data you collected was part of a project led by your advisor (collecting data is a valuable learning experience as part of a postgraduate degree), who "gave" you an analysis to do, their behavior trends toward acceptable/expected, the data is "theirs." But, if this was a project you proposed and executed, it trends toward unethical, although some would argue that data collected in a lab ultimately belongs to the PI (I don't), which makes using it without contacting you only slight rude. This, of course, depends on how expensive/difficult the data is to collect. If they gave you funding to collect six MRI scans, that would give them a little bit more leeway than if you scraped data from Reddit. Finally, with regards to "processing," in my field at least, that would give you priority over the first paper published with it (which you said you did), as well as the next few you are directly involved in. After that -- especially a few years later -- citing you and acknowledging the use of your data is the correct way to go. In short, I think it's more likely than not your advisor behaved appropriately, but the details matter. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: I don't think the behaviour of the PI would be regarded as 'wrong' by most academics; the fact that a problem exists in apportioning ownership to the paper is testament to the fact that many people contributed to the paper, either through writing or analysis or data generation or ideas. Therefore my personal view is that everyone ought to be included as authors. The decision of the PI in this case is not unusual, however, I think it sucks. Who wants to be way at the bottom of the page, separate from all of the other authors, like a black sheep? An acknowledgement is more of an insult than anything. This is why I avoid academia. I am not going to be the labour-slave of a PI who gets to take all the credit, make all the important decisions and receive the fat salary. I'm\_not\_doing\_it: become an independent researcher. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: The title of the question seems to contradict the text of the question: it's not the "student's data" once it's been published. But there is nuance. Very broadly speaking, a person gets to be an author on a particular publication when they have done work *for that particular publication. If work was done but already published elsewhere, then it is considered work for a different publication. Conversely, if this new publication relies on data that has not been (and is not about to be) published elsewhere, then the data is essentially work for the new publication. Basically, if the student considers the data published, then the student can no longer claim any ownership of the data. And if the student hasn't contributed anything new to this new publication, there is no ethical demand on the professor to share authorship with the student — in fact, there would be more of an ethical demand not* to gift authorship to the student. Now, having said that, it's also true that there are different levels of publication. When the thesis was "published", where and how did that happen? Just in the university library's archive of theses? On the arXiv? Some kind of data repository (zenodo, figshare, dryad)? Or a journal? One of the driving factors behind ethical decisions is the fact that, "in the scholarly arena, [authorship] also forms the basis for rewards and career advancement." (COPE, 2019) So — specifically in their role as a supervisor — the advisor has some moral responsibility to ensure that such rewards can be conferred on the student. At least in fields I've worked in, that basis entirely ignores university library thesis archives, but gives nearly full credit to arXiv publication, and full credit to data repositories and journals. I suspect that every academic field would give full credit to a journal publication, some might not with arXiv or data repos, and most would not credit a library archive. So here, I'll just give my judgment based on fields I've worked in. If it were me, and the thesis had only been published in the university library's archive, I would not consider the data published, and thus offer authorship to the student. Otherwise, I would consider the data published, and feel ethically bound not to offer authorship to the student, unless they contribute something specifically to the new publication (which could be as minor as helping to write a section). But there is some gray area here, so I'll also point out that it could be just a dumb move on the advisor's part to push toward the greedy end of the gray. Sole authorship is usually more of a boost to the ego than to the career. On the other hand, the advisor's institution and funding agencies want to see evidence of training the next generation — and joint publications constitute great evidence. Also, future students and collaborators want to know they won't be squeezed out of credit they might deserve. When there's ethical wiggle room, the smart move is to err on the side of generosity. --- Edit: I should also emphasize that there's a difference between being an author and being offered authorship. Given the comment below that the thesis was published in the university library, the advisor should have made a good-faith effort to bring the student aboard as an author on the paper. However, it's also true that students who have moved on with their lives will often be unable or unwilling to take on the responsibility of authorship, even with a reasonable amount of flexibility from the other authors. I'm not saying that's what happened here, but it can happen. And if it does, the advisor can't let the research be held hostage, but must accept that they made an honest effort, and the research has technically been published, so the new publication can go forward without the student. --- ### Further reading Within academia, [COPE](https://publicationethics.org/) (Committee on Publication Ethics) is generally regarded as providing a sort of broad framework for all fields. (For example, [Springer's](https://www.springer.com/gp/authors-editors/editors/publishing-ethics-for-journals/4176#c4228), [Cambridge's](https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-file-manager/file/5b44807ace5b3fca0954531e/CUP-Research-Publishing-Ethics-Guidelines-2019.pdf), and [Wiley's](https://authorservices.wiley.com/ethics-guidelines/index.html#5) discussions of authorship ethics link to COPE.) And COPE has put out [a document](https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.3.3) with lots of discussion and links to more discussion on the issue of authorship. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2021/02/22	837	3,224	<issue_start>username_0: I have been sending emails (in English) to the "visitor's program" of an institute in Germany. Initially, only one person used to reply to these emails, and I addressed this person. Recently, two more people started replying from the same account (and they seem to reply in some random order). I started addressing the person who last replied, but since then, it has happened twice that I addressed an email to "Mr. A", but "Ms. B" or "Mr. C" replied to that email. Also, some of them write `Dr.` in their signature, while some do not write. And they are not professors (So Dear Prof. A, Prof. B, Prof. C won't work). Since some of them don't write Dr., I feel it may not be a good idea to write "Dear Mr. A, Ms. B, and Dr. C". Can I write "To whom it may concern"? Is that somehow considered rude? Although this institute is in Germany, feel free to add information about other countries. I don't think this is a duplicate of [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/147179/128673) because I am concerned about addressing more than one people simultaneously, while that question seems to be more concerned about gender of the recipient.<issue_comment>username_1: The customary formal address in written English to an unknown (number of) recipient(s) is "Dear Sir or Madam". In German, it would be "Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren". However, although German etiquette is a tad more formal than US etiquette, it's alright to just omit the salutation after the first or second reply in an email exchange. Some other okay options, in order of my subjective sense of appropriateness (with 10 years in German and Austrian academia): * "Dear Mr A, dear Ms B, dear Ms C" * "Dear X" (with X being the person who replied last) * "Hello" "To whom it may concern" is not a great choice. It's very formal, old-fashioned, and used only when the recipients are unknown. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I would reply to whoever wrote the latest email... it is a reply after all. When other people take over and respond, I interpret that as if the group that monitors the email is always in bbc, and is free to join in the conversation/take over when it becomes useful. When I reply, it's to the last person to have "spoken," unless I need to address something specific a different person said, in which case I might write back to both (ETA: as in, "Dear Mr. Smith and Ms. Jones, " or "Hi Sarah and Michael, " matching their tone). There was some talk in the comments of this question about etiquette in various countries. I'm from the US but have worked in Europe for four years, and I still would go with this strategy. I know German addresses combined with honorifics are notoriously more formal than other languages, but usually when the conversation is in English and among an international crowd, the international English standards take over. I've never lived or worked in Germany, but get communications from German academics and haven't noticed any deviations from that norm. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: * To whom it may concern * Dear sir/madam * ... Are fine for first contact. Subsequently, respond inline, which doesn't require a salutation. Upvotes: 1
2021/02/22	1,828	7,499	<issue_start>username_0: I'm a second year computer science PhD student. I switched research areas during my third semester and did an independent study with Professor X. He basically gave me a bunch of papers and textbooks to read so I could get up to speed on the field and told me to ask questions as they come up. Things did not turn out too well because (1) everything moved online (COVID) and (2) I had a breakdown, ultimately resulting in me barely communicated with Professor X. I'm in a small reading group he leads, so he knows I still exist, but we have not actually exchanged speech in months. To briefly explain the breakdown: I grew up with alcoholic and abusive parents and had everything under control for years, but my emotions just exploded out of nowhere. I've been seeing a therapist, and I am faring much better now. I did read the papers and most of the textbooks, but it took much longer than it should have because of my breakdown. I also came up with a few research questions I'm interested in pursuing, but I don't know how to proceed after ghosting Professor X for months. I want to hear what he thinks of them, and if he thinks they're good, ask if he has any advice. However, I imagine he does not have a favorable opinion of me right now. I'm not sure if a professor would want to work with a student after something like that, and quite frankly, I feel horrible. I emailed him to see if we could meet, saying that I fell off track last semester and want to make better progress. I haven't received a response yet, and I do not know if this was the right way to proceed. What can I do to help this situation? How should I explain my lack of communication without providing personal details? Will I have to find a different professor to work with? If anyone can offer any advice/insight, I would greatly appreciate it. Note: Professor X is not technically my advisor at this stage, but I use that term in the title for brevity.<issue_comment>username_1: It should be enough to explain your absence with "I've been ill for several months, but am better now". You don't really need to go in to details. If asked, just reply that it is very "personal". The professor may need some assurance that you will be effective going forward, but really has no need to know details. And, of course, you should say you've been somewhat (at least) productive in the interim. And keep contact with the professional counselor through any necessary transition. Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'd also go through some channels at your university that offer support to students going through difficult times in their lives. Having referred yourself to them will lend you some support in case things get hairy, because it will (partially) legitimise your lack of communication. That said, I disagree with username_1, in that you shouldn't hide the issue so much from this professor. We're all human at the end of the day, and it would be a welcome approach to just be a little more candid with what you've gone through. This doesn't mean you have to reveal every detail, far from it in fact, but don't just say that you had "personal issues". That sounds like a copout and may make you look like someone who's just finding easy excuses for their lack of progress. Finally, I'm sure that them seeing you being able to overcome your issues and be ready to get to work again will display you in a positive light, as it will highlight your determination and desire to continue your work. I've seen people quit PhD's over far less. You're a trooper, stay strong, chin up. There's always a light at the end of the tunnel. As someone who has suffered from depression for numerous reasons (partially down to parental issues as well), I can only empathise but at the same time remind you that no matter how hopeless the situation may feel, it's never the end of the world. :) Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: First of all you are paying for your tuition, so ask about and use whatever support channels are open to you. Speaking from experience of abuse, my biggest challenge was the need for acceptance and a lack of self esteem. 1. You will need soft skills to succeed as a programmer, so treat thesis a learning opportunity. 2. In 2 to 3 years having gained your degree, this motor bump in the road will seem like that, not like the mountain it feels like now. I am looking back form a perspective of almost 40 years, I have been programming for 20 of that. If you give yourself the freedom to heal things will get better, focus your goals and how you want a better life for your children. I was able to give my son many of the things I did not have. He came out of univ. with a Masters in Physics and a Masters in intelligent Systems engineering. You can do it, just be gentle on yourself and don't worry too much, within reason, what others think. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: A very similar thing happen to me in my 3rd year (of 5), but I was able to go on to complete my PhD with my advisor nonetheless. If reconnecting directly is too uncomfortable, try reaching out to your program coordinator, trusted fellow PhD candiate, or friendly professor to help start the conversation back up again. PhDs are hard, and pandemics are also hard! It sounds like your heart and your efforts are in the right place, and better than that, you are taking steps to fix this! There's no reason you can't reconnect! My story: My advisor went on sabbatical for a year to another continent, and I had my research problems to figure out. I became quite dejected with my studies, and stopped communicating with my advisor for maybe 9 or 10 months. I continued with my own studies, but struggled to make progress and gain traction with any particular topic. In the end, another professor (to whom I am very grateful) reached out to me to see where I was at, and help me reconnect with my advisor. It was an awkward first conversation, and I was put on probation by the program coordinator (a well-deserved kick in the butt for me!) but soon things were back on track. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: A few months isn't that long on typical academic timescales. In my experience, a few months of silence between collaborators on non-urgent matters can happen, and are not a big deal at all. I am currently waiting to hear from some people I've sent stuff to months ago, and there are even more people I really ought to get back to[1]. When reestablishing contact, a simple "Sorry for the delay in getting back to you" or "My apologies for the long silence, I had stuff going on" is enough. If you are confident that you'll be back to quick response times from now on, you can add something like "Things should be better now, and I'm keen to get back into our project." There are two caveats where some[2] remorse would be in order: One, if your silence led to missed opportunities mattering to the collaborator. If you had planned to submit results to a conference as a joint paper and missed the deadline, or a grant application couldn't go ahead. Pointing out that you just couldn't would be appropriate. Two, if you ignored "welfare check" style emails. In this case, thank the person for their concern and apologize for having caused them worry. [1] If you are of them, and are reading this: My apologies for procrastinating here. [2] But not too much. Based on how the question reads, half of OPs current remorse is definitely enough. Upvotes: 0
2021/02/23	1,683	7,199	<issue_start>username_0: Several years ago, I did a summer project as an undergrad with a PI not at my undergrad institution (I'm in grad school now). Now, the project is finished and he wants to publish it with data that I've gathered. The problem is, after checking my data, that the spreadsheets that I used to calculate the data are very inaccurate, to say the least. I can't remember exactly what I did, but there do seem to be some egregious inaccuracies (as in, values from the wrong dataset) in my spreadsheet compared to the raw data from the instrument either that I was colossally bad at copying data over correctly (all of the data in my spreadsheet do appear in the raw data someplace, but not necessarily in the right location, the right dataset, etc.), or worse, I'm terrified that I may have done it deliberately at the time. (How would someone be able to tell?) I did analysis with the faulty data back then and produced graphs. Obviously, I will have to supply the correct data analysis before it gets published. But is it ok to explain it as "I majorly screwed up the analysis and made a lot of data entry errors, here's the corrected version"? I'm hoping that my PI will just use my corrected data and analysis and just focus on that instead trying to pore over my wrong spreadsheets to individually compare all the changes, many of which are embarrassing at best and look suspicious at worst. I am not under any suspicion of wrongdoing thus far. I redid my data analysis with correct data entry and the results look messier on most of the things I messed up, though they do not affect the underlying trends. Not sure what this means - how likely is it for honest error to have the effect of making data look cleaner than it actually is? Also, my god, I was awful - mishmashing data from one trial with another, copying data from the wrong wavelengths and/or from the wrong trial, wrong normalization numbers, etc. etc. etc. If you were a professor and you were approached by a student who says that made egregious errors on past data analysis and the corrected data looks not nearly as good, what would you think? Would you think they were honestly trying to fix a mistake, or trying to save face and cover for past misconduct?<issue_comment>username_1: Everyone will have their own reaction, of course, but the more important thing is that you point out the errors and the need to correct them. Going forward with bad data is the worst outcome. Work up the best data you can and tell the prof that the older data was seriously flawed. I think most people will accept your honesty, even if it means some delay. And most will forgive at least some of it due to your lack of experience at the time. Hopefully the original data is still available making corrections possible. But, you also need to be honest with yourself about how this all happened. I can think of a few very bad scenarios that I hope weren't contributing factors. There are actual medical conditions that might have such an effect. You don't want a recurrence. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I infer from the question that you still have the raw data. In that case, I think you need to re-do all the steps in which errors could be introduced (such as data entry, spread-sheet calculations, analysis of trends). Then see what effect the corrections have on the conclusions of your paper, and rewrite as necessary. I realize that this sounds like a lot of work, essentially repeating most of what you had done earlier, but since you apparently did it wrong the first time, you now need to do it right. Meanwhile, you should tell the PI about the problem and your plans for correcting it. If I correctly understand the situation, the raw data are the only reliable information currently available. You should make sure he knows that, so that he (and others working with him) won't build further research on a foundation of wrong results. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: I'll take your questions one at a time. > > I'm terrified that I may have done it deliberately at the time. (How would someone be able to tell?) > > > I'm not sure if by "someone" you mean you, or the person you send this to. I can definitely imagine looking back at my own work from undergrad and doubting the integrity of it if it looked fishy. If I were trying to figure out whether I had done it intentionally, I would look for patterns in the errors (e.g. maybe treatment group is only ever misrecorded for data points that pattern against the tested hypothesis), and see if they jog your memory. I suppose that's probably what I'd do if I were trying to figure out whether someone else had done something intentional, but I seriously doubt most people would bother. > > But is it ok to explain it as "I majorly fucked up the analysis and made a lot of data entry errors, here's the corrected version"? > > > Absolutely. You were an undergrad and it's the prof's responsibility to check your work and to ensure you know what you're doing. Also, the unfortunate reality is that lots of profs intentionally teach students in their labs to mishandle data to "improve" results, so that's a potential explanation here too. Because of that, I'd be more likely to say something like "Looking back at the data now, I'm finding a lot of errors, so many that I don't think correcting them is feasible, so unfortunately I believe that this data would have to be reanalysed from scratch to proceed with the project." That is, tread lightly if you can't recall the origin of the discrepancies, but make your own position clear. Also, it is absolutely not your responsibility to provide corrected data if you don't want to continue with the project. I assume as an undergrad you were either paid or volunteering in exchange for the training/experience, and I assume neither of those is true of your relationship with this PI/lab now. I recommend asking yourself whether you honestly want to continue with this project before putting any more work into this. > > I redid my data analysis with correct data entry and the results look messier on most of the things I messed up, though they do not affect the underlying trends. Not sure what this means - how likely is it for honest error to have the effect of making data look cleaner than it actually is? > > > More likely than not. Unfortunately, we're a lot more likely to double-check steps in our work if we don't like the look of the data, no matter how thorough/neutral we might intend to be. > > If you were a professor and you were approached by a student who says that made egregious errors on past data analysis and the corrected data looks not nearly as good, what would you think? Would you think they were honestly trying to fix a mistake, or trying to save face and cover for past misconduct? > > > Depends on the student and the professor. Personally I trust the students that I work with or I wouldn't be working with them, so I would believe them. And I promise you, every researcher has encountered egregious errors in their past work at one point or another, often at this very stage of preparing/doublechecking for publication. Upvotes: 3
2021/02/23	519	2,193	<issue_start>username_0: So here is my situation: I am applying for a PhD for Fall 2022. Not too long I found ago that my ex boyfriend had used my name online to post all kinds of crap. This includes revenge porn, as well as racist and anti-semitic comments. I have filed police reports, but all of this is still attached to my name (which is a very rare name btw) and available online, and probably will never go away. I am so scared of not being admitted because of this. Is there anything I can do?<issue_comment>username_1: The pictures and the posts are rather different issues. Whether there are nude pictures of an applicant available on the internet is no business of an admissions committee, regardless of how they got there. This aspect is covered well in another question: [Can leaked nude pictures damage one's academic career?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/79680/can-leaked-nude-pictures-damage-ones-academic-career) For the racist comments however, the fact that you did not write them is essential. If you had written them, it would be very legitimate to hold it against you. If these show up on the first page of Google results for your name, you may want to include a statement with your applications that horrific comments with your name attached to them exist on the internet, and that you neither wrote them nor agreed with them. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't entirely agree that this is a duplicate. I would put a note somewhere in your application materials that you have been a victim of online abuse and that online information about you is likely invalid. You don't need to give details. People understand the persistence of such things. If anyone asks about it, say in an interview, just refer them too the police department to which you made complaint. No one should hold you responsible for the acts of others, especially an abusive former partner. But it is better if others give the defense than if you try to explain it yourself. If any of your recommenders are aware of the situation, perhaps they can make a similar statement, without details. And especially, speak to your lack of racist actions or attitudes. Upvotes: 2
2021/02/23	436	1,821	<issue_start>username_0: I have submitted a paper to a Springer conference and it has been published. The publisher will charge 24.95$ to anyone who would eventually download my paper and 201 copies of my research sold by Springer official site. How much percentage royalty do I get from Springer (as the paper's author) and how I can apply for royalty payment?<issue_comment>username_1: You get nothing: Welcome to academic publishing. Upvotes: 8 <issue_comment>username_2: You get absolutely nothing. When you submitted the paper to the conference, you (very much likely) transferred the copyright of your paper to the publisher retaining just a couple of rights, but not that of being paid by the publisher. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: Here's how academic publishing works. * You write the paper. Your peers review it for free. The journal charges people to read the paper to cover copy-editing/hosting costs, and to make a profit. * You write a paper. Your peers review it for free. The journal charges you to cover copy-editing/hosting costs, and to make a profit, then gives it away for free. Unfortunately you're not allowed to save money by doing the copy-editing yourself, nor are you allowed to use your institution's infrastructure for hosting. You can't submit to a university-run committee to organise the peer review. To be taken seriously you have to publish in the well-known and established journals of your field. To publish in those journals you (or the tax-payer or funder) have to contribute to the publisher's profits. To answer your question more directly, they won't be giving any of those profits to you. Edit: forgot to say, for anyone who can't afford to pay for scientific articles (or who wants to make a point), you can access the majority via Sci-Hub. Upvotes: 5
2021/02/23	1,325	4,593	<issue_start>username_0: I wish to cite a research paper by <NAME> from 1928 that is titled (very) slightly differently in the front/back matter of the journal versus the first page of the article: in the [front](https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=MMKWG01:022157001:00007)/[back](https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=MMKWG01:022157001:00303) matter the title is given as "Beweis einer Baudetschen Vermutung" and on the [first page](https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=MMKWG01:022157001:00228) of the article it is given with an apostrophe as "Beweis einer Baudet'schen Vermutung". My guess (since my German is very rudimentary) is that the apostrophe is a typo because the German language apparently [does not use the possessive apostrophe](https://german.stackexchange.com/q/2550). But, even if the title of a paper contains a typo I would prefer to cite it along with the typo as per the advice in this related post: [How to refer to a source with typos in the title?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/55525/134891). However, in this case, I am not even sure which one is the official title of the article since there is a (slightly) different title in the front/back matter. What is the preferred method of citing the article in this scenario? Admittedly, the difference is not so great that it will cause trouble for anyone looking up this article using either title, but I am interested also in the general case where the difference in the title between the first page and the front/back matter is more drastic than a deviant apostrophe. Is there a standard practice regarding which one to consider as the "official" title to quote in a citation? If not, what is the preferred method to deal with articles having different titles in this manner?<issue_comment>username_1: For a research manuscript with a digital object identifier (DOI), associated metadata may provide a title. Alternatively, and for research manuscripts without DOIs, a publisher's table of contents, index, etc. may provide a title. The actual title assigned by the author(s) may differ, and a publisher's usage may vary, hence, there's no "official" title. Ultimately, a citation is used to identify a source and the absence of an official title doesn't matter. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Without sufficient reputation, I cannot post this as a comment; so here we go in an answer... I apologise! 'Beweis einer Baudetschen Vermutung' is orthographically incorrect, as 'Baudetschen' is an adjective and should therefore be written using a lowercase 'b' as 'baudetschen'. If this adjective, however, is derived from a name, it can be written as 'Baudet'schen' to emphasise it origin from the name 'Baudet'. We can conclude that the title of the article itself is correct, whilst front and back matter are incorrect. The title of the book 'Nieuw Archief voor Wiskunde' does not look German to me (the cover lists Amsterdam and Groningen, two cities in the Netherlands), and indicates that is was not necessarily compiled by editors sufficiently proficient in German. So this problem is actually not comparable to the [potentially related question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/55525/how-to-refer-to-a-source-with-typos-in-the-title) mentioned by OP and in the comments, as this book has a misspelling solely in its table of content, but not the article itself. Therefore I suggest to just quote the article by its correct title 'Beweis einer Baudet'schen Vermutung' and not to copy the editors' mistake 'Beweis einer Baudetschen Vermutung'. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Note the inconsistency. The exact way of doing this will depend on the style or publication guide you are using. This idea comes from the [APA Style Blog](https://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2017/06/creating-a-reference-for-a-work-published-with-a-typo-in-the-title.html), where <NAME> suggests noting an unintentional typo using a footnote: > > <NAME>. (1968). Social identification and the seeking of pyschiatric1 care. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 38, 83–88. <https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-0025.1968.tb00558.x> > > > 1The published article includes this typo. > > > Similarly, if there are two forms of the title given, you could include a note that says something like this: "In the front and back matter of the journal, the apostrophe in Baudet'schen is absent from the title." Doing that, rather than messing with [sic] or assessing whether it's a typo, will give readers accurate information on the title as it is printed. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
2021/02/23	1,506	6,335	<issue_start>username_0: I'm a graduate student who's currently working on an experiment involving some animals. I have two separate places where I keep my animals, and one of them is in a locked section of a lab (which is only accessible by myself, my PI, and a few other investigators). A few weeks ago when I came into the lab, I noticed that all of the animals in that locked section had died. Without going into too much detail, after a quick investigation I found that a gas valve must have been opened to kill the animals, and then closed again. It is impossible for the valve to open spontaneously, let alone open and close. I also determined that it couldn't have been a gas leak because I have a habit of always setting the valve to a certain position after closing it, and it wasn't exactly in that position when I checked it, so it must have been physically moved. I thought that maybe the stars unfortunately aligned and I had gone wrong somewhere for this to occur, so I left it alone and kept it to myself but have been careful to check the valve everyday afterward. A few days ago, the animals were dead once again. The valve had also been moved. Although I don't have concrete evidence, I'm strongly suspecting that either my PI (who I don't have the best relationship with) or another investigator in the lab is deliberately killing the animals. I don't know what to do now, who to approach, and what to say. My entire experiment is now also in jeopardy. What steps do I take? Clarifications / responses to comments: * The "animals" are insects, so "animal care regulations" are limited * No one has commented on the deaths. My section of the lab is rarely used, so they may not have noticed. * There are no security cameras.<issue_comment>username_1: This is a very serious allegation. You should immediately speak with your PI about it. It is highly unlikely your PI would sabotage you - what could they have to gain? Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: I assume you're doing CO2, in which case you frame it as a serious safety concern and insist on looking into it. You're in an enclosed space with an asphyxiant that appears to be leaking. This is a critical health and safety issue and should be treated accordingly. It's unlikely in my opinion that you are being sabotaged but if you are whoever is doing it will stop if these issues are investigated Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I am assuming that your line manager is your PI and that you would normally take any issues or problems relating to your work to them. If that is the case, then you ought to report your concerns to your PI. While it sounds like you don't have a good rapport with your PI, that does not prevent you from behaving professionally. Ask your PI for a meeting, raise your concerns, make good notes during your meeting (literally write notes during your meeting), do not accuse anyone, offer a solution (perhaps ask that a webcam be set up to record your insects, ostensibly to time when the deaths occur, but also can monitor who entets the lab), ask for the PI to consider the matter but don't press the PI for an immediate solution. Summarize the meeting in a subsequent email to your PI, asking the PI to add anything that was discussed. Now you have brought your concerns to the person whom your institution expects you to tell, and you have a record of that meeting. If it turns out that matters don't improve, you can refer to your earlier discussion and take it from there. This could include raising the issue again with your PI, or, if necessary, bringing the issue to the attention of people who could advise further. This could be the health & safety officer if you had justifiable concerns about a leak (or "leak"), or it could be your Department/School/Faculty head if you find the PI unhelpful. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: It is critical that you approach the matter from the most objective point of view possible. Most importantly, do not make any assumptions about who did it and why it happened. I can only repeat: do not make any assumptions about who did it and why it happened. While it is quite possible that someone sabotages you, it may be that there is a misalignment of circumstances; and if there is an act of sabotage, it may be somebody entirely out of your picture, such as cleaning personnel or somebody entirely different. In short, as you approach the matter, keep an open mind about what may have happened and why. Stick to the facts. Proceed by involving your PI, but at the same time triggering animal protection protocols, so that as many people as possible know about the matter being investigated. Hopefully that is a sufficient deterrence for any but the most determined and out-of-their-mind saboteur and if they are the latter, it enters outright criminal territory, which requires an entirely different ballpark of escalation. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: > > [Hanlon's Razor](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor): Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. > > > For purposes of advice, I will accept your assertion that you have good cause to believe that the insects were killed by turning the gas on. Even in this case, it is surely possible that this could have been done for some other purpose than the deliberate killing of these insects. Perhaps someone turned the gas on for some other purpose (or not even knowing it was a gas tap) and then turned it off again when they saw it had done some harm. The fact that this happened twice does raise a reasonable suspicion of dasdardly deeds, but it is still possible that this is just someone making an error. I recommend you go and speak to your PI about your concerns, and still to what you know for sure about the mechanics of the death, without speculating on the presumed malice of whoever turned on the gas tap. Any improper use of the gas will raise a safety concern (and not just for the insects) so it is likely that this will at least lead to briefing the lab users on proper and improper use of the gas taps. If it keeps happening, leading to strong suspicions of intentional sabotage then you might then take stronger action. For now, start by speaking to your PI and give all participants the benefit of the doubt. Upvotes: 1
2021/02/23	931	3,972	<issue_start>username_0: I am taking a math course this semester and the problems that are given to us on a weekly basis require less than half a page to solve. The path to the proof is relatively straightforward, using the things we learned in class. However, my professor is accusing me of cheating because my proofs look very similar to online solutions. I don't know what to do because the proofs do look similar, even if they aren't word for word, but I wouldn't know any other way of solving them using the information we learned in the course. Because the problems were relatively simple, there doesn't seem to be many places where I could "branch" off and do something completely different from what can be found online. What do you think is the best course of action in the face of this allegation?<issue_comment>username_1: I'll assume here that you didn't cheat, nor go outside the bounds of what is acceptable in your course. The path, hopefully successful, is just to insist that you didn't cheat and keep on insisting on it. Don't try to "prove" that you didn't cheat. That isn't your job and will probably lead nowhere, or even to some "gotcha moment". If you didn't cheat, say that and keep saying it. If your work process was that you solved the problem on your own using course materials and your notes, then say that. No one can, of course, guarantee that this or anything will be successful. If offered a follow up, possibly an oral question, consider taking it. But accusations need to be proved, not assumed. Good luck. The world isn't necessarily fair. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: because my proofs look very similar to online solutions. If the word "proof" were in the singular form, I would believe you. Otherwise I side with your professor: the probability of multiple similarities is rather small here (it is not zero, of course, but we allow new drugs to be used on people with confidence levels of 1% or so, so I would also accuse someone of cheating if the probability of random coincidence is below a certain threshold). However, I would certainly give anybody a chance to disprove my accusations as soon as they arise. What I would do is to bring the student to my office (online mode doesn't work, sorry, so that has to wait until the next semester), give him or her two problems, one of which has a readily available solution online and the other one has not, and see what happens. If the student solves both and the student "online problem" solution is, indeed, similar to the web one, I would profusely apologize and revert all accusations and reduced points. Another way that would make me to remove all accusations is to give a student a couple of really difficult questions in the same setting. If he or she manages to solve them, I would remove all accusations too, but this time not because I am convinced that the student doesn't copy his/her solutions from the web occasionally but merely because I no longer care is he or she does. In all other cases I would stick to my original opinion. You may try to suggest something like that to your professor or ask him to invent his own verification test. Just stubbornly insisting on your innocence would prove nothing to me: the people who are best at that are usually the hardest cheaters (alas, I agree with username_1 here: the world is not fair). Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: > > What do you think is the best course of action in the face of this allegation? > > > Explain to the professor that you found the proof relatively straightforward. Perhaps mention that proving the result using taught methods leaves little room for variation, which is why your proof is similar to others. Offer to explain the proof. A student that can explain a proof either wrote it or is good enough to write it. Ultimately, the burden of proof is on the professor: They must demonstrate that you cheated. You cannot definitively prove you didn't. Upvotes: 2
2021/02/24	850	3,538	<issue_start>username_0: I uploaded my thesis to a Turnitin ID which my friend got from some other university than where I am studying. Due to some reason, my thesis got uploaded to Turnitin repository and the university is very far away from my home. I made a blunder mistake. Now I have to make my thesis submission this month but the plagiarism is showing 100 %. It is comparing my own thesis with the one I submitted earlier to the other university. I cannot contact the university turnitin administrator regarding deletion of my thesis. In my thesis submission, can I exclude the student paper source of my own work?<issue_comment>username_1: A thesis must typically be an original work, so re-submitting a thesis submitted earlier to [an]other university may constitute self-plagiarism. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_1: Do nothing: If you've made a genuine mistake, it will be obvious to examiners. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: No. As far as I am aware there isn't. The person reviewing your thesis after submission can exclude the earlier submission though. You should probably make whoever is checking this aware. You should however, be aware that submitting your thesis to a user account provided by someone else at a different university may be breaking some rules, or at least expectations - either at your university, at your friends university or turnitin's rules (possibly all three). This is not a serious infraction, and I wouldn't expect any comeback other than disapproving tuts, but its still bad practice. Students often want to submit their work to check the turnitin score to see if they have paraphrased things sufficiently not to trigger the plagiarism checks. This betrays a misunderstanding of what plagiarism is. Taking text from another source and paraphrasing it, even with attribution, is still on the "plagiarism spectrum". Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Turnitin is not a useful tool for students. The appropriate use of Turnitin is to provide a similarity report to someone familiar with academic writing and the relevant field, which that person can use to screen for suspicious clues that could lead them to suspect plagiarism. It cannot help an honest student author, because if that author understands the customs surrounding plagiarism, they should already know that they have not plagiarised; whereas if they don't understand the customs, the Turnitin report is useless to them anyway. The OP doesn't need to do anything about this. So there is no reason for the OP to try and fiddle with the Turnitin settings, because they shouldn't use Turnitin again (atleast until they get an academic job themselves). If their PhD thesis is going to be run through Turnitin, the person will presumably either immediately see that the flagged document is the OPs dissertation, or be able to confirm quickly that the OP indeed wrote their own dissertation. It is then their problem to get Turnitin to tell them about other similarities (but I think Turnitin does multiple sources anyway). But it may look suspicious There is a small caveat to my first claim: A plagiarizing student could use Turnitin to try and hide the evidence of their transgression. Uploading a copy of the dissertation could have been an attempt to mask whatever hits Turnitin still finds. So I wouldn't be surprised if OP's dissertation receives more scrutiny regarding plagiarism than usual - but not because of a 100% Turnitin score, but because OPs behaviour seems suspicious. Upvotes: 0
2021/02/24	490	2,050	<issue_start>username_0: I am a second-year Ph.D. student/ RA from a university in country A. I had no problem with my laboratory or supervisor; however, as I could not speak the country language and was not able to find a post-doc position due to COVID, I applied for another Ph.D. positions in the same field in an English speaking country (B) where I can immigrate and settle. In the application form for the universities and during my interviews I mentioned that I am a Research assistant, omitting the fact that I am a Ph.D. candidate. Also, my supervisors mentioned that I am RA in their recommendation letters understating the fact that I want to go to an English-speaking country. The problem is that due to my successful publications our department from country A decided to grant me the Ph.D. degree at the end of this year. I read some posts that mentioned that omitting your academic records is the same as falsifying them. I am afraid if I go to country B without mentioning that I was in fact a Ph.D. candidate and RA and get in huge trouble, so what should I do? Is it be unethical if I omit this fact that I would have a Ph.D., refer it to RA and start the second Ph.D. in the same field in country B, or should I contact the prospective professors from country B and tell him/her that I did a mistake in my application?<issue_comment>username_1: The comment of Jeff is worth considering. Do you really need a second doctorate to migrate. But, under the circumstances, send a message to the new university stating that since your application, you were awarded a PhD, but, assuming you want to, that you still want to continue your application and enter the new program. Stress that the research proposal will be different if accepted. Hiding the recent degree could come back to harm you. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Does country B automatically recognize academic degrees from country A? If yes, I'm afraid you have to mention your PhD. If no, technically for them in country B you are (academically) nobody. Upvotes: -1
2021/02/24	765	2,725	<issue_start>username_0: I never saw a paper published in a journal of (pure) math with more than six authors. Is it a rule? (see [this one](https://doi.org/10.1007/s10468-019-09873-9))<issue_comment>username_1: No: Authorship is governed by the number of contributing mathematicians, rather than some arbitrary limit. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: It turns out that someone put out a bibliometric analysis of publication characteristics in mathematics papers this month, which is very convenient for answering the question! > > Richard & Sun (2021). Bibliometric analysis on mathematics, 3 snapshots: 2005, 2010, 2015. arXiv:[2102.06831](https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.06831) > > > They found a general increase in the number of authors per paper over time, from 2.1 in 2005 to 2.4 in 2015. (Interestingly, this collaboration was both "internal" and "external" - the number of distinct institutions and distinct countries on a paper also increased steadily). The share of papers with five or more authors was 5.4% in 2015, so presumably slightly higher now. Papers with more authors, or from more places, tended to be more highly cited, which I believe is a common phenomenon across most fields. They used the Web of Science "research area" classification, which as I understand it will group together a few different Web of Science "categories" (which in turn are inferred from the journal the paper was published in). It will probably thus include more interdisciplinary material than a narrowly defined field of "mathematics" might. They do not break down authorship by category, but it's possible to pull the data and do it yourself. I ran the numbers for 2020 papers in "mathematics" and in "mathematics, applied", filtered to just "articles". Papers in "mathematics" had an average of 2.24 authors; those in "mathematics, applied" had an average of 2.56. 3.4% of papers in "mathematics" had 5+ authors, versus 5.7% of those in "mathematics, applied". If we limit it to just those papers published in journals which were only classified as "mathematics" and not as eg "logic / mathematics" or "mathematics / mathematics, applied" (about a third of papers were in journals which were in multiple categories), then we get an average of 2.20 authors, and 3.3% with 5+ authors. So whole we don't have an explicit classification for "pure mathematics", the non-applied group clearly skews towards a slightly smaller number of authors than applied, and the "just mathematics" group ditto. Papers with five or six authors are not unknown, but they are definitely uncommon - only a few percent of papers. (7 or more authors was around 0.4-0.5%, depending which group you looked at). Upvotes: 3
2021/02/24	2,393	10,387	<issue_start>username_0: Yesterday I applied to a bunch of internships and sent my professor a request for a recommendation letter. He denied me the request, and sent my request email, along with his reply, to everyone in the lab. He wrote that he didn't understand why I would apply for a research internship in (our research area) when I am already a research intern at his lab, and that he assumes that I was only here for a reference letter and I have no intention of contributing to the lab. This was shocking to me for several reasons. He had previously wrote, 2 months ago, that he was happy to write me a recommendation letter. In addition, I had already applied to a research internship in (our research area) at a national lab and he provided me a recommendation for that. On top of this, I have been working with a grad student with in-person lab work 4 days a week. I always show up on time to the group meetings but I usually don't have much to share since the grad student I work with share our results. I also thought that it was obvious I would apply to research internships in our research area, and that it was common for undergrads to work on summer research elsewhere. I don't understand why I would apply to internships in other research areas that are not related to our lab. On top of all this, these REUs are funded and I applied because I can get paid over the summer. My position at the lab is a volunteer position. Was this an offensive request? I'm not sure why he felt so strongly about this since he has always been very nice. Edit: Thank you for all your suggestions. I emailed him explaining my decision and he sent the group an email saying that he values my contribution and supports my application.<issue_comment>username_1: From the information you provide, your request looks reasonable. This is probably just a misunderstanding, and definitely a terrible (over)reaction from the prof: sending your private email to other lab members is not done. Talk to your prof. (as soon as possible) to find out what happened. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Tell him that you do intend to participate as previously agreed, but that funding for the summer was an important consideration. If he is at all reasonable, then that should be enough. If he is offended, then he isn't being reasonable. If he offers you summer funding, then consider that, of course, but he should have little controlling say over a volunteer. Perhaps he values your work so much that he thinks losing you for the summer would be a blow. Alternatively, he is just a jerk. If he hasn't got a reasonable response, you should find a way to be done with him. What he did is unprofessional, probably unethical. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: It's at least a little rude to send a request for a recommendation letter without mentioning your plans. Of course, forwarding your email to the whole group is orders of magnitude ruder. > > He had previously wrote, 2 months ago, that he was happy to write me a recommendation letter. > > > For any summer internships, or did he maybe think you were asking about grad school? > > I also thought that it was obvious I would apply to research internships in our research area, and that it was common for undergrads to work on summer research elsewhere. > > > I don't know about common (maybe it's different in your field), because summer internships are short, and it's difficult to do anything productive. So I can see why he would be confused as to why you are trying to leave the lab just for a summer. He may have seen the national lab as an outstanding opportunity, but questions a lateral move (perhaps not knowing these opportunities are funded). This isn't to excuse his behavior - he behaved atrociously, but you should really give your letter-writers a heads-up. If you had emailed saying "Hi, I think I'm going to apply to these internships, would you write me a letter?" then he could ask why, and you could explain it's because they're funded. Like username_2 said, if he was still rude after explaining you'd like to work for money, that would be a red flag. That said, he shouldn't be accepting volunteer labor in his lab anyway, but that's another conversation. I would probably try and find a way to exit this group immediately over the way he treated you - perhaps your grad student supervisor can write you a letter and explain why the PI did not. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Speaking as a postdoc: as others have suggested, there are some very good reasons to diversify your network - and you have run into one of them. Explain yourself, and give the prof a chance to explain and apologize. Try not to burn any bridges with him, but start looking elsewhere immediately. That he forwarded your email to everyone in the lab group suggests that he is using you as an example of how he treats those who make "lateral moves." Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I'd try to find another professor Whether or not you were rude, your professor acted in a way that is totally unacceptable. He betrayed your trust by sharing your private correspondence publicly, and he publicly shamed you in a very passive aggressive way. If it were me, I'd find another professor as soon as possible. He sounds like a sociopath. If you can't leave now, I'd at least try to limit the amount of leverage your professor has over you. Don't ask for more letters of recommendation from him, don't commit to additional internship terms under him or to papers you're not already committed to write. Basically be professional and cordial while limiting your professional relationship with him to what you've already committed to if you can't get out. And always be on your guard around him. He clearly isn't looking out for your best interest. Anyway it's up to you, as you're the best judge of your situation, but I can't imagine continuing to work for someone who did that. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: To add onto other answers, especially @username_2, I will share my recent experience as a graduate student in a similar situation. I will highlight where the conflict arose, and how you might proceed. The Situation It was about February when I started preparing an application for a well-known, although by no means 'prestigious' summer research internship/opportunity. The opportunity was directly relevant to my research area, and would undoubtedly help develop my applied scientific skills. I reached out to mentors in the opportunity, gained their support of my application, and submitted my application. Crucially, I informed my PhD supervisor too late (I had already submitted the application). Supervisor's reaction and reasoning The supervisor was initially very confused - why would I be seeking opportunities elsewhere when I am already in a PhD program? I believe this is a relatively common reaction among professors and supervisors - there is some expectation that the current employment is 'enough', and in many situations, it is! However, there are numerous reasons as to why a student might seek additional opportunities, such as expanding one's skillset, securing additional money for personal financial security, or not having departmental funding in the summer. Actions I took Gauging that my supervisor was displeased, I immediately scheduled a meeting with them to explain my actions and, holding my ground, why the internship would ultimately improve my research in the long-run. I explained that this internship is temporary and would ultimately increase my success at my PhD institution. I was very direct and honest - I let the professor know how I felt about the situation, using phrases like, 'When you say X this way it makes me feel Y', such as, 'When you say, 'Why would you be seeking external opportunities, usually that is the role of the supervisor?' this way it makes me feel like I did something wrong by securing a well-known internship that would advance my career and success in the PhD program'. Once I secured the internship, I kept my supervisor in the loop of my progress, explained what I was doing, and ultimately they felt that they were semi-participating. I also was honest and kept my word - I did not abandon the PhD program and it legitimately helped my success in my PhD research. Your situation (as it is a bit different) I would recommend you try the following things: 1. Before proceeding, ask yourself a few questions. What is your goal moving forward - to move on from this event as quickly as possible? Confront your supervisor? Secure the internship? Understanding this will help guide your actions, emotions, and self-presentation. 2. Immediately schedule a virtual meeting for as soon as possible with your supervisor. Make the intention of the meeting explicit over email, such as 'Request for meeting to discuss internship X'. 3. Before the meeting, read the many answers to SE question carefully. Many people have provided excellent insight. First and foremost, your professor has crossed a definite line by effectively publicly shaming you, and, as an adult, you should communicate how this made you feel or how it was perceived among lab mates. For example, 'When you sent an email saying X to the lab, it made me feel as though I was being publicly shamed.' 4. If your professor is unwilling to apologize/doubles down in the meeting, you may want to do some personal calculus about the situation. If you'd like to keep your supervisor, I would drop the issue. If you'd like to do the internship, explicitly ask your supervisor, "I am intent on doing the internship but I realize that this is causing some conflict. What is the best way we can both move forward from this situation?" Make them engage in the process. Engage them in the process. Hope that helps, happy to expand any of my points if unclear. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: When it is clear as is the case here that the professor is more interested in their success than your success, it time to look for another mentor. It is perfectly legitimate for undergrads to look around to broaden their research horizons. Indeed, if a professor is sufficiently secure to believe their work is very interesting, she or he will not fear students going elsewhere to realize on their own that her or his lab is better. Upvotes: 2
2021/02/24	706	3,188	<issue_start>username_0: What are the minor and major concerns that the reviewer should be concerned about and what improvement suggestions should they take in mind when reviewing a survey/review paper? Are their duties for checking the language of the writing? Are they to check for the figures are in sufficient resolution?<issue_comment>username_1: If you are new to this, ask the editor of the journal for guidance. They probably have some prepared. The minimum is to make a judgement about whether you think the paper should be published at all. If it is obviously sloppy or incorrect then you don't really need to do more than say that you think it can't be salvaged. But, to serve both the journal and the authors you can, for reasonable papers, provide any advice that you think will (a) be required to make the paper come up to the journal's standards and (b) improve it for readers. For a review of the literature you can point out that parts are missing if you notice that and possibly provide some pointers. But your job isn't to complete the paper. This can include some minor suggestions on the writing and on the quality of the images. But you aren't expected to be a copy-editor. But if the language is terrible, you need to say that and, if possible, say how the author might go about getting it improved. There are very rare cases, say in mathematics, in which the paper contains a poorly written but very important result. Then you, the editor, and the authors have the possibility of getting something important out, even if it requires a lot of work. For such things you can make more extensive suggestions if you have the time. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Absent some compelling reason to the contrary, I would think that the reviewer should review every aspect of the paper that is within their ability to review. Check the content, the writing, the scope, the figures, and anything else you have the ability to check. If there is some aspect of the paper that you don't have the ability to check (e.g., it is out of your field of expertise) then it is useful to state this limitation in your review. There are some aspects of papers that are also checked by copy editors (e.g., spelling, resolution of figures, citations, etc.), but it doesn't hurt to raise these issues in the initial review process, so that the revised paper fixes them before going to the copy editors for production. For a review paper, the main contribution you can make as a reviewer is to point out any deficiencies in the scope of the review, or the summary of papers in the field (e.g., identifying additional papers that should be cited, or places where the paper is summarised incorrectly). However, there is no reason that you should not point out any deficiencies in the paper that you think could be improved. Most reviewers try to respect the "style" of the author, but if you have suggestions for improvement then I see no reason to withhold them, even if they are minor. Bear in mind that in the revision process the authors may choose to act on each of your suggestions or decline to do so, so you are not forcing anything on them. Upvotes: 1
2021/02/24	536	2,274	<issue_start>username_0: I apologize if this is specific to the field or professor, I'm still figuring out academia.StackExchange. Just flag me if it's a bad question. If it matters, I'm studying Electrical and Computer Engineering. I've recently been accepted to some Ph.D. programs. I also happen to have no internships lined up for this summer. Is it appropriate to ask professors if I can begin (paid) research with them this summer before I begin as a Ph.D. candidate?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, you can ask. If the professor has grant funds and a need for someone to fill a slot then you might be successful. It needn't be the person you intend as your advisor, and if you are entering with just a BS then it is unlikely that you would choose a final advisor so soon. But asking is not a problem. However, you might also consider that taking a bit of time off might be better overall, to avoid burnout that can arise after an intense degree program. If the money is essential, however, don't hesitate to say that. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If this were to happen, most likely you would be hired on as a temporary employee rather than literally "starting early"; effectively there is little difference although the pay rate might be different than your typical stipend. I'd say there is no harm in asking but be clear what your expectations and commitments are (you're looking for summer employment, not necessarily committing to joining the lab; you understand this may not be possible). For what it's worth, I did something quite similar before my Ph.D., though I was instead employed at my previous institution, the one I just graduated from, working with an advisor I did unpaid undergraduate research with. You might also look to this as a possibility if it makes sense. One benefit to the person paying you, in this case, is that you're already onboarded/trained in some way, so they can get some immediate help from you that's worth paying for. It's harder to see the direct benefit in employing someone for just ~3 months; they're not likely to accomplish much in that time, and in particular, if they're still considering other labs it might not be worth the investment; labs are often pretty tight on funds. Upvotes: 0
2021/02/25	1,802	7,934	<issue_start>username_0: My research, which in my opinion, is quite important, has unfortunately been getting noticed by people who has previously ignored them and systematically avoided to cite them. This is not ideal for me! Because I want to remain as virtually anonymous for as long as possible so I don't get scooped. I really hate the feeling that the moment I publish my next paper there will be a flurry of paper that follow my work, leaving me with nothing to work on! Is there anyway I can still remain anonymous and secretly working on my breakthroughs? Help!<issue_comment>username_1: Sure, all you have to do is not publish your work. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: The prospect of getting "scooped" in extensions to your research project is rarely a big problem, because you always maintain a head-start on others through the period of time it takes for a paper to go from completion and submission to a journal to publication. Even if your paper is extremely well-written in the first instance, there is usually at least a six month delay between initial submission and publication; if you require revisions to the paper then the period of delay is longer, and it can often take years until publication occurs. Now, obviously you can start working on extensions to your work at any time you want. If you do your work sequentially, and you start working on extensions as soon as you submit your previous work, you will still have a head-start of at least six months (if not a year or two) on those who later read your published work and then decide to extend it in like manner. If that head-start is insufficient then you can always start working on your extensions before submitting the finished product of previous work. Irrespective of this, I would encourage you to see interest from other researchers as a desirable outcome, and be flattered if there is a "flurry of papers" that follow your work. (Oh, what I wouldn't give to have such a problem!) This is desirable for the progression of science and other academic fields. It is useful to have multiple researchers pursuing research in a field to progress it more broadly and rapidly, to give a heterogenous range of approaches on the subject, and to act as a check on erroneous work. Most researchers have the opposite problem --- it is often difficult to get other people interested in your work, and many good papers end up with zero citations because they do not attract interest from others. Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: [Ben said it best.](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/163056/13126) Let me add a couple pieces of information: 1. The world is vast, and you never know what everyone else is working on. There may be one or multiple people out there duplicating your foundational work right now. Publishing now frees them to pursue more useful, non-redundant work. Also, if you care at all about recognition, publishing first gets you recognition for your foundational work. If you publish last, readers may be skeptical that you really made your discoveries independently. Even if they believe you, they may not care as much about date of discovery, and choose to credit the more influential researcher anyway, if only to stimulate the next visionary to publish earlier. 2. You may have made a mistake or two. It happens. If your work gets attention, someone else may spot it, a third person may correct it, and you may progress much faster without it holding you back. I can't speculate more concretely without knowing about your research. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: While I agree with previous comments, I believe that your question indicates, respectfully, a misunderstanding of the scientific endeavor. The entire point of scientific publishing is to have your work noticed by others and for them to build on it. This is what drives science forward. The vast majority of great scientists worked with a large group of students, collaborators and mentors from whom they drew inspiration. I can only think of a handful of researchers who were able to make significant scientific progress truly on their own. Perhaps you are brilliant enough to not need such a support network; perhaps you are a Tony Stark-like figure, working in your lab and creating scientific marvels all by yourself. But if that is the case, ask yourself this: why would you be worried that others would scoop your work? If it is so easy to generate followups to your work, then you should question whether it is indeed that groundbreaking or important. After all, by virtue of you being the one to come up with this important idea, you should have a significant leg-up on any potential competitors, right? Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: Broadly speaking there are three reasons to do research: * To push the boundaries of human knowledge forward for the betterment of humanity * Because you personally find it interesting and exciting and rewarding * Because the knowledge gives an organisation a competitive advantage over another organisation. (Note these are not mutually exclusive) If you are in the first camp, then other people working on your problems is good. If someone figures out what you've spent a year pondering without progress then great! That problem is now solved and you can move on to the next step. If you are in the second camp and you feel that someone else figuring out the answer deprives you of the satisfaction you would get from making the discovery yourself, then just don't publish - since you are only doing for your own benefit why bother with publishing? In the third situation you also wouldn't publish, and doing so might even be breaking your contract or even the law. However, you would have to give your work to your employer, if you had one, and I guess you might be scooped by someone else in the org. But that's their right, as you are being paid to better the org, not better yourself. You tagged your post "independent-researcher" this is usually how people are described if their research is not what they do for a living. In which case, if you want to keep your research to yourself, that's entirely your right. If you are employed to do research in what we might broadly call a public institution (like a university), then you may be forced to publish to keep your reputation up and therefore keep your job. But again, this is right. Someone (generally, ultimately the public) is paying your salary, and they deserve the knowledge in return. And the quicker the better, since as the funder, it is their knowledge, and things advancing faster is in their interests. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: If you perceive other researchers only as adversaries and competitors who encroach on “your” territory, then I strongly suspect your definition of what it means to “do good research” is fundamentally different than that of actual good researchers. A true good researcher does not worry about running out of things to work on, because they understand that the scope of things we are ignorant about is vast. The more interesting things you discover, the more new questions are raised by those discoveries, and the more work that creates for you and other researchers. To use language favored by politicians, the best kind of research is “job-creating” rather than “job-killing”. The good researchers are analogous to entrepreneurs, coming up with new ideas that create jobs for everyone else. Have you ever seen a successful entrepreneur who wanted to not spread word of their inventions to avoid other people working on similar things and them running out of things to work on? That is an absurd notion. Anyway, if you are still concerned about competition, don’t publish your work and you’ll be fine as @allure’s answer says. But don’t be under any illusions that that means you are realizing your full potential as a researcher this way. Upvotes: 2
2021/02/25	1,181	5,178	<issue_start>username_0: Is doing well in the standard core undergraduate math courses (complex analysis up to the Riemann mapping theorem, abstract algebra including Galois theory, point-set topology, and algebraic topology, as well as integration on real manifolds and Stokes' theorem) good enough to get into a top-20 math PhD program? I started with linear algebra after placing out of second-semester calculus. I ended up taking almost all the undergraduate courses offered at the liberal arts college I went to but I still think it's not enough, because most of the Harvard PhD students apparently take lots of graduate courses while undergrads. To be competitive, are applicants expected to have undergraduate research and do additional math programs in other countries (Budapest Semester, for example), and/or take graduate courses while still an undergrad? In American universities there are more distribution requirements, whereas in universities in Europe, my understanding is that you declare a major right away and only take classes in that subject. Because of that, they learn a lot more math than American students. I've also noticed that at places like Stanford or Harvard, the undergrad senior theses that students write are super advanced and get into current research. Here are some examples: <http://abel.harvard.edu/theses/index.html> Are math undergrads expected to know things like Galois cohomology, the Local Langlands Correspondence for tori or Lubin-Tate theory or the Jacquet-Langlands correspondence? What could I have done as an undergrad to be able to write a senior thesis on stable homotopy theory or the moduli stack of G-bundles? I am thinking that I did not get a good math education in college.<issue_comment>username_1: No, possibly except for Princeton. Berkeley in particular has a long tradition of accepting domestic graduate students who have less background but strong potential. (I had not learned Galois theory or anything about manifolds when I started graduate school there, and I still have never learned the Lebesgue integral.) Graduate admissions committees in the US trust what recommendation letters say (with evidence) about the potential of students, and take that into account a great deal, in many cases attaching more importance to this than any actual achievements of students. Their statistics based on how students have done in their programs and after finishing is that how much math you know coming in actually doesn't make much of a difference; much more important is your demonstrated capacity to learn math and solve problems. Keep in mind that it is quite possible to do quite impressive undergraduate theses despite not knowing much mathematics if one has a good advisor (who can explain how the problem can be reduced to an elementary(\) one), works hard, and is clever. (It's quite common for PhD advisors to complain that their weaker students don't actually understand their own dissertations.) Keep in mind that undergraduate admissions at Harvard or Stanford is extremely selective - generally more so than graduate admissions in fact - and every student at Harvard or Stanford is very clever. (\) elementary meaning not requiring knowing lots of mathematics, not meaning easy. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Not necessarily, but it could help. Examples would include getting exposure to a field of interest that you wouldn't be able to get in your undergrad, or if you are doing it as a combined undergraduate/graduate degree program where doing so would count for credit towards both degrees. If you are applying to a PhD program, you'll take the graduate courses only during the first couple of years generally, then coursework will take the backseat to research, which is what the degree is all about (unless, you leave early with a masters, which you still will likely get research experience out of). So while it's not a bad thing to take graduate courses, don't fret too much on this, and try and get some research experience/exposure as well, since that will be primarily how you get the recommendation letters that you need to apply to PhD programs. > > I ended up taking almost all the undergraduate courses offered at the liberal arts college I went to but I still think it's not enough, because most of the Harvard PhD students apparently take lots of graduate courses while undergrads > > > This is very dependent on the situation with regards to where you did you undergraduate. If you did it at Harvard or another very top research institution, you'll have such opportunities to do research or take graduate classes. At smaller liberal arts colleges, from my understanding, people don't have as much of these opportunities readily available at their own institution. Graduate committees are generally aware of this and factor this in when making admission decisions. So no, you're not expected to take graduate classes as an undergraduate (although if you have the time to do so, you could definitely get your feet wet in this), but you should have some research experience in order to demonstrate the ability to do research at the graduate/PhD level. Upvotes: 0
2021/02/25	1,750	7,652	<issue_start>username_0: I am a Ph.D. student enrolled in one of the top universities. I was working on a research problem. And, it turns out that my results are not of as high quality as one would expect from a student from my university. I am planning to submit the paper to a low-tier conference and if submitted, this would bring a bad name to my university. Therefore, I do not want to mention my affiliation in my research paper. Is is acceptable to do so? --- By "not good quality results" I mean that "just so-so work", that is done well but not seemingly very interesting right now.<issue_comment>username_1: If you do not work under supervision or funded by a project awarded via the university or a prof at the university, you might be able to hide the affiliation (but read the clauses of your university about copyright and acknowledgments, to make sure). However, if it is worth publishing, it is worth mentioning your and the university's name. Don't litter. That is true for grass verges, public transport as well as the scientific discourse. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: You're trying to solve the wrong problem: either your work is a decent contribution and then it's worth publishing with your affiliation, or it's not and then it shouldn't be published at all (and anyway it's likely to get rejected in respectable venues). So the real problem here is whether this work is a decent contribution. However you might not be able to make the call yourself: * You are a PhD student so you might not have enough experience to judge, and especially to judge your own work. * You also seem to assume that researchers in your university never produce any mediocre work, although this is very unlikely even for a top university. * The fact that you talk so negatively about your work might be a sign of [impostor syndrom](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impostor_syndrome), a bias which frequently affects researchers (and not only them). The competitive environment of a top institution is a fertile ground for this kind of psychological bias. But the solution is very simple: you just ask your PhD advisor their advice. It's precisely their job to teach you what is a decent contribution and what is not. If they tell you not to submit the work, then it's not even worth submitting. If they tell you to submit, then it was actually better than you thought and it means that you should revise your criteria. You can even ask them about your idea to submit without the affiliation if you want. But be aware that they might laugh at the idea, it's not something academics do anywhere. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: If the paper is bad enough that it will give your university a bad reputation, then it will also give you a bad reputation - in fact a much worse one, since you are the author of the paper and the person who made the decision to write and submit it. So if you’re thinking of hiding the university name, to be consistent you should also hide your own name and publish anonymously or under a pseudonym. Which makes one wonder, what is the point really... Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Firstly, I agree with others here that you should seek advice from a senior person in your department prior to making any decision on this matter. Look, your work must have addressed questions not answered until now - otherwise you would not have been allowed proceed with it. You used relevant techniques, organized your work well, reported your data honestly, interpreted your results fairly and drew reasonable conclusions in the context of that field of research. That is all that any honest PhD candidate can do, whichever university they go to. With hindsight, you may feel that another approach or even topic might have yielded more "exciting" results. As you suggest, more "exciting" conclusions can help a paper to be published more quickly or in a more prestigious journal; some PhD derived papers have even made their way into the annual proceedings of the Royal Society. But that is in the hands of fortune. The main thing is not the "exciting" nature of our work but its validity. What you regard as humdrum work may well be relied on by future researchers who would otherwise have sought the same answers as you did: with your findings published, they can include or exclude various other hypotheses, save time and money and redirect their work towards other related but as-yet unmined questions. There is no sense in being ashamed of our honest work, still less of feeling you haven't maintained the accustomed standard of your department or research group. The noisies in a team are seldom the most valuable. And excess humility does show a lack of pride in honest endeavor. The university provided a major share of the support for this project. It is reasonable for them to be listed as the affiliated organization. In fact it may well be that you would have no chance of being published in many journals without detailing your affiliation, however exciting your conclusions would be. I think that you have to submit your work for journal publication and that you must not do so anonymously. The conference submission is another thing. At conferences there's often an unhealthy group dynamic and people with no interest in certain papers at a session nonetheless remain there exuding their boredom. The "exciting" papers of course seem to get all the attention. On the one hand, I could understand you wanting out of this; on the other, non-attendance resigns you to miss meeting other honest triers - some of whom will be today research managers and potential employers. But please revert to more experienced people - not solely your supervisor and HoD - for their opinions on this. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: No, you cannot publish anything without putting your affiliation down. That's the point of having an affiliation. They pay you money to work for and represent them and you will put your name out there on a piece of work, then people will read it and see that it was produced by someone at such-and-such University / research institute / state laboratory / company. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: The place you do the work at may have a formal rule about it. Thus, you may be obligated, under either the terms of your contract, or some general rule set for academic work at your location, to report your name and affiliation in a certain fashion, but conversely there may also be a formal rule that grants you more leeway than you think you got. Whether formal rules apply to you at work, there may also be institutional tradition that could cast you in potentially bad light - or, conversely, provide some guidance as to when it's appropriate to do what you are contemplating. After all, how people perceive your actions is rooted in tradition to an extent, and will have a definite effect on the quality of your work environment. It'd be unwise to self-ostracize, and what potential actions of yours would lead to that is a matter that you may have to inquire about in the context of your institution - ask someone you could trust, or perhaps there's some confidential support structure in place for answering similar questions, perhaps some employee ombudsman position? It is also not immediately clear that your reverence for your institution is reciprocal. There certainly are institutions that treat their students and employees extremely well and it'd be considered at least polite to think of the institution's reputation to the extent you do. In no case, though, it'd be wise to think of any institution's reputation ahead of your own. Upvotes: 0
2021/02/25	1,875	7,792	<issue_start>username_0: So, I'm on the dreaded waitlist (PoI says I am "near the very top" of the list) for my top choice PhD program and naturally I've spent the past couple days driving myself nuts trying to game the process out. As I understand it there are two general approaches a grad adcom might take: 1) making more offers than the program has spots available, expecting a certain yield which will produce the desired cohort size or 2) making as many offers as there are spots, and moving to the waitlist to achieve desired cohort size if necessary. My intuition tells me that #1 is more common, but in that case I don't quite understand the purpose of a waitlist--it seems that there would have to be an anomalously low yield in a given year for the program to ever have to move to the waitlist. So, do you find that #1 or #2 is more common? I have two offers in hand, but my heart is really set on this program. Adding to the stress is of course the cascading nature of the PhD waitlist (i.e. someone is probably holding off on declining their offer at my top choice program because they're waitlisted at some other school; the same goes for someone waitlisted at one of the programs I have an offer from, and so on and so on). Basically it seems like we're all waiting for someone to get into their top choice program, and set in motion the chain reaction of declined offers. Intuition would also tell me that this all basically happens on April 14 or 15 because nobody wants to accept an offer from a program that isn't their top choice until it is absolutely necessary--so the cascade doesn't start until then unless there are a sufficient number of people who have top choice offers who then actually decline other offers in a timely manner. Am I just overthinking this whole thing? Or is this entire process completely bizarre and up in the air until the last minute? Has anyone gotten off a PhD waitlist well before April 15?<issue_comment>username_1: Actually, I expect that #2 is more common and is actually ethical. The number of slots is determined by money and faculty (and other) resources. It isn't especially flexible and telling someone "sorry" after "accepting" them is pernicious. You say you've been accepted at a couple of places and your deadlines are in the future. You should just wait to see what happens. Accept something by the deadline, but otherwise just relax. Note that at the institutions where you've been accepted, others are likely on the waitlist and hoping for you to decline. Is it bizarre? Hard to say. The decisions are made by thousands of different people all with their own needs and priorities. Before a (more or less) common deadline was set it was chaotic. People were inclined to accept an offer (with an early deadline) and then later decline when they got a better one later. But #1 would be unethical if such an acceptance could be rescinded for other than bad actions by the candidate such as failure to graduate. The common deadline was set to avoid such situations as having to turn down someone after accepting them and making the process a bit less bizarre than it might otherwise be. So, just relax. Your trying to "game" the system is going to result in sub optimal outcomes, very possibly for yourself. It is what it is. --- And if you do accept an offer, you should immediately decline other offers as a courtesy to others like yourself who are worried, worried, worried .... Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: These days, in the U.S., in math, in R1-ish schools, more admission+funding offers are made than are expected to accept. If the unlikely event occurred that a surprising number accepted, I would expect that the program would act in good faith, and just try to average things out the next year and the year thereafter. I'd be shocked if an offer of admission+support were "withdrawn" after accepted. (Nevertheless, the pandemic does give people excuses for otherwise-unthinkable behavior...) So, as in my program, we have lots of experience (at least for non-pandemic times...) about acceptance rates, demographics, etc. Each year we also have similar qualified financial info, e.g., about "unacceptable" over-admission, and such. We do not have an literal "waiting list", but we do have a list of people who have a chance of getting an offer (admission+funding) if events transpire considerably outside of expectations. The nation-wide April 15 convention has many positive features, but it does tend to discourage wait-listing, for game-theoretic reasons mentioned in the question. That is, even with an official/literal "wait list", unless there are unexpectedly-many rejections, we would not, and maybe could not, start making offers to people on the wait list, because rejections (from the students) are not binding until April 15. Right, operationally, unlike 20+ years ago, at most places "being on the wait list" is not as positive as one might imagine. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I don’t think you’re overthinking, you’re just... thinking. But basically, you’re thinking about things that are beyond your control, so in that sense any amount of thinking does not benefit you in any practical sense. For what it’s worth, many departments hold events allowing admitted students to visit the department (virtually, these days) and meet with faculty. My own department’s event is today and tomorrow, and I had a pleasant meeting with several of the visitors. So I expect many students will be making decisions soon after attending such events. Keep in mind they don’t all know ahead of time their precise order of ranking the different programs (unlike what your intuitive “model” seems to assume), but instead go through a due diligence process where after getting admitted to several schools, they find out more information about each one and then make a decision. There is no reason why this can’t happen well ahead of April 15, and I believe it often does. Good luck! Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: > > Has anyone gotten off a PhD waitlist well before April 15? > > > I got a rejection letter and was accepted afterwards. The rejection letter was sent by the system automatically (it was the end of April). However, my acceptance was 100% conditioned on my advisor getting a grant, and that was delayed due to the government shutdown. So I kept waiting for another couple of weeks until I got the good news. A few of these experiences turn you into a silver fox. Now, what really matters: *You should email this graduate program and politely let them know that: 1) You already have offers from other institutions; 2) Their school is at the top of your list; 3) You would appreciate them letting you know about their decision ASAP. This may* increase you chances of moving toward the top of the waitlist, presenting you as a stronger candidate.** Good luck. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I am waitlisted by one of the public university. I checked gradcafe and a few yrs ago someone was waitlisted by the same program, on the top#1 of the list of 2, begging ppl to decline offers so that this person could attend, which did not happen. The same year, according to the university's official website, the program has a 45% yield rate with a few receiving acceptances but did not attend. I would say for this program #1 is probably more true than the #2. Because on gradcafe I have never seen ppl talking about being waitlisted other than that one post but the program yield is pretty much ~50% each year. Also because of funding, I don't have my hopes up - someone else turning down an offer tied to an RAship with a faculty not in my research interests is not gonna help me get off the list. But different programs will be SO different. Upvotes: 0
2021/02/25	730	3,337	<issue_start>username_0: I have an undergraduate student who has been working in my lab for quite some time, doing relatively advanced work and has even been able to mentor other students in getting up to speed in the workings of the lab and the methods we use. I never had this student in a class, but they approached me in their second year asking if I had any opportunities and I was happy to provide an unpaid opportunity and the following year a student job for them after seeing their exceptional work. This student is now applying to graduate school and has asked me to write them a recommendation letter, and I said I would be happy to do so since the student has demonstrated competence and has even started asking quite interesting research questions related to our work. As part of the recommendation process I always ask for the application materials, including transcripts, personal statement and so on. Upon looking at the transcripts I found out the student has a very bad academic history and has even recently been on academic probation. They got C's in classes closely related to our subject (but taught by people I don't know well in the department). I'm not sure what to think or whether to include that as part of my recommendation letter, or to ignore it overall?<issue_comment>username_1: This answer may be limited to the US and other places where letters of recommendation have quite a bit of importance. I realize that this isn't a universal. If you think that a student is performing beyond what the grades would indicate you could, and should, say that. You don't need to explain bad grades, nor assume that the student's chances are lessened necessarily. Some students do relatively poorly in situations in which there are high risk tests determining the grade. They might actually know the material, but just have issues about testing. With the student's permission to discuss them with your colleagues, you could ask if they have any evidence that the student can (and probably will) perform past what the grades might indicate. If you talk to the student, ask why they think their grades are lower than you would have expected. But graduate study and academic research beyond that isn't about getting grades, but about having the knowledge, skills, attitude, and perseverance to do good work. If you see that in the student you can say that the student has shown performance beyond that indicated by the GPA. Some students, of course, even have learning difficulties that make high grades much harder to achieve, even if they have the knowledge. I would occasionally write that "I would accept this student for any research task without reservation." That can mean a lot, provided that it is actually true. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: When I write letters for undergrads (in math, in the U.S.), I usually aim to speak exactly and only about things I know from first-hand experience. For that matter, transcripts (whether high-GPA or low) are usually part of the application, so second-hand comments from me add little. Now and then, I am surprised to learn that a student of whom I think quite highly has had some rough spots earlier. I can only infer that they've done a great job of turning themselves around, and I'm happy to vouch for the positive things they're doing. Upvotes: 5
2021/02/25	647	2,758	<issue_start>username_0: How would you respond if an advisor writes a chapter of your thesis for you and asks you to rewrite what they wrote? Something seems wrong but I can't pinpoint it. It seems like a grey area. What are the potential plagiarism implications if I do this? And how can a student rewrite it any better than what someone with so much experience has written? What would be an ethical and courteous way to respond? If there are any other sources or places you think I might be able to find more information or help from about this, I would like to hear that too.<issue_comment>username_1: A few possible reasons: 1. The advisor is not very experienced with advising students and is not clear on what they are supposed to do. 2. The advisor intends to publish the thesis with the student and is therefore interested in ensuring that the specific chapter is properly written. 3. The advisor is not confident in the student’s ability to correctly formulate certain ideas. What can the student do? Ask the advisor politely to lead the writing of the thesis, write a first draft that they can later review. If the advisor insists, I suggest letting it go. It’s one chapter and is not a very big deal if it is indeed an undergraduate thesis. Helping students write is not unethical unless the student is really not leading the project. However in that case I fail to see why the advisor would take the thesis writing as their own project... Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: For PhD students: If the advisor conducts the research, the student must not submit that research as part of their thesis. If the advisor did the research, it does not matter who did the writing: for the student to include it in their PhD thesis would be plagiarism if unattributed or, if attributed, fail to meet the standard required for a PhD. A PhD student in this situation should respond by expressing a desire to demonstrate their ability to work independently. If it is not a PhD thesis but at a lower level, it might be okay for a student to write about someone else's research if proper attribution is given. If the student did the research but the advisor wrote it up, this is not ideal. However, in some disciplines it may be considered acceptable for an advisor to give extensive writing assistance to PhD students. > > And how can a student rewrite it any better than what someone with so much experience has written? > > > Probably the goal is to rewrite it to be in your own words, not to rewrite it to be better. I would suggest outlining the writing, and then changing the structure of the outline. Check the new structure with your advisor to make sure it is acceptable. Then rewrite according to the outline. Upvotes: 2
2021/02/26	941	4,109	<issue_start>username_0: I am currently writing up my PhD thesis and have the following issue. I wrote a paper during the PhD thesis, the result of which was developed further by third parties without my involvement. From the perspective of my published paper, this new result lies in the future and is of course not mentioned in the paper. However, at the time of writing the PhD thesis, this result is available and may be relevant for the readers of the PhD thesis. Should the PhD thesis contain a reference to the third party paper? Presumably the answer to above question is yes in one form or another. A more detailed question is then: How should it be included? I can imagine multiple options. 1. If the result is relevant to the general scientific scope of the thesis it probably warrants an explicit mention in the introduction, explaining that the work is based on the result in the thesis. 2. Let's say there is a close technical connection and the third party paper improves upon some aspects of the original result. Would it be appropriate to even summarize this progress rather than simply mentioning it? 3. If the result is not directly relevant to the scientific scope, it is presumably omitted in the thesis. This question is generally about whether the PhD thesis is meant to reflect the state of research at the time of writing or at the time of the published results that are summarized in the thesis. An answer to the above examples would already give a lot of insight, but I am also interested in the general attitude towards this issue. As a side note: In some countries, cumulative theses (also called "staple theses") are allowed, which are simply an accumulation of the published papers with an introduction added. Since this form would most likely not contain any mention of the third party paper, I started thinking about what a normal PhD thesis should be doing in this regard.<issue_comment>username_1: It depends a bit on the school and, as you point out, some theses format will not have this. Nevertheless, it is often a good idea to write a “background” chapter that would place your work in the context of current research. Current here means a few years and in a case of a PhD thesis can span the lifetime of your thesis rather than the last few months. So the answer to your 1. is yes. It is always nice if one’s work is a starting point rather than an endpoint; such a situation would increase the value of the candidate’s thesis, and I would certainly highlight that others have followed up on some of the early work of the candidate, and explain briefly how this feeds back to the context of the thesis. So to your 2. I would answer yes. If the new results are only tangentially relevant, the general point of the previous paragraph applies although something more concise is appropriate: “this idea was developed in another direction by Author A.” You don’t want to ignore the work of others: you wouldn’t in a publication. On the other hand, authors don’t spend a lot of time talking about other’s work unless it’s directly relevant to the context of the current work. I tend to think of a thesis as a “archival” paper (a mini-review of one’s work on the problem during the PhD period). Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Some options: * Explanatory footnotes often work well and can be used to 'talk across time' so to speak; * Appendices can also be used for covering material that may be out of sink, if you think you need to go into more detail; * An afterword can also be an appropriate way of accounting for developments between the time of writing and the time of publication. This is fairly common practice. Basically most examiners will view the dissertation as YOUR journey through the research, rather than as an exact snapshot of the state of play in your area. HOWEVER - they will be looking for (and be impressed by) you demonstrating that you know what good practice looks like in your field of research, and this extends to how you handle (and acknowledge) circumstances of this kind. Upvotes: 2
2021/02/26	1,261	5,439	<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student with only two papers published in peer-reviewed journals all within the same journal. One of them was published due to a deal between a conference I was in and the publisher. The other one is a critique of a paper that was published there, hence it makes sense to be on the same journal. I have two other papers under review in journals. I am waiting for a first review on them for a much longer than average time. In one of them my PhD advisor is also an author. Even though it wasn't peer-reviewed yet, we are already preparing (and submitting to conferences) works derived from it. After waiting a long time for a review I mailed the editors of the journal and they say they didn't find reviewers yet. Here is my dilemma: my advisor is pushing that I withdraw the article from the current journal and submit to the same journal I have my other papers in, but I am scared this will damage my career prospects. If one reads my CV, in a job application for example, and realize all of my papers are in the same journal they might just stop considering me. This might damage even more since: (i) the chief editor of the journal works in our dpt (and was my professor in grad school) and (ii) even though this specific journal has good metrics (Q2 in general and Q1 in the paper's topic and higher impact factor than the journal which didn't find reviewers for my paper) I know many academics dislike the publisher, some with good reason. Will this damage my career? Is it worse to publish again in the same journal than not publish at all? If so, how should I explain this concern to my advisor?<issue_comment>username_1: Your first few papers don't determine your career. The answer to the title question is, of course, "it depends". If your research focus is narrow, especially narrow, then there are fewer journals that are appropriate venues and the others won't have appropriate reviewers in their "stable". But continuing to publish in a very low impact journal would have negative consequences, that aren't the case here. I'll guess that "a paper in the same journal" is a better outcome than "no paper" at this particular point in your journey, so your advisor is likely giving good advice. I doubt that an editor, even one who knows you will bias decisions in your favor if they want to keep up the reputation of the journal. But, the indicators seem to be positive, not negative; getting published in a good journal. You can also ask the editor of the journal you submitted to about the likelihood of a decision in a reasonable time frame, saying that if that isn't possible you will "be forced by circumstances" to withdraw the paper. I'll also note that, assuming everything you say is accurate, that people believe in you and your work. That support alone should lessen your fears about getting a good position in the future. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Most people would base their decision on: 1. The relative rating or impact factor of the journal compared with others relevant to the same field; and 2. The relevance of your material to what the journal typically publishes and their audience. The citations you are likely to get will be influenced by both the profile of the journal and the relevance of the material to its readership. Its therefore perfectly feasible (and sensible) to publish material in a 'lower ranked' journal if the research you are looking to publish has greater relevance for that audience. BUT - if the research in question is genuinely only a 1-shot-at-goal only situation when it comes to publication - then you would usually be inclined to go for the highest rated journal that you can as these outlets can be very selective. Be aware however that, for better or worse, most academics will now 'salami slice' the output from their research, or different aspects of it, for different outlets. This is not always a bad thing (and may not actually constitute 'salami slicing'). For example, a paper emphasising theoretical or methodological aspects to the research may go to a different outlet to one that is more applied or gives greater emphasis to context, findings or implications in practice. This final point does however flag that if you are only ever publishing in one journal it does convey a relatively narrow focus in terms of how you convey the relevance of your research and your willingness to engage a broader audience. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: > > Will publishing all my papers in a single journal endanger my career? > > > * If it is not one of the very top journals in the field * If you have more than ten publications * And all the publications are in the same journal Then yes, it will endanger your research career. Your research career is based on your reputation as a researcher. If you only publish in one journal, then your reputation will not spread to as many editors and peer reviewers. If you only have two to four papers, then where they are published tells us very little about where your career is headed. It's just not a useful sample size. This assumes you work in physical sciences fields that I am familiar with. In these fields people getting permanent positions have over twenty publications, so there is a decent sample size. > > Is it worse to publish again in the same journal than not publish at all? > > > No. Upvotes: 2
2021/02/26	818	3,624	<issue_start>username_0: I recently learned about the National Recognition Information Centre for the United Kingdom (UK NARIC). It's a UK agency that assesses international academic qualifications. According to UK NARIC, a Master's degree from my country is at best equivalent to a British Bachelor's Degree with Honours. Thus, it seems that before I can apply to a PhD program in the UK, I will have to complete another Master's degree in the said country. My question is, are all public universities in the UK required to follow the UK NARIC guidelines in evaluating the academic credentials of prospective PhD applicants? Or, can these universities still opt to assess PhD applications on a case-by-case basis? Thanks in advance for your answers!<issue_comment>username_1: No. Universities (almost all UK universities are public) in the UK are not bound to follow any standard or rules when evaluating prospective PhD applicants. Even the requirement for a Master's degree at all is at the discretion of the admissions panel (in fact at least half of the students have supervised had only Bachelor's degrees). Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: UK universities do assess PhD applicants on a case-by-case basis ================================================================ Actually, UK universities do assess PhD applicants on a case-by-case basis. Broadly speaking, the criteria for admission are: * is the applicant's research proposal coherent and will it advance scholarship? * does the applicant possess the necessary skill, motivation, and credentials to conduct the research proposed? * does the university have a member of academic staff who is capable of supervising the applicant's research and who is available and willing to do so? (NB: getting admitted to a PhD programme in the UK is relatively straightforward, but getting a funded PhD place is significantly harder) In general, the minimum "credentials" expected of an applicant by a UK university would be: * an upper-second-class or first-class undergraduate (Bachelor's) degree in a relevant (but not necessarily the same) discipline; and * (where the applicant's previous university studies were not in English) evidence that the applicant is highly proficient in the use and comprehension of English. Expectations regarding a Master's degree ======================================== Nowadays, a relevant Master's degree would also be expected (but probably not essential), since it is regarded as good preparation for undertaking original research. For that purpose, NARIC equivalence is not very important here -- a UK university is more interested in the details of what you did in that Master's degree. Ideally, you will have written an original dissertation or project involving serious original research in a relevant discipline (the dissertation need not be particularly long -- the quality and potential are what count, and a potential supervisor may well ask to see only extracts from it), demonstrated specialist knowledge relevant to your PhD research proposal, and manifested some appreciation of some of the research methodologies you propose to deploy in your PhD. So, if you feel that your existing Master's degree can demonstrate research preparedness and a suitable specialist knowledge for your research proposal, it may well be sufficient. You should be prepared to discuss what you learned and discovered from that Master's degree in detail, and show extracts from the work you produced in fulfilment of the requirements for that degree (such as a dissertation). Upvotes: 1
2021/02/26	913	3,906	<issue_start>username_0: I am in the early stages of my career (post PhD) and I would like to referee papers to (1) get the experience and (2) be exposed to unpublished writing to learn to improve upon my own writing. How do you become a referee? Can you register? Edit: I'm not asking about reviewing.<issue_comment>username_1: I am not in math, but as far as I know the ways to become a referee are pretty consistent across fields. In my own field, referees are chosen by editors through some combination of the following categories (in no particular order and of course these can overlap): 1. Authors who have published in that journal in the area of the submitted paper 2. Authors cited by the submitted paper who do related work (also more generally people who publish in that field; this depends on how familiar the editor is with the specific field and whether they feel qualified to identify the right people) 3. Referees suggested by the authors of the submitted paper upon submission (some journals request such a list explicitly) 4. Past referees the editor has worked with and had a positive experience 5. An invited reviewer doesn't want to review the paper and suggests someone else. This is perfectly fine if it goes through the editor, however sometimes a busy professor might present it as their own review but it's actually written by a graduate student or post doc, but I find this unethical. (4) doesn't really apply to you if you haven't reviewed in the past; (1-3) aren't really things you can influence besides publishing in the area in which you are qualified to review, which you're doing anyways (right?). (5) is a possibility. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Generally, you would publish in Journals, and the Section Editors will descend on you like vampires in search of fresh blood asking you to do reviews. If you have trouble breaking in, talk to a mentor, and ask them if they can recommend you to the section editors (in place of themselves) for any refereeing jobs that are really up your alley. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: If the editor knows you and sees a paper that you might be a good fit for reviewing, he or she might e-mail you and ask if you want to review it. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: If you want to increase your chances of getting selected as a referee, I suggest improving your visibility in a few ways. Editors use many sources to get referee names, some of which you can control. Make sure you are visible on the internet, and that it is clear what are your areas of expertise. An editor may well look to names listed in a paper's references or try names suggested by an author or some other mathematician declining to referee, but before sending you email they likely will verify who you are and what sort of mathematician you are. If you are hard to find you may get passed over. Many (most?) mathematics journal editors are ordinary professors, and you will meet them in conferences. If you ask questions at talks, and more generally show interest in mathematics not directly related to your latest research, then your name might stick in their mind. Make sure to attend conferences, even virtually, assuming that you are able to do so. The list of attendees at a conference where an author presents is an obvious list of candidates. I agree with @username_2 that it might be worth mentioning to someone like your PhD advisor and let them know you would be interested in refereeing. Editors tend to overwork the names they know, partly in hope that the person they know will suggest a younger name the editor did not know. In summary, it is about networking, which can help your career in many ways. Just be careful, or you will be asked to organize conferences, referee papers, serve on editorial boards, serve on funding panels, and too much of that is a problem early in your career. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
2021/02/26	612	2,501	<issue_start>username_0: This fall I started a tenure track position. They offered me a very good start-up package. Half of it was state money for buying equipment and the other half was for course release, research assistants, travel and etc. Also I had a promise for spouse support and that had huge impact on accepting the offer (unfortunately this one was not written!). Now, I see that the only thing I can use is the state money which is more than enough. However, the equipment is not the only thing I need. Obviously, I need students for my research too. It's my second semester and they have not even sent me my written contact yet. Their false promises have put me and my family in a very difficult situation. What can I do now? What are my rights? Obviously, I am not planning to stay here. But cannot leave off without doing anything. I do not want other families go through the same situation as me! Other faculty members have almost same issues but no hope for any change. Note: for the start-package I have an email as proof. Also, initially, the university was required to pay equal amount as state money to new faculties.<issue_comment>username_1: My strong advice is that you take an offer from a better school and just do what is needed to get through the year as best you can. If the place is as bad as this then you, with little institutional power behind you, aren't going to make a difference. You will be stomped like a bug. I was once in a bad situation (perhaps not this bad) and went for the door by the shortest route possible, simply saying goodby to the insanity. It worked out fine. As in your case, I wasn't going to get anything from any other action. In particular don't say things that might come back to negatively affect your own career. Suing them might be an option, but it requires a hard talk with a lawyer first and threatening it isn't going to get you a positive outcome. I realize this is hard advice to take, but you have a good option and you don't want to do things that antagonize people and that will cause blow-back on yourself. You are fortunate to have a good option. Take it. Others aren't so lucky. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The email you got from the provost is the only contract you have until you get a new contract. > > What can I do now? What are my rights? > > > Ask a lawyer. If the email you got from the provost does not provide you with what you want, then you should leave the job. Upvotes: 2
2021/02/27	1,063	4,354	<issue_start>username_0: I teach a language course on 1st year BA level. The students should be able to translate basic sentences, and this is to be tested in a written exam. I'm looking for resources on how to design the exam. I have already made an assessment matrix and determined the weight of the translation exercises in the exam (they also need to parse some forms and the like). I understand that most of what we have treated should appear at least once and can come up with sentences for the students to translate. What I'm having trouble with is the scoring. From what I've heard I should divide sentences into smaller blocks, like a verb or noun phrase, and assign points. I'm looking for some hands-on explanation how to divide the text into sensible blocks and assign points, to make sure that the blocks are as independent as possible. Searching for tips on how to do this is difficult, I mostly find results about taking translation tests instead of designing them. Any references or tips on how to search would be appreciated. This will be a written exam, taken on-campus.<issue_comment>username_1: You may not like this answer but if you need to ask or search on the internet how to design or score an exam, you should not be designing the exam. At least not by yourself. Don't take this the wrong way: you have taken the right step by realising that you need help (hence your question here), but you are asking the wrong people. Seek help from at least one experienced colleague! Even if this is a first year exam, the future of students may depend on it. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Consider following [backward design](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backward_design): first, identify your goals; then, determine how you will evaluate them. What do you hope the students can do that this tool assesses? In my mind, it's impossible to say how you should break down your translation exercises without knowing this. Some possible options... * By the end of this course, students will be able to understand the central idea of a text in a source language and render this idea in a target language. If this is your goal, the basic unit of the passage to be translated is the semantic one. Tally up the ideas you think are the most important. For example, taking this sentence of Dickens': > > “There is nothing in the world so irresistibly contagious as laughter and good humor.” > > > A translation would have to capture (i) laughter is "contagious", spreading easily; (ii) nothing compares to it for contagiousness. You would deduct marks for such mistakes as applying "irresistible" to the laughter itself or saying that there's nothing in the world like a laugh. * By the end of this course, students will be able to reproduce in a target language the idiom and style of a text in a source language. If this is your goal, the basic unit of the passage is the sentiment: the imagery, the positive/negative skew, the connotations. For example, taking this sentence of Dickens': > > “I loved her against reason, against promise, against peace, against hope, against happiness, against all discouragement that could be.” > > > A translation would have to capture (i) the repeated rhythm of "against X"; (ii) the startling contrast between the positivity of the first five abstract nouns and the negativity of "discouragement" that is intended to summarize them. * By the end of this course, students will be able to identify and effect various types of modulation and transposition in translating a text from a source language to a target language. If this is your goal, the basic unit of the passage is syntactic group: noun phrase, verb phrase, adverbial complement, etc. For example, in this sentence of Camus': > > “En entrant, Cottard et Rambert essuyèrent leur front.” > > As they entered, Cottard and Rambert wiped their foreheads. > > > A translation would need to (i) avoid rendering "en entrant" awkwardly as a participle; (ii) make sure the singular "front" ends up as the plural "foreheads". * By the end of this course, students will be able to do all of the above... Then your rubric (or discrete rubrics for discrete exercises) can capture all those aspects under various headings, or whichever other ones correspond to your goals. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2021/02/27	380	1,628	<issue_start>username_0: Is publishing in open access journal a good impression ? I mean publishing in such journals (where one has to pay money), will it be valuable compared to other journals ?<issue_comment>username_1: For academic reputation purposes, publishing in a reputable open access journal is fine. I'm assuming that the journal goes through a proper review and editorial process and that papers might be rejected for quality or innovation reasons. Otherwise, it may be a predatory journal that just wants your money and will publish anything. But it is the reputation of the journal and its adherence to norms that makes this valid, not whether the authors (or their grants) or subscribers pay for the costs, etc. of publishing. In some ways, it is a (minor) reputation enhancement since you are doing something for the public beyond what is required by absorbing the costs. But do a bit of investigation of any journal (open access or not). Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It depends entirely on the journal. There are good and bad open access journals, just as there are good and bad closed access journals. For example, in biology Nature Communications, Cell Reports, eLife, PLoS Biology and Genome Biology are all open access journals with excellent reputations. PLoS One, BMC genomics, PeerJ, Scientific Reports are open access journals that have a reputation (earned or not) of publishing work which is sound, but maybe less exciting. And then there are various lower quality open access journals that people might be suspicious of. This is no different from closed access journals. Upvotes: 4
2021/02/27	7,298	28,923	<issue_start>username_0: I am writing this from the perspective of a mathematician. I am wondering whether there is any research on the standard mode of instruction. Mathematics lectures, at least in my home country, typically work as follows: the prof starts writing on the blackboard (or whiteboard) while telling about the notes, and students copy down the notes from the board. 90% of the lecturer's speech is reading out the notes aloud while facing the blackboard. Depending on the level interaction, there may of course be questions to the audience, but mainly it is reading out the lecture notes. Most students aren't really listening because they are busy copying down the notes from the board. You typically see them turning their back and forth between the board and their own notes. Students may find themselves in "unintelligent copy" mode, just copying symbols from the blackboard without any comprehension of meaning. Irrespective of your style of instruction, I think this is a terribly ineffective concept of teaching right from the start. Individuals have told me that they believe in some sort of "subconscious diffusion" of the lecture material into their students' minds, even if their students are just in "unintelligent copy" mode. I don't believe in this and find this rather counter-intuitive. All in all, much of the typical way of lecturing looks like a giant waste of time to me. I can only imagine that the most gifted students may benefit from this, and perhaps that is the reason such a mode of instruction is pursued. Has there been any research on this mode of instruction and its educational benefits? Has there been any research on that "diffusion" hypothesis?<issue_comment>username_1: Prior to electronic media generally and after the start of mass, rather than individual instruction, this was the primary way of teaching a lot of things. It can be a good start to learning, actually. However, it isn't enough, and never was. Learning is an active sport, not a spectator sport. We learn by actively engaging the brain. Copying down notes is somewhat active. Certainly more active than taking a phone picture of the board once it is full, or downloading a lecture. It is even more engaging than (just) reading a lecture. However, if you really want to learn, or teach someone how to learn, I suggest a few additional steps. One is to review the notes after a day or so. A more extreme version is to take the notes by hand (pencil and paper) and then transcribe them and add annotations that are needed, perhaps preparing questions for the instructor or yourself to answer. One is to extract and write down the most important message in a lecture. Or maybe a couple of them. This can be done at the immediate end of the lecture. One is to ask questions during the lecture if a step in a proof isn't clear to you. (Yes, instructors make mistakes). One is to review the most important points of the previous lecture just before the next one. But the most important aspect is to do some kind of exercises based on the lecture. Perhaps these will be assigned. Perhaps they are available in a text book. Try to get some sort of feedback on your solutions. Another is to start a discussion group with a few students to review the lecture material and update the notes. But the real key to this is that you learn by actually rewiring the synapses in your brain and that takes repetition and reinforcement. To assure that you are reinforcing the correct ideas, you need feedback. Note that watching lectures (say on the internet) without active participation is almost completely ineffective for most people. Especially for long term retention and the ability to put the knowledge to use. --- For some of the biology behind learning that suggests reinforcement and feedback see: The Art of Changing the Brain by <NAME> --- Note also that, as a professor, I've had to explicitly teach this to students and force some of the activities. For those that learn easily they may not seem to be needed, but eventually things will get hard and having good practice can save you. For example, I'd end a lecture a couple of minutes early and ask for "the most important lesson of the day", expecting that the students would have note cards with a few ideas. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: I find this lecture style to be basically useless. I hate giving lectures in this way and students hate taking them. With 500 people in a class there is no real alternative (I'm including zoom versions of this same thing). I also find purely flipped classrooms to be basically useless. Maybe if I ever taught a class with 5 people it would consistently work. I don't know. My experience has been hybridizing lectures, flipped classrooms, and student-driven presentations is a good way of dealing with classes that have 10-40 people. At the end of the day the lecture style that the professor is comfortable with is always best. Nothing's shittier than a poorly run classroom - you're better off with just lectures than some flipped classroom where little or no thought has gone into the course design or execution. Some students will do better in each type of classroom and some will do worse. Somewhere there's a student with no imagination but a good ability to memorize things that they're told who loves lectures. There has been a ton of research on this topic and I find very little of it valuable. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Most of the deeper learning happens after class when working on homework, rereading the notes, asking yourself questions, etc. But that doesn't mean that lectures are useless. In a setting where you have 50 minute classes and a lot of content to cover, what other options are available? I think the best scenario is if students come into class already acquainted with the new content. If lecture notes are made available before class and students read them, a lecture could be oriented to helping the students understand the notes more thoroughly, and that would be a better use of time. This way students are actually paying attention to the content, not paying attention to "getting everything down." But it requires that the students actually prepare for class, which they might not do, and that lecture notes be prepared well before class, which the professor might not do. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: > > Is hastily writing down the professor's lecture a good way of learning > > > Ans: No,your life and time will be waste you will not gain deep knowlegde and understanding , From Prof <NAME>ao statement regarding learning mathematics It’s also good to remember that professional mathematics is not a sport (in sharp contrast to mathematics competitions). The objective in mathematics is not to obtain the highest ranking, the highest “score”, or the highest number of prizes and awards; instead, it is to increase understanding of mathematics (both for yourself, and for your colleagues and students), and to contribute to its development and applications. For these tasks, mathematics needs all the good people it can get.- We learn 10 percent of what we read, 20 percent of what we hear, 30 percent of what we see, 50 percent of what we see and hear, 70 percent of what we discuss, 80 percent of what we experience, and 95 percent of what we teach others Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: For what it's worth, as an undergrad I made a point of copying down the notes from the board along with margin notes whenever the professor said something that sounded wise. These margin notes often turned out to be extremely helpful. For example, scanning through the notes I made from Probabilistic Combinatorics: * Important ideas which for the sake of speed weren't written down. "Idea: induct on the number of blocks", "this bit is by Lipschitz continuity" * Structural facts about the material. "This is the same as Theorem 4 but with a different proof" * Relative importance of the material. "This lemma is silly", "The Hoeffding-Azuma inequality is the bread and butter of every combinatorialist", "we could have 48 or 72 lectures on this" * Asides to help us get more intuition. "very strong concentration of measure", "This is the only possible definition" * Notes about my own confidence. "should we interchange $p$ and $q$ here?" * Notes about the course. "Examiner's Favourite" The lecturer tells you a lot more than they write down, and a lecture is an extremely useful and highly scalable opportunity to obtain not just knowledge about what is in the course, but a bit more of the culture of what you're learning. (I do strongly believe that students should be taught how to take lecture notes, and that if they do not know how, the experience can be much as you describe.) See <NAME> for an entertaining paper on the subject, which I think should be required reading: [https://www.dpmms.cam.ac.uk/~twk/Lecture.pdf](https://www.dpmms.cam.ac.uk/%7Etwk/Lecture.pdf) Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: I think this learning style is a fundamental misunderstanding of what "taking notes" mean. I am one of those people that has a lot of problems paying attention without taking copious notes. This was true when I was a student, and it is even more true now that I am a researcher attending seminars and work meetings. The trick is that I never (or almost never) just copy down what's on the blackboard or what it is said out loud. I summarize and reinterpret, often trying to anticipate what the speaker is saying. What I write is not what the speaker says, but the understanding I get. Essentially I am retelling in real time the presentation to a third party (the piece of paper). I am so used to do it that I find very hard to concentrate on something without pen and paper to do this process. Now this is very tiring and even now, with many years of practice, I cannot do it for more than 1h30 without a pause. Moreover it is a skill, and one that's non trivial to acquire (it took me many years in middle and high school to become proficient in it). The problem, the way I see it, is that many students that could benefit from this learning technique simply never learned it, and use as a fallback mode being the "dumb transcriber" of what the professor says (which is frustrating and pretty much useless). I am not sure what could be done to fix this or what the root cause of the problem is. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: Yes, of course there is research on taking notes when the lecture method is used, etc. See, for example (found with Google): <https://www.cultofpedagogy.com/note-taking/> Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_8: > > Has there been any research on this mode of instruction and its educational benefits? Has there been any research on that "diffusion" hypothesis? > > > As you start with the request for academic research in your text and finish on that same note (not in your question title, BTW, hence plenty opportunity for opinionated empirical personal evidence reports :-)) ) here's what a run around the research net delivered: Math specific stuff? ... Not so much ------------------------------------ There is some published material around college level math ed, but that nicely clusters with the 'effective teaching & effective learning scholar search query' mentioned further below. And then... on to "note taking" and the "subconscious diffusion" hypothesis --------------------------------------------------------------------------- There's plenty on note taking in various general or non-math scenarios, but most is about doing it most effectively, e.g. * The Pen Is Mightier Than the Keyboard: Advantages of Longhand Over Laptop Note Taking <NAME>, <NAME> (2014) <https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614524581> Then on to the "subconscious diffusion" hypothesis: despite my personal objection to note taking effectiveness per se (I personally found it had negative impact, so I came up with a system where I didn't take notes at all when I was moving around in higher ed -- this was before the advent of mobile phones with great cameras, BTW, so no other recording mechanism was used) there is apparent evidence of its relative effectiveness in learning, based on EEG scans, etc.: * Only Three Fingers Write, but the Whole Brain Works†: A High-Density EEG Study Showing Advantages of Drawing Over Typing for Learning - van der Weel & van der Meer (2017) <https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00706/full> but then I could NOT find papers on the comparison of note taking vs. no note taking at all. (Only some peeps mentioning note taking is considered more "active" than listening attentively -- I disagree, but this is very different for different people, so my position is not applicable to the general student public.) A counter-search for research results which might conclude that listening is more effective than note taking, or rather that note taking is detrimental to listening, has not been found yet. > > I say yet because the plethora of publications focus on improving your note taking skills -- some universities even publish handbooks about effective note taking! -- and I do not expect much research into that specific subject as "note taking" seems to be the agreed upon (undisputable?) common denominator in higher ed. > > > An evening of meta-research like this might lead one to the cynical conclusion that the world has already lost its youthful "ungrounded idealism" and collectively gone through the 5 levels of trauma processing, arriving at the very mindful accepting stage where mediocre and inferior teachers are to be expected to be present in bulk, this majority due to the huge demand for and meager supply of teachers everywhere, hence obviating the strategy where the resultant problems are better carted off onto the backs of the students ("here's some life's experience for ya, can't receive it too early") and consequently research tracks the hurd, focusing on how to get that bunch of homo sapiens through the ordeal as optimally as possible. Which leads us to... > > > > > [Edit:] ha! found some mention at least of research including not taking notes: > > > * How Much Mightier Is the Pen than the Keyboard for Note-Taking? A Replication and Extension of Mueller and Oppenheimer (2014) <NAME> & <NAME> & <NAME> (2019) <https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10648-019-09468-2> > (and no need to pay Springer 38 European Pesos if you use your brain ;-) ) > > > There's also this (and more, once you've hit these in Scholar): > > > * An integrative review of the cognitive costs and benefits of note-taking, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME> (2017) <https://research.tue.nl/nl/publications/an-integrative-review-of-the-cognitive-costs-and-benefits-of-note> > > > Another bit of research that may be of interest here and could possibly assist in adapting your studying environment/strategy (I assume the teacher is not malleable in his behaviour): * Revising lecture notes: how revision, pauses, and partners affect note taking and achievement, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME> (2016) <https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11251-016-9370-4> * Should I take notes? master thesis, <NAME> (2015) <https://pure.tue.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/47027940/796280-1.pdf> because let's get real: ultimate this is not about note taking good or bad or whatever, but achievement in education, i.e. making it out of there, with a degree if possible, and then on to the real stuff. (and more interesting people -- for you, at least) Teaching effectiveness research ------------------------------- Ho boy! Drop those first two words in Google Scholar or Bing Academic and you'll be treated to a lot of research being done on improving the teaching effectiveness. (And there's also "Learning Effectiveness" results, though you might want to filter out the AI/Deep Learning noise there) Little attention to math specifically, but the research spans the entire gamut from preschool to higher ed and adult ed, generally ending up with the conclusion that "classical education" isn't exactly bad but can be improved in various ways, improving: [Attention, Variation, Interaction](https://www.opencolleges.edu.au/informed/features/30-tricks-for-capturing-students-attention/). Regrettably nobody I checked made the effort to get really nasty and select for horrible teachers as a baseline, though there are some blogs about "inefficient teaching methods". I would like to mention this paper: * Factors contributing to ineffective teaching [...] <NAME> (2015) <https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1079543.pdf> and I'm withholding the rest of the title ;-) , because from your description of the class experience there's plenty overlap, despite this being a report about a zero(0!) percent pass rate in schools in Zimbabwe and what possibly went wrong over there. Perceived low morale from the teacher's side being a major common factor with Zimbabwe here, for his teaching methods as you describe them seem not so much "classic" as more "curmudgeon" (facing blackboard, questions to the audience instead of from the audience, etc.) if I was feeling more compassionate tonight, I'd say the man is tired and probably does not like being in front of a class either. It happens. A lot. Who knows... --- Enough fun now, it's a large field of research and a lot is happening. However, as with all endeavours that are very personal, the overall take-away of a lot of the results is "it depends" (on the student, the teacher, the environment, and so on). Oh-kay, but did anyone compare this prof's modus operandi with anything else in edu land? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You wrote: > > All in all, much of the typical way of lecturing looks like a giant waste of time to me. I can only imagine that the most gifted students may benefit from this, and perhaps that is the reason such a mode of instruction is pursued. > > > Before I attempt an answer: A note about the "most gifted students may benefit": wrong. When you are gifted, even a little, you do not benefit from regurgitation like that, because you already picked up where this was going from the books and syllabus that go with the course. All you need is a couple of hints along the way when you get stuck somewhere, the rest is just pedal to the metal at your own pace. Fundamentally, "gifted" you has three options: * Either you make sure you get some extra intel during class that's useful and interesting to you (extroversion helps here ;-) ), * or you do as I did and skip class entirely, going elsewhere for your education: meanwhile, read (nay, grok!) the books, grab/trade the notes off the others where you deem this necessary afterwards (to make sure you don't miss any additional info that inadvertently happens to be disseminated during class by the sub-top teacher and might otherwise hit you in the neck at the exams), * or you become severely depressed, because you don't receive the necessary amount of input to keep your brain engaged. (I've seen those and generally this tends to spiral towards heavy alcohol abuse. Total drop-out, ending up doing something completely different, is your option when you're lucky.) (yes, those three options are logical-OR-ed together. There's no exclusivity requirement there. ;-) ) So, please, rethink what it might mean to be gifted in a setting like you describe. If it's already "wasted time" to you, how can it be fruitful to you at all when you are gifted? Now about an answer to the "waste of time" from research: If we can agree that the basic strategy of your prof is using the transmission instructional model of teaching (he disseminates his knowledge to you folks, instead of leading you on a path of discovery), then there's plenty researchers have to say, and, again, ignoring his specific qualities as an educator here, but merely focusing on the various strategies, then I 'read' the research as, once more, "it depends". But that's me and an evening of very interesting publications. You can research this and come to your own conclusions. Let me approach this one from a different angle, where I come back to your own stated desire to have a mathematics focused answer: I serve and aim to please. :-) This one is about your future competition in the world and very interesting on various levels, with lots of references to material that's much closer to home geographically: * Effects of Constructivist and Transmission Instructional Models on Mathematics Achievement in Mainland China: A Meta-Analysis, <NAME>, <NAME> and <NAME> (2018) <https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01923/full> --- Aftermath --------- I wrote this while doing the research and it was fun. While I did not really address this from the perspective of a mathematician (after all, where's the hard logic and the math in here?), I wrote this more from the perspective of an educator interesting in education research, as at least there we might have some rapport as you wanted to hear about scientific research regarding your issues. (The professionals in the edu field have a yearly conference ([ICED](https://iced2020.ch/)); this is serious business. If you are interested in this area of research, you might want to check them out.) While you (OP) may be bothered about the note taking, etc., in my opinion, you (OP) have an over-arching problem causing all this, which might be stated as this question: *How do I spend my student days more optimally? How do I get more* out of this endeavour?** [Because right now, I feel like I'm wasting my time and having to adhere to bosses (professors) that do not enthuse me at all.] Asking that question (and trying to answer it) might lead you to more useful conclusions and strategic and tactical choices. Without going into it further, here's a few questions for you: * if note taking is such a stressful operation, why not distribute the task? Have a few people take "official" notes, while others can copy them. Thus they are free to pay more attention to the verbal/interactive part of the lecture, entice the professor into interaction instead of droning on, etc. and make only notes about those few bits they feel very strongly about. Then get together and merge notes or study together. (What researchers mention as more effective note taking by not acting like a photocopier all the time, but digesting the material and only noting those bits that were surprising or otherwise noticeable hints to drive your thought processes. Haven't seen mention of any "team effort" in those papers to game the system like that though. A pity.) Of course, this requires teamwork and a working team is a long term mutual contract, for mutual benefits: the "note takers" are not to be "used up"! -- personal experience is that some people are good at note taking (seek out the ones who score B/C and are happy with an A once in while; the rare summa cum laude folks write notes only Bletchley Park could decode in their heyday so they're effin' useless for a scheme like this) while others are not good at it, so don't step into the simplistic "equality" trap by rotating the note taking. You'll fail horribly, all around. * have you asked the prof for lecture notes? If those exist, that can save a bundle on note taking effort too. * why not be better than my old self and take the prof aside and ask him how he feels? No critique, but are you interested in maybe trying something different next time, sir? Like maybe try a Q&A? Let's try something different, shall we? Not permanently, but once in a while, you know, to keep things interesting? Seek the joy and wonder, try to find it. (That'll be a tough job and needs someone emphatic with the prof to help kick it off, but things can happen. Positively.) + I Know I Can, but Do I Have the Time? The Role of Teachers’ Self-Efficacy and Perceived Time Constraints in Implementing Cognitive-Activation Strategies in Science, <NAME>, <NAME> and <NAME> (2019) <https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01697/full>Of course, I can remain cynical and pop in with + [College adults are not good at self-regulation: A study on the relationship of self-regulation, note taking, and test taking. Peverly, Brobst, Graham, Shaw, Ray](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/216467574_College_Adults_Are_Not_Good_at_Self-Regulation_A_Study_on_the_Relationship_of_Self-Regulation_Note_Taking_and_Test_Taking)but may I be idealistic for a mo' and suggest you try to counter that one by showing some surprising collective initiative? I hope you do! Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: It's an oft-recounted fact that nearly all pedagogical studies done on this matter show that students who take notes at lectures perform better than those who do not. Refer to 13:20 in [this intro pres](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6U-i4gXkLM). In that video the professor refers to the combined effect of using both sides of the brain when listening and writing. Whether or not a lecturer benefits from writing the notes is not something that I can be definitive on. Obviously, it will depend on lecturer fluency: less fluent lecturers will want more time to explain things and hence the increasing use of pre-prepared overhead projection notes since the 70s. But this benefit to the student presupposes that the pace of note-taking enables concurrent absorption of the more elaborate explanation being provided by the lecturer. In practice, with certain subjects (math in particular), with large classes and interrupted views at the far end of the theatre, a display board behind the lecturer, bad timing between the explanation and the notes, etc, this may not always be the case. In the latter cases, given that the lecturer is working from (i.e. essentially copying) an existing set of notes, it might be better for all concerned that the notes be printed with generous margin space and distributed among students. The student can then focus on: * Understanding the matter being presented * Composing his/her own syntheses of point on the printed notes' margins However, just because everything seems clear enough in class, this doesn't remove the need to re-read and regenerate more fluently these classes in home study - as well as the obvious task of doing exercises based on them. Overall, I think it's hard to offer a comprehensive rule on this question of the "best way" to lecture and to learn from lectures. If classes were handy (< 30?) and the lecturer a fluent speaker and fast writer and conscious of his/her position w.r.t. the board, then maybe the traditional way would be best. But then students have widely varying ways of looking at things and a range of preliminary knowledge. I feel that this is something that each class and their lecturer should discuss beforehand as soon as possible after a course starts. And if most of the class find the initial method awkward then changes should be suggested and taken on board. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: This is just my take on this as a student. For me copying what the teacher writes is a way for me to force myself to think about the material. When I'm not actively writing my mind goes like 'yeah I understand this' but when I write along I have to actually understand what I'm writing down. I don't even use my notes for studying afterwards it's just one way to process the information. This method that the teacher uses can be a good method but only under certain circumstances. If you have a bad teacher at some point you will lose track of what the teacher is saying and the remaining time of the lecture will be a torturous stream of seemingly unrelated facts. If you prepare for your lecture you have seen most of the material already and since you're on your own you can spend more time on the things that are harder for you. The lecture becomes a repetition and since you have seen the material at least once this gives you a chance to process it a second time. You need less effort to understand everything so you have more mental capacity to really think about what you're doing. To be honest I haven't been doing this too much myself but I hope to do more of this in the future. So my conclusion is that if you pair a good teacher with preparation before the lecture this method can be really effective. It might not be optimal but it's more than good enough. If you have a bad teacher and you're not prepared these kinds of lectures are almost a waste of time. Upvotes: 2
2021/02/28	581	2,452	<issue_start>username_0: I made a huge mistake of working in a field different than my advisor's expertise. My PhD research was in computational modeling of 3D printing process using finite element analysis. While my advisor's expertise is in density functional theory and molecular dynamics simulations. She works on battery research and my colleagues working on those projects get published in >15 impact factor journals. Due to covid, I did not relocate to other place for postdoc and I have been pursuing postdoc with my PhD advisor for the past 9 months. I have already destroyed my chances of getting an academic position by being a simulation guy in a experimental heavy research field. I am trying to find another position but failed so far. I am having an ongoing discussion about a postdoc position with another professor from another university. He will let me know if he secures a grant. Meanwhile, my advisor has offered me one more year of postdoc position. Am I heading on to disastrous career by considering her offer? For the past 9 months, my work has been different and I am enjoying the new learning opportunity. But I extremely worried about my future. Please advise.<issue_comment>username_1: Doing a postdoc with your PhD advisor is burning critical post-PhD clock time working for someone you know for sure has nothing more to teach you. There are probably edge conditions where it makes sense but for the most part it's a pretty dumb thing to do. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: > > Am I heading on to disastrous career by considering her offer? > > > No. There is nothing wrong with considering and accepting a job offer from your PhD advisor, or an extension thereof. What is disastrous for your career is not looking for a better job and taking one as soon as it is feasible to do so. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I have already destroyed my chances of getting an academic position by being a simulation guy in a experimental heavy research field. There are two sides to this. One: the received opinion is that anyone who can code better than the reigning professors (i.e. just about anyone) will do just fine as a simulation person. Two: the received opinion is that good "simulation guys" who understand what the experimentalists are talking about are hard to find and worth their weight in gold. The truth lies somewhere in between. Make your best guess and act accordingly. Upvotes: 0
2021/02/28	379	1,675	<issue_start>username_0: I am willing to apply for advertised PHD position in Sweden. In the instructions to apply they have mentioned about the required documents which include CV, cover letter, transcripts. I have two questions regarding this 1. They have not asked for a separate statement of purpose (SOP). So, should i include my motivation and research interest in the cover letter? 2. Whom should i address my cover letter? to the professor who have given this advertisement or to the department or admission office?<issue_comment>username_1: The letter should be addressed to whomever posted the call for applications. I don't know precisely how things work in Sweden, but in some places (and fields) admission is through a professor who hires you. This may be the case if they posted the advertisement. And yes, the information that you would normally put in a SoP needs to be included somewhere and the cover letter may be your only opportunity. Alternatively, the application system, such as it is, may permit additional documents than those required. But, somewhere you need to talk about your goals, both for the degree and thereafter. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Officially, in Sweden, it's normally the department that hires students. In practice, it's likely going to be the professor that acquired the funding who is going to evaluate candidates and make a decision. Even more in practice, your average Swedish professor won't care the least bit who you address in the letter. If you feel you need to put in a name, put in the name of the hiring professor. If you get it wrong, it likely won't matter in the least. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2021/02/28	515	2,209	<issue_start>username_0: I am working as a researcher in a research lab, and I want to apply for a Ph.D. position. I have read that most of the professors read emails sent through professional email-id only. But my current professional email id is restricted to be used in the research lab only. What should I do to make my application email stand out?<issue_comment>username_1: An institutional email address is not a requisite nor it does make your inquiry looks less serious. I personally was suggesting a receipt request, but apparently most people dislike the option no matter the purpose. I personally can see the difference between a peer of mine pushing for some action and a student in trepidation. However, as the chance that I would be the recipient is ridiculously low, don't ask for a receipt. Be cautios and clear filling the subject field. I do suggest something like "PhD openings inquiry, name surname" or so. I also suggest that the body part shows that you didn't choose the particular recipient at random. This can be very short, at this stage. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: * Use an email which sounds serious, like <EMAIL>. Also have your full and real name as a name in the From: field. Whether it is a professional email does not matter. But it should look professional, in the sense mentioned. * Keep your email itself concise. Make it clear why you want to apply to this specific place. This, of course, means that you apply to a few selected places which you picked for the specific research they are doing. Note that just looking up the professor's most recent papers and saying "I find $PAPERTITLE1 and $PAPERTITLE2 very interesting." is likely not going to work, for several reasons. * Attach a CV, and possibly some other documentation. Don't say "I can send you a CV upon request." You want to minimize the professor's work to learn about you. If possible, also mention who they could ask about you, either in the CV or the email itself. * Don't misspell the addressee's name, or their institutions name, etc.. And address them directly. Emails starting with "Dear Sir" look like you sent them to many people. Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
2021/02/28	1,827	7,612	<issue_start>username_0: I graduated from my MSc two and a half years ago, so I have been outside of the University environment for a while. I have recently started working on some novel machine learning techniques. Writing an article by myself and submitting it to a prestigious journal is no joke. I'm wondering: how likely is it to get supported from a University, or by specific researchers that are working in a University (for example PhD or postdoc students) with my work? I envision them becoming co-authors of the paper. Would they benefit from this? For example can they get some credits for correcting the paper and being a co-author even if I'm not a PhD student? Clarifications: * I'm developing my own technique, independent from my employer. It's a general topic (regularization) so it's not directly applied to an industrial task. * I want to apply for a doctorate, but my GPA and MSc thesis grade weren't brilliant. Hence, the need to publish an article before applying for the PhD - but also for the pleasure of writing about innovative research, of course<issue_comment>username_1: For university researchers, it would definitely be beneficial to become co-authors of a paper published at a top venue. This is their bread and butter. They are unlikely to get explicit credits in any form, but a publication is its own reward, even as a co-author. It may be nontrivial to convince university researchers to work with you, though. Maybe their funding compels them to work exclusively on specific projects. Even if they're completely free to work on whatever topic they want, you will still need to convince them that your ideas will be worthy of publication, before they will be willing to invest significant amounts of time on it. But if your ideas are good enough, being convincing is possible. Reach out. You may get "no" for an answer, and you may get that answer often. But you may also get a "yes". Only one way to find out. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You don't need "support" from a university to publish. What you need is work good enough to satisfy journal reviewers and editors. You can always publish as an "Independent Researcher" without other affiliation. However, if you want help in the research or writing, then you need to make some personal contact with an interested party. Being in Amsterdam gives you some options as there are universities within reach and someone there might be interested if you pay them a visit. Blind emails to people aren't likely to be very productive. And, given that you are interested in a doctorate, you might try to apply to a few places and include your current work as "work in progress" in your CV. Of course you will need to meet the admission requirements, and I'd think that some letters of recommendation in your case might be helpful if you can arrange them. Post-docs probably have their own projects and little time. And working with an "independent researcher" isn't unheard of for an academic, but you need to find a way to make contact. Even if there is someone who is trusted and can introduce you to someone else. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I agree with Wetenchaap's answer and just want to elaborate the picture from our (university) side. Occasionally people write me and suggest something along the lines you envision, so, in general, yes, it is possible. However, my personal experience with this type of collaboration is mostly negative so far, and thus now I'd think twice before venturing into such projects again. So, what's the problem? Usually it boils down to expectations and work management. People outside academia often misjudge what is considered "interesting" or "publishable", and what kind of work is typically required to compose a paper. More often than not getting a full picture cools down their motivation. Next, since people typically have jobs and do research in their spare time, months of efforts can easily end up with a short "sorry, piled up at work" message. Thus, investing into someone else's idea requires trust that lies on some firm foundation. Dealing with students and colleagues is much easier. Students need it for their graduation works and (possibly) for their future careers if they consider staying in academia. Colleagues do research with me as a part of their normal daily activities. Outside people are unpredictable: today they believe that publishing a joint paper is good for them, but tomorrow they can easily change their mind. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_1: The other answers are missing a key point. For you, writing a paper is stupid. It's a big waste of time that will take forever assuming you can find someone to help you, which you probably can't. It will give you academic currency that's basically useless for you because you are not an academic yet. Let's talk about alternatives. You have a new/modified method you think has improved performance on a problem in stats/ML (regularization). A perfectly valid way to show your work is by writing it up informally (in a blog post or on twitter) and developing a software package (most likely in R or as a sklearn module in python). For example, let's look at [UMAP](https://umap-learn.readthedocs.io/en/latest/), a relatively recent addition to the nonlinear dimensional reduction toolkit: * It started on [twitter](https://twitter.com/leland_mcinnes/status/884093336428191744) as an idea in 2017, with an associated software package. * It showed up on the conference circuit in 2018 (I first heard about it as a scipy talk) * It turned into an [arxiv](https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.03426) paper in 2018, which currently has something like 2500 citations. It's a great piece of software and lots of people use it every day. The advantage here is that the process moves quickly, it requires skills that you already have (not academic writing, which you probably don't because academic writing is a very specific skill that nobody should bother having if you don't need it), and it's also a tangible thing that you can put on your PhD applications. The disadvantage is that you might get "scooped", which I won't bother to define because it's idiotic in 2021 to think that for stats/ML the software package and associated writeup is itself not the key research output. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I publish on the topic in question. If you were to write a paper, the first step would be to get a good understanding of the relevant literature. In doing so, you'll end up having a good idea of who publishes work similar to the method you are proposing. I would recommend looking those people up and contacting them: an email stating that you're working on something similar and would be interested in chatting. Set up a short video call, run your idea past them, and see if they're interested. Key would be to know your audience: you'll likely want a 2nd/3rd year PhD student. Younger and they might not have any idea what they're doing. Any older, and they're either busy writing up, or a full time busy grownup postdoc/prof. Even if no one is willing to work with you, you're likely to get useful feedback on your idea that may improve it. PS, I strongly disagree with @Libor's statement as to writing a paper being a `stupid' idea. At the research group I am at in ML, a publication at a top conference is a prerequisite for applying for a PhD position. That's a fairly common requirement in the field. A blog post/non-peer-reviewed arxiv article/code would have to be extremely impactful to be accepted in place of that (i.e. a higher threshold). Upvotes: 2
2021/02/28	1,943	8,032	<issue_start>username_0: So I'm a first year PhD student in the UK working on an applied mathematics project. Excluding weekends I put in about 37/40 hours a week of work which leaves me pretty tired to say the least. Normally I'll also work on weekends to keep the momentum going but lately I've been feeling really burnt out and despite the breaks making me feel more refreshed, I still feel guilty for "missing" out on work I should be doing. How do I combat this feeling and am I alone by feeling this way? I rarely take breaks.<issue_comment>username_1: Firstly, you are certainly not alone in feeling like you are missing out on work. In the competitive world of academia, everyone feels this way at some point or another, though it is rarely because they are actually not doing enough work. Also, I can only imagine how difficult it must have been to start a PhD while working remotely, as you have no colleagues or peers around you to gauge the "normal" level of work. Once we are all allowed back to our offices, you will see that plenty of PhD time is spent not working at all... my office had regular badminton matches during the working day, or we'd all stop for a cup of tea together, or go out for lunch or to the pub as soon as the clock hit 5pm (or before) :). You will honestly be more productive if you stop trying to force yourself to work solidly for eight hours a day. One of the great benefits of academic work is the flexibility: if you're having a terrible day, there's nothing to stop you working for a couple of hours and taking the rest of the day off; conversely, if you're having a great day, there's nothing to stop you working late, chasing the solution to your current problem. Furthermore, you're a first year PhD student, meaning if you started in October you're about five months into your PhD, which is likely going to take you between three and a half and four years to complete. During an undergraduate degree, it's common to work intensively for short bursts, while completing coursework or preparing for exams. A PhD requires a completely different strategy. It's often said that a PhD is a marathon, not a sprint. In my personal experience, this is very true. You have to learn to pace yourself, since you don't have external deadlines any more (possibly excluding things like submitting a paper to a journal, but that is likely a self-imposed and flexible deadline). The only one you have is your thesis submission, still more than three years away. You can't keep up the high intensity work for that long. As you correctly recognise, you will end up burned out. My strongest piece of advice is to stop working at the weekend. Your brain needs a break to be able to think productively and creatively when you are at work. Try to prioritise other, non-mathematical activities during the evenings and weekends -- go for a walk or run, read a book, draw, practice a musical instrument -- what ever you can do to relax under the current restrictions. If you are worried about losing momentum, try writing a short paragraph or list of bullet points every Friday afternoon before you stop work, detailing where you are and what the next step in your work should be. You can even do this at the end of every day, to help you get started the following morning. Finally, do you have anyone close to you who you can talk to about this? I suggest mentioning it to your PhD supervisor, as they can probably help you with time management or prioritisation strategies (and if they're a good supervisor, I expect they'll reassure you that you are working hard enough, and can afford to relax). If you are not already in touch with the other PhD students in your department, then perhaps send them an email and organise an online meeting, perhaps a virtual pub session on a Friday afternoon, where you can all chat and relax together. You will soon learn that everyone has gripes and complaints about their work, and how busy they are etc. It can be good to let off steam in this way. In summary: take breaks (as many as you think you need times two), stop working weekends (unless you really, really, really need to, and I mean "PhD thesis is due in a week and I just found a huge mistake in my analysis" need to), and try to talk to your PhD peers at least once a week if you can (and don't just talk about work!). Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: There's mountains of evidence (research, studies, documented cases of overwork, expert interviews/articles, etc.) to suggest that overworking leads to disastrous results (we've seen that even more in 2020) and increased health problems (hypertension, weight gain, smoking/drugs/etc.). There's a reason there are laws, in the US at least, for limiting the time an individual can spend working; it's not only for safety and reliability but the general culture/health of the population. There is absolutely no reason to feel bad about taking time off and not working during off hours. That time off is actually built into your schedule (incl. professional schedules and academic schedules). You are human and not a robot, you need to give your mind a rest and do other things (sociable, recreational, exercise, personal hobbies, personal health, etc.) so that you can get different input and stimuli in your life. The mind is a muscle and like all muscles there's a time to exercise it and a time to let it rest. I have seen people put off doctor appointments, dentist appointments, vacations, etc. just because they got addicted to "work" culture and the love of being "busy" (social status). They are not happy or health people. Your #1 investment, #1 tool, and #1 asset is you and you only get the one. There's no undo, redo, eraser, or next time if you don't take care of yourself. Life is too short to only work. Work to live, not live to work. Best of luck! :) Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I came to my PhD from a job where weekend work was all but impossible (no remote access to the systems I needed) so it was quite a shock having to decide to switch off. That's going to be harder these days when much more work is done from home (I'm an experimentalist so I'm in the lab a lot). Something I found that really helped, and that I still use as a postdoc, was to categorise weekend work, roughly as follows. Good reasons: * Inspiration strikes - make plentiful notes and revisit in the week, probably telling someone about it. * A little work for a lot of return, e.g. starting an experiment or simulation that's then going to run for hours to days unattended. * Time sharing of lab space or equipment (probably less applicable to you) - but take a break to make up for it. No-so-good reasons, but necessary ones: * A hard deadline. This could be internal (progress review, group meeting presentation) or external (conference submission). Consider whether the deadline inherently means weekend working or whether you put it off until the last minute; if the latter, try to start earlier next time (we're all guilty of that). Bad reasons: * You feel like you need to put the hours in. * You're stuck and feel that the only way out is effort. That works up to a point, but so often doesn't - it's much more effective to forget about the problem for the weekend. When you return to work mode you may even start with some broader reading and discussions to get the ideas flowing. It's always worth noting down your thoughts before downtime (I still prefer a physical book for this), but just enough to prompt you on your return then shut the notebook. Don't spend your downtime writing the world's most comprehensive to-do list Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: > > Normally I'll also work on weekends to keep the momentum going > > > Simple answer - do not do it. Weekends are for the rest and free time, during these days just forget about your work activities - hang out with your friends, read a good book, watch a film, whatever. You are not a robot, job is not your life. Focus on yourself. Upvotes: 3
2021/02/28	353	1,294	<issue_start>username_0: I was reading a review paper which cited another paper, however for the life of me I cannot seem to find any hits on the cited paper. The author, title and journal return nothing on the usual sources (Google mainly). What is the best course of action to go about finding such a paper? The citation is "<NAME> al.,in Proc. Innov. Sustainability Conf., vol. 40, 2017, pp. 1–4."<issue_comment>username_1: It's not a journal, it's a volume of proceedings from a conference (which you can derive from the format "Proc. X Conf."). It looks like these are proceedings from a conference held in Bucharest, Romania, in 2017. It may have been a local conference; online sources are very limited in English and slightly less limited in Romanian. As Buffy suggested in the comments, your best bet is to ask your local academic librarian. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Here's a link for the abstract book (p. 41) <http://innovation.pub.ro/archive/2017.pdf> The easiest thing would be to email the authors. I found the article by searching in Google Scholar (scholar.google.com) for your reference. With more details I searched for some of the author names. I think the accent in the name Bădulescu might confuse the search engines. Upvotes: 3
2021/02/28	829	3,685	<issue_start>username_0: I am a mathematician but want to do a PhD in mathematical physics focusing on gauge-gravity duality and more generally quantum gravity, what is the most appropriate PhD choice to do research in this field, is it an astrophysics (cosmology) PhD or a particle physics one? I am looking for a program that I can take a lot of relevant abstract mathematics courses like topological quantum field theory, functorial quantum field theory, algebraic geometry and topology, while at the same time I can get a good understanding of physics concepts about quantum gravity.<issue_comment>username_1: If this is for US admissions, then you don't really need to choose a specialty to be admitted in most fields. You can join a larger physics program that has a lot of professors likely to have a lot of interests. This is especially true (US only, perhaps) if you enter with only a BS degree, since there is expected advanced coursework normally required before you need to choose a specialty or an advisor. It is also fairly common in US to change fields, within reason, after a BS. I think that math to physics would normally be possible. Especially mathematical physics of various flavors. State Universities are usually classified R1 and tend to have large faculties so you have some choices. Moreover, if you get "close enough" in your doctoral studies, then you can further specialize afterwards. Your degree doesn't need to define you forever, though it takes some work (and luck). Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: At least in the US, your first question should be whether to do a mathematics or a physics PhD. It's possible to work as a physicist with a mathematics PhD and vice versa (and I know people who do it), but it's hard enough to find an academic job (which is the only kind of job that will pay you for theoretical research of the kind you seem to be interested in) as it is, and having background and teaching experience in the "wrong" field makes it much harder. It's important to understand that physics and mathematics are different fields with different ideas of what it means for a statement to be true. In mathematics, a statement is true if and only if someone has given a valid mathematical proof for it. In physics - well I'm a mathematician who is ignorant of physics, so I think it's best to let physicists speak for themselves - but it's not what I just wrote for mathematics. Their definition (in the mathematical sense of definition) of truth is different. Which definition of truth do you want to work with? Also important - would you rather teach introductory physics or calculus? In either case, you want to be at a university where the mathematics and physics departments have a good relationship with each other. (For this purpose unlike many others, having no relationship does not count as having a good relationship.) Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: You're getting good general answers from qualified users with broad knowledge, which would be useful if you were deciding between physics and math in general. But your question is a lot more specific than that, and deserves a specific answer. In the US, you don't apply to a subfield like "particle physics". You either get a math PhD or a physics PhD. In addition, while you might be required to take some basic courses, there is typically little restriction on what advanced courses you're allowed to take. However, topics such as gauge-gravity duality and quantum gravity are studied almost exclusively in the physics department, under the name of "high energy theory". If you're sure you want to study this, you need to apply for a physics PhD. Upvotes: 1
2021/02/28	812	3,439	<issue_start>username_0: I am applying for a post which asks me you ever part of government entity like federal/state/local government entities including publicly funded universities. I was a research assistant with fellowship in a department under the state university. So is this an Yes? There is question here: [Are professors at a public university in the U.S. considered to be "employed by the U.S. government"?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/29022/are-professors-at-a-public-university-in-the-u-s-considered-to-be-employed-by) but it concerns federal employees. Mine includes any level of government entities. Hence the question.<issue_comment>username_1: It likely depends on the source of the funds. If you were paid by the department at a State university, then the likelihood is that it is a Yes. But if you were paid through a grant then the answer might be no, but might depend on some things. I suspect you should ask the department, or, alternatively, answer Yes, but qualify it somehow/somewhere with the actual arrangement. But, as <NAME> notes in a comment, things vary by state. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Let me suggest a quick flowchart for this question. (1) Were you employed by a public University? It's a bit hard to provide a comprehensive list of indicators for this. I've had both an employee and non-employee appointment as a graduate student at the same state University, so all I can say is that in my experience you should have received several clear indicators about the context of your position. "Research assistant" is usually a title of employment in the US in my experience. * Did you sign appointment forms or letters when starting your position? If so, did those indicate you were an employee? Did they indicate that the position entailed specific responsibilities or who your supervisor was? * Did your paystubs indicate you were an employee? * Did the University withhold Federal income tax from your paychecks? If so you were probably an employee. * Did you receive a US Federal tax form from the University at the end of the tax year indicating you received "wages"? (2) Assume you were employed by a University run by a State. What you should do depends on who is asking about your status. a. If you are applying to a job that is not in the same State as where you were a Research Assistant at a public University, simply say "yes". There is virtually no situation where an out-of-state asker cares about fine distinctions. b. If you are applying to a job that is in the same State as where you were a Research Assistant at a public University, you should investigate this State's definitions more carefully via web searches tailored to exactly that State. This is the only situation I can imagine where the asker may care about pedantic distinctions. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I would assume that it is generally unlikely that students or research assistants at most US (state or private) universities would be US government employees (this could be very complex in the case of state governments and different from state to state). Competitively recruited US federal jobs typically have US citizenship requirements (Executive Order 11935 from 1976). The research positions you mention are most often open to international candidates, and hiring internationally would be difficult if citizenship requirements were involved. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/01	766	3,029	<issue_start>username_0: [U.S. doubles down on protecting university research from China](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-universities/u-s-doubles-down-on-protecting-university-research-from-china-idUSKCN2AT0WB) Apparently the US is taking action to "prevent sensitive technology from being stolen by the Chinese military". The article doesn't go into many details of what that action is, but it does say: > > The NSCAI [National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence] recommendations would require more disclosure on research funding and partnerships at universities. It also proposes creating a database of individuals and entities to flag risks in advance. > > > How does this plan work? In principle everyone is a security risk, since everyone can defect or seek to immigrate to China. Even if we neglect defections/immigration, unless US universities stop admitting Chinese students or exclude Chinese postdocs/visiting researchers entirely, they could always take their knowledge back with them. Checking the source of resource funding and partnerships doesn't seem effective either - one could always change funding sources or partnerships after the PhD/postdoc etc is over.<issue_comment>username_1: The nominal goal is to keep people from running two labs, using US funding to develop ideas that then get teleported to the china lab for commercialization. The guys indicted so far were all running labs in China they didn't disclose. [Like charles lieber, who seems to have run a china lab](https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/harvard-university-professor-and-two-chinese-nationals-charged-three-separate-china-related). [It also looks like they're going after people for not filing fbars](https://news.mit.edu/2021/professor-gang-chen-fraud-0114), which is kinda shitty since half the green card holders in the US are probably guilty of that. Is this a real problem? Probably not. But it sounds good if you aren't an academic. Same way "tough on crime" always works. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Most American researchers do not plan to avoid research "falling" into Chinese hands. We send our research to China, and everywhere else, for free. The real problem is that China has internet censorship to keep our research out of China. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: ### It seems to aimed at preventing collaborations, not preventing defections. Looking at the links given by the OP and the other answers, it seems like the primary goal of this is to prevent researchers in the US from collaborating with individuals or institutions associated with the Chinese military (which also happens to run their spy agencies), in order to prevent them from taking defense-related US-funded research and sending it to China. Obviously, its possible for researchers to defect to China, and its possible that the CCP might start leaning on civilian Chinese nationals who are working abroad, but the current initiative doesn't seem to be focusing on either. Upvotes: 1
2021/03/01	812	3,450	<issue_start>username_0: I worked on an idea and got new results. I came across a very prestigious conference that calls for poster abstracts. I sent mine and it was accepted for a poster presentation. Should I present it there or it is better to publish it as a paper first? What are the pros and cons of submitting my idea as a poster? Also, I want to mention that I worked on the idea independently without a supervisor which was the main motive for me to send the idea in the poster session. What advice would you give me also? Thanks<issue_comment>username_1: Pro: You may have some input from and exchange with experts and people interested in it, and this can help you improving a later publication. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In my field (in computer science), posters are usually a "low cost, low benefit" activity. Pro: * A small amount of visibility * A small but nice CV entry * A small opportunity for feedback and input Cons: * A small time investment for actually developing the poster and, sometimes, writing up an accompanying paper * A small cost for registering at the conference (I assume that the conference will be online due to COVID19, otherwise the costs could actually be larger) In the end, it probably won't make much of a difference, unless lightning strikes and you happen to get amazing input/feedback/collaboration opportunities (not impossible to happen but unlikely). Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Additional pros: It's better to share your ideas before publishing. This way you can improve your paper. Additional cons: A talk would give you more time to develop your idea. It could be noisy when a lot of people are on nearby posters and you try to talk with someone. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I don't see much downside to this provided that you submit a full paper to a reputable journal at the earliest opportunity. You will be putting ideas out there that a few people might find it worthwhile to follow up with. They need not even have a motive to scoop you but their work could make yours moot for a full publication. I'm not suggesting you withdraw from the poster session, but just that you get a paper submitted so that you are in process for the complete work. The other answers here ([especially username_2's](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/163217/75368)) suggesting you will get feedback at the session are correct and valid. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Pro: constructing a poster forces you to organize your ideas so that the poster can function as a de facto draft of the paper to follow, speeding up the writing process. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: There are no real downsides. Posters are an excellent way of getting feedback on fresh ideas without the effort of writing a full paper. Use the feedback to write a proper paper afterward if you like. That said, with posters you have to actively solicit feedback yourself unlike with regular journal/conference publications where you are guaranteed to get feedback from at least 2 referees. I have seen both a crowd of famous professors happily chatting with students standing by their posters, and sad faces with noone paying any attention to their material. Interestingly, that has nothing to do with the contents of their posters. It is more of how approachable they appear and how good they are at faciliting a constructive discussion. Upvotes: 1
2021/03/01	1,285	5,458	<issue_start>username_0: There are a long list of stories about the issues with my PhD supervisor here in Academia.SE (see it [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/98164/alone-programmer?tab=questions) but these are not the only ones). So, I'm not going to repeat why I'm leaving my current research group. Last week, I decided to change my research group after almost 5 years. Despite its painful nature to switch after 5 years of work, I'm really hopeful that I can find a new PhD advisor who help me to finish my thesis and get my degree. I was in the same situation of switching to a new research group in Fall 2019, but at that time, still I was not 100% confident that I will not be able to get my PhD degree with my current advisor. In fact, in Fall 2019, I left my current research group for a couple of months and searched for a new PhD advisor. The problem was that every time I reached to a professor, even in other departments, my current advisor sent an email to them and recommended them to not accept me as their student. At the end, when I realized that nobody wants to take me as his/her student, my current advisor requested to have a meeting with me and he said that we are in a really good shape in terms of research progress and I will be able to get graduated soon, which didn't happen at all. Long story short, I reached the end of my capability to work with my current PhD advisor and even I don't want to see him or hear his voice again. I talked to our graduate coordinator in the department and he also said that I should change my research group and he supports my decision. Tomorrow, I'm going to have a meeting with my current advisor as well as the chair of the department and graduate coordinator. Based on my discussion to our graduate coordinator, this meeting is going to be a formal briefing about what would happen when I switch to another research group. For example, who owns the data and intellectual property that are created during these 5 years, which I don't have any claim and I want to just accept their requests and do whatever they want me to do and just move on. My current concern is that my current advisor wants to repeat the same strategy to prevent other professors to take me as their student and after that again try to force me to back to his group, which even I prefer to switch to master degree but do not continue my PhD with him. I want to ask him politely tomorrow in front of chair of the department and graduate coordinator to stop sending email to prospective advisors that I would contact in the future, but I don't know how to do that. I really appreciate any help or suggestion.<issue_comment>username_1: It’s superbly clear: You are being manipulated by a person who possibly has wasted years of your life. At this point, everything they do must be presumed malicious and intentional. Don’t take any other explanations, that’ll be gaslighting. You have to treat your former advisor like a public enemy #1, and his every action must be from now on interpreted as being on a vendetta against you. Look at the last few years. Has that person ever done anything that actually helped you achieve your goals? Don’t think of positive things they said: have they actually been helpful, in the truest sense of the word? Has their helpfulness been of the genuine kind that helps you make progress in the project, or it was only of a kind to put your mind at ease and dismiss the previous horrible things that person has done? My guess: it’s solid NO, they never helped in the last couple of years, and you’re clearly dealing with a manipulator who has no qualms about anything they did so far. Don’t ever believe any excuses they may offer to recast their abhorrent behavior in a good light. Remember how you felt through this whole ordeal and what a mess it was because of that person. There is no excuse for their behavior. None whatsoever. They are a lost cause in every sense of the word. Some of the answers to your other related questions seemed to have been slightly equivocal or giving the whole matter some benefit of the doubt. Having had the dubious pleasure of dealing with people like the one you describe early in my life, all your recollections are stereotypical and there's no doubt in my mind that you have been taken advantage of and have been subject of gross mistreatment. The person you speak of is playing a game that takes cards from the same decks that many other such people use. The game they play is so typical and so highly stylized that it may as well be called chess. You see it once and you can't unsee it, pretty much. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This is seriously abusive behavior and wouldn't be tolerated if this happened in industry: if your former boss reached out to every prospective employer to keep you from getting hired while trying to get you back, they could expect a lawsuit. I understand there are additional considerations in academia--you don't want to make powerful enemies and ruin your academic career. But I still might consider seeing if you can find a lawyer who will work pro bono and talk to them about your situation. A credible threat of legal action may well stop this (and may light a fire under the administration to curb the prof's bad behavior). To be clear I'm not recommending you rush into this action without carefully weighing all sides of the problem, but it may be worth considering. Upvotes: 1
2021/03/01	1,523	6,395	<issue_start>username_0: I recently found that the largest share of students in program X at my school do not need to take classes on topic ABC, even though topic ABC is considered as critical and fundamental by virtually everybody in the field. (Think of physics but no mechanics class) In fact, I can't believe anybody would give them accreditation without making ABC a required topic. Which makes me wonder: Are there any official criteria in the US about what a majors in X, Y, or Z must cover in the United States? Can a school just decide arbitrarily what needs to be covered in their majors? Can those criteria be seen in public?<issue_comment>username_1: > > Are there any official criteria in the US about what a majors in X, Y, or Z must cover in the United States? Can a school just decide arbitrarily what needs to be covered in their majors? > > > No, unless a licensing body (e.g. engineering or nursing) is involved. Education is managed by the states in the US, and generally speaking, state governments don't mandate curricula to the universities, because universities are generally the state agencies that have the expertise in X, Y, and Z. > > Can those criteria be seen in public? > > > Yep - sometimes it's buried in a very technical page, but I've never seen degree criteria restricted to students only. [Here](https://phys.washington.edu/physics-bs-degree-requirements) is an example page. So, no, you can't say "Ah, this person has a physics degree from (the US\|a given state), they must have learned topic X." --- [Accreditation](https://www2.ed.gov/admins/finaid/accred/accreditation.html#Overview) in the US does this: > > 1. Standards: The agency, in collaboration with educational > institutions and/or programs, establishes standards. > 2. Self-study: The institution or program seeking accreditation prepares an in-depth self-evaluation report that measures its > performance against the standards established by the agency. > 3. On-site evaluation: A team of peers selected by the agency reviews the institution or program on-site to determine first-hand > if the applicant meets the established standards. > 4. Decision and publication: Upon being satisfied that the applicant meets its standards, the agency grants accreditation or > preaccreditation status and lists the institution or program in an > official publication with other similarly accredited or > preaccredited institutions or programs. Only public and private > non-profit institutions can qualify to award federal student aid > based on preaccreditation. > 5. Monitoring: The agency monitors each accredited institution or program throughout the period of accreditation granted to verify > that it continues to meet the accreditor's standards. > 6. Reevaluation: The agency periodically reevaluates each institution or program that it lists to ascertain whether > continuation of its accredited or preaccredited status is warranted. > > > Generally, this is more concerned with ensuring it is a real school, with qualified professors, doing real teaching, not examining whether certain topics are taught. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There are no national criteria for such things and unlikely to be statewide criteria outside state universities, perhaps. But almost all US universities are accredited, usually by one of the regional accrediting agencies, though there are a few other options (for medical school, for example). This doesn't, however, in involve required courses in majors, but is an overall evaluation of the quality (and commitment to quality) of the university, not the specifics of its individual programs. Individual majors can, and often are, accredited by other, less formal agencies. In CS, the accreditation is normally by [ABET](https://www.abet.org), but it isn't required. Accreditation involves a preparation of documents by the institution or department, followed by a visit by academics from other institutions who are qualified to judge the quality. Some negotiation may follow the visit, resulting in changes. Then a judgement is made.. So, no, there is no real requirement that any particular thing needs to be covered, as long as the institution can make a case that the agency and its evaluators deem valid. --- See <https://www.ed.gov/accreditation>, for overall accreditation procedures. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: This is an addition to the other answers. Most professional bodies publish guidelines on what majors in their fields should include. For example, a joint committee of the ACM (Association for Computing Machinery) and IEEE (Institute for Electrical and Electronics Engineers) publish guidelines for what should be part of a computer science major. The MAA (Mathematical Association of America) publish guidelines on what should be part of a mathematics major. In some cases, these guidelines are quite specific. In others, they are much more vague. The ACM guidelines are fairly specific. For largely political reasons, the MAA guidelines are fairly vague. (This is because departments at universities with more academically capable student bodies and or PhD programs want guidelines that would prepare students for graduate school, while departments at universities with less academically capable student bodies know that they have no students capable of completing such a program of study.) These are guidelines, not requirements, but they are reasonably influential because many professors do pay attention to them. In addition, as mentioned above, in certain subjects, there is subject specific accreditation that may impose requirements on the departments involved. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: As the other answers have pointed out, this is largely field-specific. One interesting example is that of chemistry, where the American Chemical Society offers an [approval program](https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/education/policies/acs-approval-program.html) for departments. If a department wants to offer an "ACS-certified" major, they can submit the course list and other information to the ACS, who will give it their stamp of approval (or not.) However, nothing stops a chemistry department from offering a non-certified major. In fact, the chemistry department at my institution offers both certified and non-certified majors in chemistry. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/02	1,865	8,012	<issue_start>username_0: I am currently a first-year Ph.D. student taking a course sequence with my Ph.D. advisor. The first class of the sequence went really well, however, the second class is not going as well. The most notable instance is I copied down a problem incorrectly from the homework prompt. This is the first time in my life I have ever done so, and I was extremely embarrassed about it. An embarrassing instance outside of the class was during a one-on-one discussion. He asked me a question, and I froze and could not think correctly, and said a factually incorrect thing. With the combination of these things, I am beginning to worry my advisor thinks I am stupid, and thus not cut out for a Ph.D. I think one aspect of why I am so nervous around him is he's extremely famous and I think that gets to me. Anyway, I was curious if anyone had suggestions on how to proceed with any of the two instances I mentioned to help me improve my situation.<issue_comment>username_1: Take responsibility and move on. You cannot do anything to change what has happened in the past, but you can learn from what has happened. If your advisor chooses to dwell on what has already happened rather than evaluate you based on your current progress, you might consider giving less weight to your advisor’s opinion since they are not assessing you with relevant and current data. If you feel is is helpful, you could offer an explanation or apology for your errors. And if your advisor asks about the situation, you should talk about it. But unless this awkwardness is impeding your work with your advisor, I doubt it is necessary. --- Embarrassing things happen all the time. I’ve blanked on factual questions in areas that I know really well, and I personally have evaluated it as being nervous on my part. Since then, I’ve tried different strategies to prepare better for meetings so I’m not caught off guard. Was it embarrassing? Absolutely. I’m sure my advisor found it odd and supplied his own narrative for why it happened. Take responsibility and move on. I’ve also made mistakes in copying information and have had a misunderstanding based on my lack of proofreading. This is usually solved with a remark to the effect of “Looks like I copied that wrong, I’ll make a note to fix it on my own time.” Take responsibility and move on. Both of these situations were embarrassing, but I hope they demonstrate that 1) you are not alone in not being a perfect person and 2) they are not career-devastating mistakes that color your advisor’s opinion of you as a good student. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If that's the first time you've copied a problem down incorrectly, I'd bet you're the type of student whose conscientious work is obvious to your advisor and other professors in your department (whom you should also be developing relationships with, even at this early stage, btw). Also, keep in mind that admissions committees (especially in departments that can attract "famous" professors) don't casually accept students; if you weren't cut out for it, you probably wouldn't be there to begin with. In any case, no reasonable advisor would expect a first-year student to get every fact right or never make mistakes. In the unlikely case your advisor does happen to have those expectations and/or does think, based on two inconsequential mistakes, that you're not cut out for the program, you have plenty of time to find a new advisor, which is not at all unusual. More importantly, it sounds like you may be assuming the advisor thinks these things, since you don't mention any specific reaction he had that indicates as much. But even if he did give some feedback or correction, keep in mind that giving feedback and critique is what they're there for, and receiving that critique and advice is what you're there for. It's crucial for survival in grad school that students not take criticism personally—after all, if you're planning to be an academic at least, proposing some idea and having other people critique it is pretty much what you'll be doing for the rest of your career. If your advisor did give some clear indication he's displeased with your progress, you might consider explaining the circumstances or somehow remediating the situation—but if there wasn't an explicit indication (and even if there was) he's probably forgotten about the whole thing by now. You're likely better off just keeping on with the hard work and reminding yourself as often as you can that you belong there and that all grad students who aren't egomaniacs are constantly wracked with self-doubt and that you're probably doing just fine. But here's the most important thing, which I don't think most grad students (of which I am one) realize soon enough\: the professors are there because they want to teach students! If you showed up and knew every single thing perfectly before your first year was over, their lives would be pointless (slight exaggeration, but still). Being a professor is about teaching people things they didn't know before and guiding students in their acquisition of knowledge, so don't feel bad when that occasionally happens. A good advisor will genuinely enjoy feeling like they're actually contributing to your development from student to colleague, and your making mistakes early on is part of that process. --- \I didn't figure it out on my own; I was lucky that someone very wise told me this when I was distraught after my first teaching evaluation (which in retrospect was actually full of constructive feedback, which I took as harsh criticism simply because it included room to improve). Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I'm also a first year PhD student so I get the pressure to feel impressive to your advisor. That having been said, I think the best advice is to try not to take your small mistakes too seriously. Everybody freezes and everybody misses homework questions. As long as you're putting in the effort (and if these mistakes are bothering you enough to ask about them on stack exchange, I bet you're the hard working type) you're advisor is going to see it after a little while. In short - try not to be too critical of yourself, I really doubt your advisor thinks you're a bad student because of them. If not already, in time your advisor will recognize your strengths and see you're a valuable student. Just be patient and keep the faith. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: #### Don't try to build an "image" that is different from how you actually are, especially with your supervisor I would counsel against the idea that you should be trying to build a positive image with this person at all. In particular, you should not be trying to build an image that presents you as more competent at your work than you actually are. The purpose of a PhD supervisor is to train you and assist you to improve, so if he has an image of your competence that is more favourable than your actual competence then it will harm his ability to assist your learning. You are only in the first-year of your PhD. Accept that you are a novice and that you are in training to attain basic competence in research. Don't be embarrassed about making mistakes in front of your supervisor and don't worry about the "image" your supervisor has of you (see related question and advice [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/170569/170573#170573)). Let me put you at ease --- your supervisor almost certainly views you and all your peers as incompetent, which is how almost all PhD students start out. Focus on learning and practicing your research area, making mistakes, learning from those mistakes, and improving your work. As you go through your PhD program you will get more competent and your supervisor will keep track of your progress. Focus on substantive learning and improvement and don't concern yourself with your image. You will have an entire career to build up a positive good image through good quality work. Upvotes: 3
2021/03/02	671	3,083	<issue_start>username_0: Over the past few years, I have written a lot of job applications for permanent academic positions. None of these have been successful. I have been interviewed a few times, but mostly I have received either no reply or a very standard rejection letter. A handful of the rejection letters contain some kind of statement seeming to imply that although they don't want to interview me, the committee did like my application to some extent. For example, here's a sentence from one such letter I recently received (emphasis mine): > > We received many excellent applications and *although the search committee was impressed with your credentials*, we have decided your application will not be advanced for further consideration at this time. > > > My question is: does this statement, and other ones like it, mean anything or is it just a bit of fluff inserted for politeness? To put it in another way: should I infer from this that the committee actually was impressed with my credentials and that they sent this reply to only a subset of candidates they rejected? Or is this likely to just be part of a totally generic rejection letter and I should therefore infer nothing?<issue_comment>username_1: It could be both an honest statement or generic fluff. Unfortunately, there's no way for you to distinguish both, and to derive useful information here. (Maybe unless they comment on specific things they found impressive, but that doesn't seem to be the case.) The more informative fact are the rejections themselves. A single rejection means hardly anything, but if you only received rejections, there would be some problem that you need to fix. The fact that you got some invitations is indeed a good sign. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It is almost certainly an automated form letter. It was very probably sent to every applicant to who reached the same stage in the application process. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: IMHO, they all mean one and only one thing: you've been rejected and they would rather tell you something nice than to explain why exactly that decision was made or where you stood compared to other candidates. Note that they are not obliged to disclose their decision process, nor should you suspect any foul play in such cases. However, I would really appreciate some plain informative letter like "you were our #3 candidate out of 10 interviewed and #2 accepted the offer" much more. As to the phrase "impressed with your credentials", it could mean absolutely anything from admiration to shock. Whether they wrote this nice thing to everybody or just to you cannot be determined with any degree of certainty unless you have a friend who applied to the same place and has been rejected too, but the point is that the only part that matters is "we have decided your application will not be advanced for further consideration", which more often than not (in my experience on the both sides of the hiring process) means that you were sorted out at step one of a multi-step process. Upvotes: 1
2021/03/02	654	2,534	<issue_start>username_0: I am trying to write a paper. We have done certain experiments and results from it are good. So, I feel that if our idea can be implemented in other sites, it can benefit those sites. Now my question is simple, how can I write in scientific context that the results of my study is useful to others? For example, > > We believe that the analysis results from our study can benefit bla > bla.... > > > Is it appropriate to write as below > > We feel/think/suppose that the analysis results from our study can > benefit bla bla... > > > Any scientific word equivalent for "believe"?<issue_comment>username_1: The word "believe" is a very fine word to use in a scientific article. Generally, it's a good practice to separate factual information (data, observations, results) from subjective information (interpretation, speculation). The word "believe" clearly puts a statement in the latter category. Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Those words can be ranked in order of strength: * believe > think >= suppose > feel A belief is considered true by the believer, it's the strongest (assuming a rational believer). A thought/supposition is an opinion or judgement, allowing for doubt. A feeling is a best guess, the weakest. Use them accordingly. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: It probably isn't a big issue for a reader as they will understand your intent, but I'd rather suggest: > > Evidence from the results of this study imply that ... benefit ... > > > Make the statement about the study, not about yourselves: what you found, not what you think. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Assertive communication theory states that you must be precise and speak the truth when you present results. It is not the truth that your results will benefit others. It is the truth that you believe that your results will benefit others. So be precise. Similarly, in most fields you cannot truthfully state "A causes B", because you don't know. B could be causing A; or Z could be causing both A and B; or you might have simply been unlucky (which happens 1 time out of 20 at a 95% confidence level). So you must state "We believe this shows that A causes B". However, one "We believe" per paragraph is sometimes enough, to avoid being prolix. For more on all this, see the world-class excellent mind-expanding "Language in Thought and Action" by <NAME>. Warning: It may take about a week to digest each chapter properly; take it slowly. Upvotes: 1
2021/03/02	921	4,010	<issue_start>username_0: When choosing a research topic, many researchers (in the field of psychology, in my case) often choose to study a topic they find interesting or have experience in. Does this introduce more potential for bias in their work? I have done this myself. I am doing research into an area that I also work in, and enjoy as a hobby. I see that this has the benefit of existing knowledge in that area, and more motivation to continue researching the topic. But to what degree is it problematic that the researcher is personally involved in their field of interest? Is there a conflict of interest when someone struggling with addiction does academic research into addiction? Does the methodology affect this? Does a qualitative researcher have less personal bias than a qualitative researcher interpreting their findings?<issue_comment>username_1: Bias is defined as any tendency which prevents unprejudiced consideration of a question. In research, bias occurs when “systematic error [is] introduced into sampling or testing by selecting or encouraging one outcome or answer over others” . <https://bit.ly/3q4Ijzf> Selecting or encouraging one outcome or answer is scientific misconduct. As far someone doesn't do that, they can get their otherwise biased data or give their biased interpretation of them, of course. In the best case they change mind soon or later, for what their individual opinion matters. Or the rest of the world find out they were the biased ones. To me, a not interested individual under the pressure of the environment is perhaps more prone to actively falsify data or be "victim" of biases than a genuine enthusiast. Of course, this refer to genuine scientific interest. If the financial asset of a researcher, to take an extreme example, is sensitive to a result, I suspect that bias and even fraud becomes much probable. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: The short answer is, well, yes. But what alternative would you propose? Forcing researchers to work on topics they aren’t passionate about seems like a bad idea. Academia has few financial incentives as compared to industry. The only reason many stay is because of the freedom it affords them. Take away that, and there’s not much keeping people in it. Keeping researchers’ biases in check is what peer review is for. Even if you happen to work on a topic you aren’t super passionate about (say, you got moderately involved in a project due to a very specific skill you bring in), you still have an incentive to publish the results, which should be kept in check regardless of personal interest. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: There shouldn't be any bias issue in selecting interesting questions. But there certainly is if you choose to search out support for what you think a priori is the correct answer. Questions, themselves, have no bias. But it is the evidence that answers the question. If any other "techniques" come in to play than honest search for truth then there is a problem. I found that first time researchers need to be taught this lesson. I also had to assure them that if the evidence leads to rejecting the main hypothesis that they have succeeded, not failed, since they have new evidence of what may be true. But selecting a question or an area of study because you have some deep connection to that idea is not, in itself, any cause for alarm. In fact it can (and should) result in dedication to the task of finding truth. Suppose someone with a medical issue of some kind decides to research that. It does them no good to fake research or bias it in the direction of anything but the truth. Companies, on the other hand, often have a financial interest in promoting not-truth. Overstating the benefits of a particular vaccine is a particular danger at the moment. Likewise the "research" done and published and promoted by tobacco companies was/is not a search for truth, but for financial advantage, since the costs fall elsewhere. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/02	1,328	5,050	<issue_start>username_0: I understand that a 'Chair' is a traditional title of a professor in the UK. Nowadays, what is the difference, if any, between a Chair and a Professor in the UK?<issue_comment>username_1: It is the difference between the role or job and the person who is doing that job. The person has achieved the status and title of Professor. That person can take the position of the "Chair of Computer Science at the University of Somewhere". Sometimes a particular Chair will have been endowed or funded at a University and then a Professor is recruited to take that Chair. That person could have moved from another Chair at some other University. Some of the Chair endowments are quite old, like this example from 1702 in Cambridge: <https://www.ch.cam.ac.uk/alumni/new-name-our-oldest-chair> Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: "Professor" is a 'rank' (next up from "Reader" iirc), whereas "Chair" is a specific job-role - they do not mean the same thing. In smaller fields, there will only be one Professor, who will be said to 'hold the chair'. In larger fields, there may be more than on person who holds the title of Professor, but only one can be the head, or 'Chair' - have a look at the definition of "Emeritus Professor" for more. For comparison, think of "Princes" - in the UK, Charles has the rank of Prince, so is known as "<NAME>", but so is "<NAME>". However Charles holds the position of "Prince of Wales" (meaning first-in-line to the throne) which is necessarily unique. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: "Chair" is to "Professor" as "Throne" is to "King"/"Queen". ETA: the cutesy analogy seems to have proved unpopular. The substantive point of my answer was to express the view that "chair" is synonymous with "professorship". Although I still believe, on balance of probabilities, that to be correct, I'm less sure of it than I was, because I found an [oration](https://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/reporter/1999-2000/weekly/5817/17.html) from a University of Cambridge honorary degree ceremony, which is supplied in both English and Latin, and in which "chair" and "professorship" are rendered as different Latin words ("cathedra" and "proueheret" respectively). Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: As the other answers demonstrate, this is one of those terms that has a variety of different meanings in academia, depending on institution and context. Historically, British universities had very few professorial positions; typically a university would have one for each broad field of study. These positions were created within the framework of the university's statutes, and are/were known as Chairs. Each Chair exists independent of any particular individual occupying the position, and the university statutes prescribe the procedure for appointing a new holder if the Chair becomes vacant. Sometimes the Chair is associated with the name of a particular individual or benefactor: hence Oxford has (say) the Regius Professor of Hebrew, established by the king in 1546. Many of the positions created in this way continue to exist, and occasionally new ones are added. In modern times (particularly since the 1990s) universities have sought to award more people the title of Professor, and it has become a job title within the standard framework of career progression. However, most such jobs are not 'written into' the university's statutes in the same way as the traditional Chairs: when holders leave, the position ceases to exist. Thus, a hypothetical university might establish two chairs: the [University] Professor of Ancient History, and the [University] Professor of Modern History. They might also hire a number of other historians, and give them the title of Professor - but these jobs would have less prestige than the chairs. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Although my observation of the UK system is only "from afar", at Oxford, Cambridge, Durham, Bristol, Warwick, London, and other serious places, one can look through the faculty list ... and see that (as in other answers) "Professor" is a title, more senior than "Reader", etc. There are also "department chairs", who will almost always have the title of "Professor", and are administrative heads of departments, but this sense of "chair" is quite different from, e.g., "The Savilian Chair in Geometry" (or whatever), within a math dept. The person (almost surely a "Professor") holding the Savilian chair is probably not the head-of-department, although certainly has a very senior position, and perhaps is only answerable to administration outside the math dept. In fact, this is generally parallel to the U.S., where "the dept chair" is "dept head", and is not necessarily any special honor, but, rather, entails much administrative responsibility. There are also "named chairs", like "University Chair in X"... Confusingly, sometimes there is "University Professor in Math" or similarly. In the latter usage (not uncommon in the U.S.), the usage of "chair" and "professor" have merged. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/02	1,412	6,455	<issue_start>username_0: I have a three-part question: *First, if I am the first author of a research manuscript, as previously discussed with, and agreed by, both the second author and corresponding author(s), then due to some concerns about the paper content, am I legally allowed to unilaterally decide to delay publication* (to edit the results presented in the paper), or in the worst case scenario, to not publish if I am not satisfied with the new results obtained? This question arises when both the second author and the principal investigator hope to rush with the publication, despite my objection to the current manuscript. For this specific paper, my contribution is in running simulations and obtaining the data, while the second author's contribution lies in part of the paper-writing, including explaining the graphs and data I've obtained. This essentially means the research cannot be split in half, where the second author publishes his/her part and I publish mine separately. *Secondly, in response to my attempt to delay the publication until the manuscript is edited to a satisfactory standard, the principal investigator, my professor, asked/threatened to have me removed from the position of the first author, and instead make me the second author, if I delay publication. In doing so, both my professor and second author plan to bypass me in the publication process. Is this legally allowed?* My professor's official reasoning is that, after a thorough examination, he found my contribution to be insufficient to be the first author. My problem with this explanation is that three months ago, I still hold the position of the first author, but three months later, when the second author presses for publication, somehow my work is deemed insufficient. *Lastly, any suggestions* on my course of action when both aforementioned situations arise? Update/further questions: My principal investigator has tried to remove me from the position of the first author (as previously agreed to) to simply "acknowledging" my effort. Is this allowed, and just research malpractice? My guess is the PI really wants to have the paper published, and if I get to veto as an author, then I can't be an author anymore. What should I do in this case?<issue_comment>username_1: All authors must agree to publication; any co-author may delay publication, or withdraw, if they aren't satisfied by the results. (Intellectual property law prohibits publication without consent of all authors, in many jurisdictions.) Author ordering should be agreed early to avoid disputes. Renegotiation is possible, especially when circumstances change. No author may strip another of authorship. Any author may push for renegotiation of author ordering. Although an author delaying publication isn't reasonable grounds for reordering, it may be reasonable for reordering if delay is being introduced so that author duties change, e.g., when an author is going to do more work than initially considered. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This is not really a legal question, but one of academic standards and it would never be decided on a legal level. That's as far as the legality issue goes. However, there is a good chance that at least one side here is likely to be acting unethically or at least questionably, but this is outside of the realm of the legal. 1. Either your co-authors wish to publish a premature result and you are rightly unhappy that the work is not carried out to satisfaction. 2. Or you are unreasonably perfectionistic or perhaps even overpedantic and you wish to block your co-authors from publishing a perfectly acceptable result. We are not able to judge that. Basically, from a purely formal academic integrity point of view, you can sabotage your fellow authors by blocking them from publication. Your contribution is such that they cannot remove you from the author list without violating a core contract of academic authorship. In other words, strictly spoken, you can - at least as concerns academic rules - prevent them from publishing. They can not circumvent that without breaking academic integrity. That being said, if you would be sabotaging a publication without very good reason (as I say, we have no grounds to determine either way), this could be considered a violation if not of the letter of academic conduct, but of its spirit. A supervisor of such a student who is scrupulous in matters of academic integrity (the supervisor) would probably not force the issue on that paper and just cut their losses. However, they would be perfect in their right to cut off the student from any promising critical project in the future and might also bring the case to the academic misconduct case if they think the blocking was unreasonable. If indeed the prospective author would be found sabotaging the paper, this would not bode well for them; nobody likes to see their departments' PhD supervisions and/or research funding wasted. Of course, the OP might consider appealing to the academic integrity board on their own side to prevent publication of the paper without their authorship or consent. Alternatively, OP might contact the journal it was submitted to, but that is already an escalation beyond the institution, and probably should be only considered as next step. Note in all of that that the judgement of what would constitute a reasonable result is highly subjective and thus there is a considerable grey area of what would constitute a reasonable refusal to publish vs. an act of sabotage. I repeat: we have not enough information to come to either assumption, but I wanted to make sure OP has the full picture. It may therefore be a wiser decision to contemplate whether an appropriately moderate honest presentation of the - not so impressive - results would make a publication acceptable, rather than trying to block it in its entirety; after all, that's the result, honestly presented. Other scientists then know they do not need to walk down this path. To be honest, none of the above is really satisfactory; the best of all outcomes would be to entreat your coauthors with a convincing case as to what work needs to be done to bring the paper up to the standard that one would like to see it in rather than go into confrontation. If the results are not as desired, what alternative experiments/simulations could be done to achieve that. Upvotes: 3
2021/03/02	3,738	15,897	<issue_start>username_0: I am a second year PhD student studying at a prestigious university in the UK. My main supervisor recruited me 2 years ago just because he is interested in my field and hopes to develop a new direction for his research center. I have 3 supervisors but none of them has expertise in my current field. In fact, their fields are quite different from mine (in totally different disciplines) and consequently they cannot give effective supervision on my PhD research. For example, when I present my research they usually just say my research is good without any useful technical suggestions. In addition, my main supervisor and third supervisor meet me for supervision meeting every 3-6 months, and my second supervisor meets with me every 2 weeks. I don't think I get enough supervision during my PhD studies (my fellow students seem to meet with their advisors once a week), and so I am thinking about starting a new PhD at another university which is strong in my field but not as reputable as my current university. However, my parents (who are funding me) do not agree on this. They mainly care about the reputation of my current university and the diploma I get rather than the little supervision. I am quite confused about this. Considering my future plan is to work in academia, should I quit my current PhD and start a new PhD in this case?<issue_comment>username_1: You're a PhD student at a prestigious UK university, who is (I presume) halfway to completing. You've recently published your first paper, which was well received by your supervisors and your reviewers. But you don't seem happy with it. Perhaps you're suffering with impostor syndrome. That's nothing to worry about, just something to live with (or, preferably, get over). You currently meet with your main supervisor once every two weeks and you're concerned that they aren't an expert in your field. You'd like a supervisor that meets more frequently and is an expert, and you're considering moving universities to find such a supervisor. Rather than moving, maybe you can find a mentor, co-author a paper with an expert, or seek an internship. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: For PhD supervisors, an ideal outcome of a PhD trajectory is that the student learns to independently generate good research ideas, and perform solid investigation of those ideas following the tenets of the scientific method. Ideally, this results in several top-level publications, co-written by the student and the supervisors. You describe (including information from the comments) how you independently generated a good research idea, and managed to get its investigation published as a journal paper. If I were your supervisor, I would be happy with your progress. In fact, if I were your supervisor, I would be very reluctant to start rocking the boat: why would I interfere in something that is progressing nicely? You are achieving what you are supposed to achieve. It would be very silly of me to attempt to change the current situation: if I start micromanaging a productive PhD student, this may demotivate the student and harm productivity, which is the opposite of what I want. Your post clearly indicates that you expect more from your supervisors. It is important to explore that; you owe it to yourself to make the most of your PhD trajectory. But I cannot see from your post exactly what is missing. You write that you expect "useful technical suggestions on the research", but if your research gets published, what technical suggestions are there to be made? I think it would be prudent if you ask yourself precisely what it is that you are missing, because if you can formulate this precisely, you might also be able to communicate to your supervisors clearly what you expect them to additionally contribute. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: It sounds like you're starved for colleagues directly in your area. Assuming you haven't already, you could just contact the experts at the other less reputable university. Tell them what you're doing, and ask them questions about their own work. Propose writing a joint paper if you think that makes sense, or visiting a seminar they run (or zooming one). It doesn't matter really what you propose - you just want to form a relationship with experts in your area. Once you have, you'll get a better idea of where what you're doing fits in. Also, reluctance to co-author a paper isn't necessarily a sign of disapproval or low opinion of the work. It could just be straight up honesty in not wanting to take someone else's hard work. Also it makes sense to be explicit with your supervisors, explaining that you would like to continue in academia, and asking whether you're doing enough to secure a post-doc, and where you could do this. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Firstly: I have been in the exact same spot than you. I did a PhD in a field my supervisor barely had any knowledge of. I taught everything myself and yes in hindsight I would not have done it again, however I still feel that I gained much deeper knowledge than being supervised fully so you definitely have an advantage here as everything you do is YOUR achievement, it did not happen because someone told you to do X and Y. This is something that makes you an independent researcher, as suggested by Wetenschaap. However, I feel with you that the lack of exchange is frustrating. Yet, I would not quit after two years as I also think you are doing well. I am not sure how common this is in UK but could you go for an internship or plan a research collaboration with another group from the University you would want to start over? This way you get a cool new project with some post-doc/PhD student and get some exchange. I know currently everything is really messy with Covid but try to look for other ways to meet PhD students in the field and exchange your ideas. This way you can stay where you are, complete the two years and still talk to peers. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Your experience feels very familiar to me. My field is economics. Back in the naughties I got a PhD from Oxford (technically, a D.Phil). While a small number of students were part of a "team" of researchers, were given assignments by their supervisor, and got joint publications for their effort, most of the students were left to figure it all out on their own: some did, some didn't. Many didn't. The amount of supervision you describe would have overwhelmed most of us. I had only one supervisor and met him once every two months. Some of the students I knew would meet their supervisor only twice a year. As head of one of the Colleges, my supervisor would meet me in his gigantic office from behind his gigantic desk. I would sit on an armchair with my notes at my feet. Unlike most of the supervisors, he'd actually read my stuff. He would point out a typo (that "t" on page 12, line 5, must be an "i"), climb on a ladder to grab an obscure book he'd edited in the sixties, would urge me to read it: It had no relevance to the problem and even if it did would be outdated by about forty years. We would be interrupted a couple of times by phone calls from the Chancellor or the Bank of England. This went on for a couple of years until he said, "well it looks like you've got yourself a thesis", we'd better ask around for a committee: Stiglitz, no, he wouldn't let you talk, Phelps, no I think he's off to Argentina, how about X and Y?". And with that I had a committee for my thesis. A committee but no thesis. Had he confused me for another one of his students? I asked for 6 months and in a frenzy wrote whatever came to mind. I honestly didn't think I was going to pull it off and had plans to re-enroll somewhere else, but in the end the stunt worked. At the end of the viva, one of the committee members asked me what I thought was my greatest contribution. I mumbled something vague. He said, "Well, as the train was pulling into Oxford station, I noticed that trick you did with the exponential. Wow, that made my day. We all need these tricks. I enjoyed that." The other committee members did not say a word and a few months later at a conference did not remember me. Don't worry about the lack of supervision. In my experience, that is/was the norm back in the twentieth century. Having a doctorate from a famous university is the best thing that ever happened to me. Been able to milk that for twenty years now. In my humble opinion, your parents are wise: stay, do what it takes, move on. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: This will be very dependent on what you want to do later and your personal character. I did my PhD with no supervision from my two thesis directors. I was extra happy with that because I could push the research in the direction that I was interested in. I ended up publishing very novel approaches (today that would be called AI-Powered Physics TM) without anyone trying to push a way or another. This said, I was not planning to stay in Academia afterwards (mostly due to the medieval organization, not because of research) and I am very independent - so that was an ideal situation for me. I wanted to have a PhD for personal pride (since I started it), because it helped me to understand research and science, and as a useful entry on my CV. YMMV. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: have you discussed your situation with your current supervisors? Before making any dramatic move I would suggest you clearly and openly make your needs and concern clear to them. There may be a myriad of reasons why they don't seem to give you all the attention you'd want, not necessarily all negative: as others suggested here, maybe they are simply happy with your work? You will never know until you clarify with them. If you need more interaction with people in your field, they may be happy to have you collaborate with other teams (which would be good for their networking too), send you to conferences, having you spending visiting periods elsewhere... etc. So potentially there could be many opportunities which you will never know about until you make your needs clear. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: I know this is not what you are expecting to hear, but I believe the experience you get by doing an unsupervised PhD is superior to the one you would get as a supervised student. You are already publishing, so you are doing well, in spite of the lack of supervision. This is much closer to what real world experiences are like. You don't need a supervisor. Your supervisors act more like mentors than anything else. You need peers and collaborators, and a long term plan. The professors supervising you can't help you with your technical issues, but they could help you find someone who can. What you need is close collaborators. You can meet such people at conferences, and if not, your many supervisors could introduce you to someone in your field they know and trust. You can also pester your advisors to invite someone whose work is close to yours to give a talk at your university. Restarting the PhD somewhere else is worth it only if you enter a very strong group working in your field, and you can be sure you have both senior and junior researchers that will work with you. If I were in your situation, I'd rather find good collaborators, and try to work with them, especially if travel money is not too scarce (assuming travel is possible). Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: * This would very counterproductive in almost all aspects--for the same reason that no one is making >1 diploma, or >1 Phd (with very rare exceptions). * You complain about the lack of supervision, but think pragmatically and try to build connections with experts in the field. * By working at you current place you have an advantage of having interdisciplinary connections (with your supervisors). This is quite valuable. * It is good for a PhD student to get a broader view. If you get into narrowly specialized team, you will be missing this opportunity. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: I can help with this one from personal experience! I have finished a PhD with little to no supervision. To give you an example of what I mean, my advisor worked in a completely different area and hired me just because he was interested in a discipline and wanted to explore that by having a student. During my entire PhD, he was extremely supportive as a mentor and a friend, but academically speaking there was effectively zero supervision. He had no knowledge in my topic, could not guide me research wise or support me when I encountered difficulties, and had no knowledge of even the introductory aspects of my field. This is not to discredit him, he is a brilliant researcher in his field, he just had no knowledge in mine and had no interest in learning it either. I had some very difficult moments where I experienced problems and felt very alone. I could not get the help I needed and his support came mostly in the form of statements like "Don't worry, it will be fine". I don't know how much this mirrors your situation, but honestly I have a hard time imagining a situation with less supervision than I had. Here are some thoughts I can give. Trust your advisors a bit more than you currently do. They may not have experience in the field, but they have experience of what good/bad work is. They can judge the merits of something they may not be familiar with simply by intuition over decades of experience. Moreover, assuming they are supportive and kind otherwise, their letter of recommendations can go a long way especially since they are at a prestigious university. A letter saying that the student's research was more or less independent speaks wonders. At the end of the day, if you want to continue academia you will have to become an independent researcher anyway. No one is going to guide your hand. The fact that you get a bit of a "tough love" approach and become independent from day 1 may be a terrible experience at first but it can be very helpful later on. A lot of postdocs struggle at first because they never had to do anything independently, they were guided all the way. You don't have to worry about that. Overall, I strongly recommend you stay in your current program unless you dislike it for other reasons. I know it sucks, trust me, but at the end of the day the best case scenario for an advisor is to have a strong and independent student. It seems like you are exactly just that. They don't have the need to micromanage you or to guide you perhaps because this appears to not be needed. Things will work out and you will be stronger for it. Not to mention that going to a completely new place is always a bit of a gamble. What if things don't work out there either as you would have hoped? Then you went to a less reputable university for nothing. Looking back at my case from years of perspective, perhaps my advisor indeed had no need to interfere exactly because things were going smoothly even when I felt they weren't. If something ain't broke don't fix it as the saying goes. It probably is the same in your case. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: Continue to pursue your degree at your current institution. Seek an advisor outside of your current institution, and add them to your committee. That way, you can get the best of both world. This is fairly common in the US, especially at Universities near national labs. I have a friend at NIST who is not a professor at University of Maryland (UMD), but is currently supervising 4 PhD students from UMD. All of them have an "academic advisor" at UMD who are the committee chair, but are not the direct research advisor. All in all, this is good because it will help for you to start building relationships with additional people. Or course, this should be done with the consent of your current advisors. Upvotes: 1
2021/03/02	3,661	15,559	<issue_start>username_0: I worked before as a freelancer writer where I would review some tech products (phones, websites, online services... etc) and post them on YouTube (channels which I do not control), and both my voice and picture were appearing in these videos. Now that I graduated from my Masters program, I want to pursue my PhD and teach in the university. I would like to start publishing some papers as well in my field. However, my past online identity is haunting me; Anyone can search my name and instead of finding my Google Scholar page as the first result, they would see me talking about the features of iPhone 7 in a YouTube video, and it is embarrassing for me. Some political articles that I published online are also embarrassing for me as I enter the academic world. Do most people in academia suffer from the same thing? How can one get rid of this past online identity before entering the professional academic life? And how can I be sure no one uses parts of this old identity against me in the future?<issue_comment>username_1: You're a PhD student at a prestigious UK university, who is (I presume) halfway to completing. You've recently published your first paper, which was well received by your supervisors and your reviewers. But you don't seem happy with it. Perhaps you're suffering with impostor syndrome. That's nothing to worry about, just something to live with (or, preferably, get over). You currently meet with your main supervisor once every two weeks and you're concerned that they aren't an expert in your field. You'd like a supervisor that meets more frequently and is an expert, and you're considering moving universities to find such a supervisor. Rather than moving, maybe you can find a mentor, co-author a paper with an expert, or seek an internship. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: For PhD supervisors, an ideal outcome of a PhD trajectory is that the student learns to independently generate good research ideas, and perform solid investigation of those ideas following the tenets of the scientific method. Ideally, this results in several top-level publications, co-written by the student and the supervisors. You describe (including information from the comments) how you independently generated a good research idea, and managed to get its investigation published as a journal paper. If I were your supervisor, I would be happy with your progress. In fact, if I were your supervisor, I would be very reluctant to start rocking the boat: why would I interfere in something that is progressing nicely? You are achieving what you are supposed to achieve. It would be very silly of me to attempt to change the current situation: if I start micromanaging a productive PhD student, this may demotivate the student and harm productivity, which is the opposite of what I want. Your post clearly indicates that you expect more from your supervisors. It is important to explore that; you owe it to yourself to make the most of your PhD trajectory. But I cannot see from your post exactly what is missing. You write that you expect "useful technical suggestions on the research", but if your research gets published, what technical suggestions are there to be made? I think it would be prudent if you ask yourself precisely what it is that you are missing, because if you can formulate this precisely, you might also be able to communicate to your supervisors clearly what you expect them to additionally contribute. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: It sounds like you're starved for colleagues directly in your area. Assuming you haven't already, you could just contact the experts at the other less reputable university. Tell them what you're doing, and ask them questions about their own work. Propose writing a joint paper if you think that makes sense, or visiting a seminar they run (or zooming one). It doesn't matter really what you propose - you just want to form a relationship with experts in your area. Once you have, you'll get a better idea of where what you're doing fits in. Also, reluctance to co-author a paper isn't necessarily a sign of disapproval or low opinion of the work. It could just be straight up honesty in not wanting to take someone else's hard work. Also it makes sense to be explicit with your supervisors, explaining that you would like to continue in academia, and asking whether you're doing enough to secure a post-doc, and where you could do this. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Firstly: I have been in the exact same spot than you. I did a PhD in a field my supervisor barely had any knowledge of. I taught everything myself and yes in hindsight I would not have done it again, however I still feel that I gained much deeper knowledge than being supervised fully so you definitely have an advantage here as everything you do is YOUR achievement, it did not happen because someone told you to do X and Y. This is something that makes you an independent researcher, as suggested by Wetenschaap. However, I feel with you that the lack of exchange is frustrating. Yet, I would not quit after two years as I also think you are doing well. I am not sure how common this is in UK but could you go for an internship or plan a research collaboration with another group from the University you would want to start over? This way you get a cool new project with some post-doc/PhD student and get some exchange. I know currently everything is really messy with Covid but try to look for other ways to meet PhD students in the field and exchange your ideas. This way you can stay where you are, complete the two years and still talk to peers. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Your experience feels very familiar to me. My field is economics. Back in the naughties I got a PhD from Oxford (technically, a D.Phil). While a small number of students were part of a "team" of researchers, were given assignments by their supervisor, and got joint publications for their effort, most of the students were left to figure it all out on their own: some did, some didn't. Many didn't. The amount of supervision you describe would have overwhelmed most of us. I had only one supervisor and met him once every two months. Some of the students I knew would meet their supervisor only twice a year. As head of one of the Colleges, my supervisor would meet me in his gigantic office from behind his gigantic desk. I would sit on an armchair with my notes at my feet. Unlike most of the supervisors, he'd actually read my stuff. He would point out a typo (that "t" on page 12, line 5, must be an "i"), climb on a ladder to grab an obscure book he'd edited in the sixties, would urge me to read it: It had no relevance to the problem and even if it did would be outdated by about forty years. We would be interrupted a couple of times by phone calls from the Chancellor or the Bank of England. This went on for a couple of years until he said, "well it looks like you've got yourself a thesis", we'd better ask around for a committee: Stiglitz, no, he wouldn't let you talk, Phelps, no I think he's off to Argentina, how about X and Y?". And with that I had a committee for my thesis. A committee but no thesis. Had he confused me for another one of his students? I asked for 6 months and in a frenzy wrote whatever came to mind. I honestly didn't think I was going to pull it off and had plans to re-enroll somewhere else, but in the end the stunt worked. At the end of the viva, one of the committee members asked me what I thought was my greatest contribution. I mumbled something vague. He said, "Well, as the train was pulling into Oxford station, I noticed that trick you did with the exponential. Wow, that made my day. We all need these tricks. I enjoyed that." The other committee members did not say a word and a few months later at a conference did not remember me. Don't worry about the lack of supervision. In my experience, that is/was the norm back in the twentieth century. Having a doctorate from a famous university is the best thing that ever happened to me. Been able to milk that for twenty years now. In my humble opinion, your parents are wise: stay, do what it takes, move on. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: This will be very dependent on what you want to do later and your personal character. I did my PhD with no supervision from my two thesis directors. I was extra happy with that because I could push the research in the direction that I was interested in. I ended up publishing very novel approaches (today that would be called AI-Powered Physics TM) without anyone trying to push a way or another. This said, I was not planning to stay in Academia afterwards (mostly due to the medieval organization, not because of research) and I am very independent - so that was an ideal situation for me. I wanted to have a PhD for personal pride (since I started it), because it helped me to understand research and science, and as a useful entry on my CV. YMMV. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: have you discussed your situation with your current supervisors? Before making any dramatic move I would suggest you clearly and openly make your needs and concern clear to them. There may be a myriad of reasons why they don't seem to give you all the attention you'd want, not necessarily all negative: as others suggested here, maybe they are simply happy with your work? You will never know until you clarify with them. If you need more interaction with people in your field, they may be happy to have you collaborate with other teams (which would be good for their networking too), send you to conferences, having you spending visiting periods elsewhere... etc. So potentially there could be many opportunities which you will never know about until you make your needs clear. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: I know this is not what you are expecting to hear, but I believe the experience you get by doing an unsupervised PhD is superior to the one you would get as a supervised student. You are already publishing, so you are doing well, in spite of the lack of supervision. This is much closer to what real world experiences are like. You don't need a supervisor. Your supervisors act more like mentors than anything else. You need peers and collaborators, and a long term plan. The professors supervising you can't help you with your technical issues, but they could help you find someone who can. What you need is close collaborators. You can meet such people at conferences, and if not, your many supervisors could introduce you to someone in your field they know and trust. You can also pester your advisors to invite someone whose work is close to yours to give a talk at your university. Restarting the PhD somewhere else is worth it only if you enter a very strong group working in your field, and you can be sure you have both senior and junior researchers that will work with you. If I were in your situation, I'd rather find good collaborators, and try to work with them, especially if travel money is not too scarce (assuming travel is possible). Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: * This would very counterproductive in almost all aspects--for the same reason that no one is making >1 diploma, or >1 Phd (with very rare exceptions). * You complain about the lack of supervision, but think pragmatically and try to build connections with experts in the field. * By working at you current place you have an advantage of having interdisciplinary connections (with your supervisors). This is quite valuable. * It is good for a PhD student to get a broader view. If you get into narrowly specialized team, you will be missing this opportunity. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: I can help with this one from personal experience! I have finished a PhD with little to no supervision. To give you an example of what I mean, my advisor worked in a completely different area and hired me just because he was interested in a discipline and wanted to explore that by having a student. During my entire PhD, he was extremely supportive as a mentor and a friend, but academically speaking there was effectively zero supervision. He had no knowledge in my topic, could not guide me research wise or support me when I encountered difficulties, and had no knowledge of even the introductory aspects of my field. This is not to discredit him, he is a brilliant researcher in his field, he just had no knowledge in mine and had no interest in learning it either. I had some very difficult moments where I experienced problems and felt very alone. I could not get the help I needed and his support came mostly in the form of statements like "Don't worry, it will be fine". I don't know how much this mirrors your situation, but honestly I have a hard time imagining a situation with less supervision than I had. Here are some thoughts I can give. Trust your advisors a bit more than you currently do. They may not have experience in the field, but they have experience of what good/bad work is. They can judge the merits of something they may not be familiar with simply by intuition over decades of experience. Moreover, assuming they are supportive and kind otherwise, their letter of recommendations can go a long way especially since they are at a prestigious university. A letter saying that the student's research was more or less independent speaks wonders. At the end of the day, if you want to continue academia you will have to become an independent researcher anyway. No one is going to guide your hand. The fact that you get a bit of a "tough love" approach and become independent from day 1 may be a terrible experience at first but it can be very helpful later on. A lot of postdocs struggle at first because they never had to do anything independently, they were guided all the way. You don't have to worry about that. Overall, I strongly recommend you stay in your current program unless you dislike it for other reasons. I know it sucks, trust me, but at the end of the day the best case scenario for an advisor is to have a strong and independent student. It seems like you are exactly just that. They don't have the need to micromanage you or to guide you perhaps because this appears to not be needed. Things will work out and you will be stronger for it. Not to mention that going to a completely new place is always a bit of a gamble. What if things don't work out there either as you would have hoped? Then you went to a less reputable university for nothing. Looking back at my case from years of perspective, perhaps my advisor indeed had no need to interfere exactly because things were going smoothly even when I felt they weren't. If something ain't broke don't fix it as the saying goes. It probably is the same in your case. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: Continue to pursue your degree at your current institution. Seek an advisor outside of your current institution, and add them to your committee. That way, you can get the best of both world. This is fairly common in the US, especially at Universities near national labs. I have a friend at NIST who is not a professor at University of Maryland (UMD), but is currently supervising 4 PhD students from UMD. All of them have an "academic advisor" at UMD who are the committee chair, but are not the direct research advisor. All in all, this is good because it will help for you to start building relationships with additional people. Or course, this should be done with the consent of your current advisors. Upvotes: 1
2021/03/02	1,240	4,677	<issue_start>username_0: In France, the following are two of the main ways people get promoted in academic positions: 1. Maître de Conférences (assistant professor whose responsibilities include teaching as well as research) -> professeur (professor) and 2. Chargé de recherche (in charge of research) -> Directeur de recherche (director of research). Note that in the second sequence of academic promotions, one doesn't have to teach and the positions are mostly dedicated to research (although one can opt to teach if s/he wants to). My question is: while applying to a position (postdoc/permanent) in the team of a chargé de recherche where s/he is the PI of the project, should one address her/him as a professor ("Prof."), say in the cover letter? It's technically incorrect it seems, but perhaps no harm is done because their positions are equivalent to those of professors anyway. I'd like to know the viewpoint(s) of someone(s) who's familiar with the French system!<issue_comment>username_1: Use whatever title they use on their website. E.g., * Use Dr Alpha Bravo or Professor Alpha Bravo, if they appear. When titles aren't used, e.g., * Their website uses Alpha Bravo, PhD, you can rightly use Dr Alpha Bravo, but may favour Alpha Bravo, since they're discrete about their title. When no titles are used, you're probably safe with their name, e.g., Alpha Bravo. (Although, you may like to google their name, find and use the title that appears in the press.) Don't assume an academic adopts national conventions/stereotypes, especially a non-native. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: French academia is not big on titles. Whether it's by students, colleagues, or the administration, people are rarely if ever addressed by their titles. I'm a "maître de conférences" myself, and nobody addresses me as anything other than "Monsieur", and my colleagues of another gender are addressed as "Madame". That's it, no fluff, no "Prof Dr", no "Maître" -- which wouldn't be appropriate as this is how you address attorneys and notaries, not even "Dr". If you want to err on the side of the formality, which is perhaps better until you know more about the person in question and how they like to be addressed, you can call them "Prof". It's inaccurate, yes, but we are used to the outside world wanting to impose American title norms on us. You can take comfort in the fact that many institutions have "research professors", so a chargé de recherches could be viewed as a "junior/associate research professor", that you would address as "Prof", indeed. Personally I wouldn't care if a foreign applicant started an email with "Dear Mr. XYZ" (or Ms. as appropriate), and I doubt (m)any of my colleagues would. But I hesitate to give this advice, as it's possible that in some French academic subcultures some people give more importance to titles. I'm thinking of law and medicine, especially. However, do not ever address someone as "Dear Chargé de recherches Dupont" or "Dear CR Dupont". That's just not used as a salutation, even if it's the title used by that person on their website. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: As stated in a previous answer, the French academia does not use any title. The terms like "maître de conférences", "professeur des universités" are just the position you hold but not the title you have. If you write an email in French, the best way is to start by "Bonjour" or "Bonjour Monsieur, "Bonjour Madame". To be honest, since I am not a Ph.D. student anymore, I avoid using "Monsieur" or "Madame" because I think it can put a sort of hierarchy in the relationship. In most cases, you will receive an email starting by only "Bonjour". By the way, in the French system, it is not unusual to start an email by "Bonjour". In some cases, the person you contact can just call you by your first name "<NAME>" and use "vous" which is the formal "you" in French. It is also very usual to call somebody by his/her first name and use the formal "vous". Then, it can become weird if somebody calls you by your first name and you call him/her Madame/Monsieur. I just use Monsieur/Madame part for formal administration-related emails. The same story for the hierarchy applies because when the administration contacts you, the most cases, the email you receive is very formal and uses "Madame/Monsieur". Then, to avoid any hierarchic context, maybe it is better to start this kind of mail by "Madame/Monsieur". If you write your email in English, then you can just call Dear Professor X. It is not strange to receive this kind of email. You can use the same international norms used in the academia. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/02	1,674	6,852	<issue_start>username_0: I am a final year social sciences PhD student in the UK. A professor reached out to me and asked if I am interested in a three-day consultant work for their project and if so, what my day rate is. I am definitely interested in the opportunity but I am not sure how much the day rate is as I haven't worked like this before (freelance consultant). Would it be polite to ask them to provide the day rate? Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: It depends on who will pay any necessary taxes, but assuming you do, take a fair annual compensation for your skills and qualifications and divide it by about 240 or 250. If you have other expenses, then add those as well, computed similarly if necessary. In the US there are about 250 working days in a typical work year (5 days times 50 weeks). Elsewhere it is a bit less, I think. Some people can adjust it upwards substantially, others need to suggest a more moderate amount, but don't underestimate your worth. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Since you want the work (perhaps for its own sake as for the money) and you have the three days free of other obligations, you should be fairly paid. You don't need to live on the money from this gig. Using @username_1 's starting point, $50K annually is $25 per hour, $600 for the three day job. Perhaps that's the annual salary you'd earn as a new UK PhD in social science, if you can find a job - I've no idea. That's more than pay for routine data entry, but less than what consultants get who consult for a living. Thank the professor for reaching out - it is a mark of confidence in you. Then I think I might cautiously ask for $1000 (in pounds). Come down if they say it's too much, say yes to more if they say it's too little. Let us know what happens. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: No, do not ask the professor to choose a rate ============================================= Speaking as an academic who has recently obtained his PhD and who earns his living from freelancing and consultancy, I would not recommend bouncing the question back to the professor. If he/she already had a particular rate in mind, he/she would have said so at the time of offering the work. Instead, I would advise doing your own research into the "going rate" -- in other words, what other freelancers of comparable credentials and experience charge for the sort of engagement the professor is proposing. Many freelancers have websites or online profiles, and these will sometimes give an indication of what they would charge. You may also want to ascertain discreetly how the work will be funded (is the professor paying you out of his/her own pocket, or does he/she have funding from another source, and, if so, what?). In the last few years, I have charged figures in the range £70-£240 for a day's freelance work, depending on the "going rate" for the type of work, how much time and skill I think it will demand, whether I have to travel (and stay overnight away from home), whether the assignment is funded by a private individual or by an institution, how well I know the customer (and how much work I have done for him/her in the past). Discussing the price ==================== Deciding upon a quotation for freelance consultancy is tricky, especially if you are doing it for the first time. You could avoid committing to an exact figure too early by asking to discuss the project by telephone in the first instance. It is perfectly reasonable to say that you want to know more about what sort of work is required before quoting a day rate, and discussing it by telephone may allow you to get a better sense of what the customer wants. A reasonable customer will see this as a good sign that you are interested in doing the work and have a professional attitude. When it comes to actually agreeing a price, always put it in writing (electronic mail is fine), reiterating what was discussed by telephone. That way, you avoid misunderstandings later. When you give a quotation, you could qualify it with a statement such as "I am assuming that \_\_\_\_. Obviously, the rate would be different if \_\_\_." or "Based on what you have described, my day rate would be around \_\_\_\_, but I would need more details on \_\_\_." General pointers about freelancing ================================== * If you are doing unglamorous but highly skilled 'grunt' work (i.e.: if it is a so-called 'support' role), you can charge more. This applies especially in fields/endeavours where the 'headline acts' work for so-called "exposure" or volunteer for a "good cause". Last month, I provided a highly skilled 'support'-type contribution for a project where the 'headline acts' were not getting paid, but where I did get paid. Basically, if your name is going to be a tiny footnote in the acknowledgements, you should charge more than if your name is going to be on the list of authors (realistically, a couple of days' consultancy work is unlikely to be enough of a contribution to qualify for authorship/co-authorship). * As a freelancer, you have no job security, and this should be reflected in a (significantly) higher day rate than for a permanent employee. A good analogy can be seen in mobile telephone service providers, where 'pay-as-you-go' costs more per minute/SMS/MB than a 'pay a fixed monthly amount for a fixed allowance', but would be better value for those who do consume relatively few minutes/SMS/MB. * As a freelancer, you are responsible for your own pension arrangements, and this should be reflected in a higher day rate than for a permanent employee (who usually benefits from employer contributions to a pension scheme on top of his/her salary). * As a freelancer, you are responsible for collecting payment and declaring your income to HMRC in a tax return (assuming you make more than £1000 from all freelance work/enterprise in a tax year). Making an invoice, chasing up payment, and doing your tax return are time-consuming administrative chores that a freelancer has to do but an employee does not have to do (then again, the bureaucracy of some big organisations is even worse). * Be careful not to underestimate the difficulty of the job -- it is awkward to increase your fee significantly above what you quoted originally (unless the customer has made substantial extra requests). Speaking from personal experience, I have often found myself wishing I had demanded more money for an assignment after realising it was harder or more time-consuming than I had anticipated. * As a freelancer, you are responsible for your "continuing professional development" in your own (unpaid) time and at your own expense, unlike a permanent employee (whose employer will cover the cost and allow the employee to do it during salaried "work hours"). Upvotes: 2
2021/03/02	789	3,442	<issue_start>username_0: I had an interview with a potential Ph.D. supervisor, and along the way, he asked whether I am intending to apply to other similar Ph.D. programs? I said: Yes, but that's because I don't know how admissions work. Was that a good answer? What is supposed to be done in such situations? Also, when the professor says: Ok, I will work with you to write the best competitive statement of purpose. Does that mean he is going to accept you?<issue_comment>username_1: The obvious answer to the first is that you will apply until you are accepted into a suitable and interesting position. For the second, it has no implication other than that he is interested. He is willing to give you advice, but your admission can depend on several things. The SoP is only one of those. In some cases, depending of place and field, the professor may not be directly involved in decisions to accept you. But nothing is assured until you get an acceptance letter. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: What the potential supervisor really wants to know is whether he/she is your first choice. By "first choice", I mean "if we made you a fully funded offer but you also received other fully funded offers, would you accept our offer?". If the answer is yes, then he/she may be significantly more willing to help you write a strong application (not just for the position itself, but also for funding). Having said that, a reasonable supervisor would understand that people may change their mind as more information becomes available or if another place makes a significantly better offer in terms of funding. Your answer ("Yes, but that's because I don't how admissions work.") is not ideal, but a reasonable supervisor should be understanding of the fact that many applicants do not really know the system very well. Re: > > "I will work with you to write the best competitive statement of purpose" > > > That is not an offer of a place, but it is a good sign. It means what it says. The prospective supervisor is offering to review your application to his/her institution and give detailed advice on your statement of purpose. This may be very useful, and implies strongly that the prospective supervisor thinks you are a serious candidate. But he/she may be keeping his/her options open in case a stronger candidate applies. Or it may be that decisions on admission are not his/her sole prerogative (the exact process depends on the country and institution). Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Honestly I would try to keep the supervisor talking retrieving as much information as possible before ever making any assumptions that could harm my first impression. That being said. There is a missing verb in the phrase “I don’t how “in the original statement. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I agree that no one should limit themselves to one option. I might implied my answer in a manner as the only format rhetorically speaking. But allow me to give an alternative method. Before any interview practice a psychological path in first impression by the what if factors yes I do understand nerves and how they play a role. But if we educate ourselves before we fear less. Just a suggestion not saying I always do this myself but my goal is to help. We all need to believe in ourselves and give our brothers and sisters a boost of CONFIDENCE. Thank for any feedback Upvotes: 0
2021/03/03	451	1,928	<issue_start>username_0: I am a phd candidate in education. My doctoral program takes 3 years. However, I have worked very hard and got several publications that sole-authored. My supervisor thinks that I can finish my phd in 2 years and a few months, but I am not sure about this move. Most of eminent scholars that I look up to took their time and finsihed their phds within the normal timeframe, so I am thinking that it is not wise to take the risk and finish earlier than the usual time. I would like to have your take on this. Would the fact that I finish my phd in shorter time negatively affect my chances in getting a tenure-track academic position?<issue_comment>username_1: It likely doesn't matter much. The major question is whether finishing in two years will adversely affect the quality of your dissertation. If the quality of your publications is high and your dissertation makes a strong contribution to your field of research, it's unlikely that a search committee will care that you finished early. Depending on the type of institution you are applying to, they'll have specific criteria that they're looking for with regard to your ability to produce high-quality research, conduct high-quality teaching, etc. If you believe that taking a third year to finish your dissertation will help you produce better work, then you should take the third year. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The other thing to consider is how it will affect you financially. If you pay for your PhD yourself, then you will obviously save money by finishing early, and might get some refund on tuition fees, or avoid having to pay "continuation fees" when you submit at the end of the third year, but it takes time to get you graduated. Conversely if you are on a scholoarship or studentship, you might forfeit the final payments by finishing early. (although you'll be able to get a better paying job sooner). Upvotes: 0
2021/03/03	638	2,575	<issue_start>username_0: Where can I find a professor to review my doctoral thesis? My current professor has a turnaround of 5 to 6 weeks before getting back to me with suggested revisions. I was hoping to hire someone to give me quicker feedback and reduce the time my professor needs to review my doc.<issue_comment>username_1: Do you know the old saying that you can have something done 1) cheap, 2) fast, and 3) good - but you can only pick two of three? That applies here. There are not many professors available for hire for something like this. If you can even find one, I would suspect that they are not very good. Good researchers are generally busy people, who would not want to commit to proof-reading some strangers' thesis. Unless, of course, you are willing to pay a large amount of money. I am not at professor level myself, but I am qualified to read a thesis and provide comments. If you wrote and asked me, I would probably say no, because of the obvious ethical problems. But if I entertain the thought for a moment, I would ask my standard rate for external consultations which, depending on who is asking, is 2-300 €/hour. If you are willing to pay something like this, then it is a matter of sending someone you know to be good an email and asking. Expect many people to say no before someone accepts. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: > > Where can I find a professor to review my doctoral thesis? > > > In your bibliography: You need a reviewer working in your field, so surely you must cite their work. > > I was hoping to hire someone > > > A professor may feel they cannot morally accept payment from a PhD student subsisting on a stipend. Some may be swayed by independently wealthy PhD students with the means to pay their consultancy rate. (Offering an hourly rate from the outset might entice such professors; you're merely offering a business transaction.) Others may reject on the principle that wealthy students shouldn't be able to buy an advantage. Both professors may cast judgement. It's unusual to hire a professor to review your thesis. A professor you've collaborated with may be willing to (partially) read your thesis for free. But, you cannot demand a prompt turnaround and you should expect some delay. Your peers may be willing to review for free too, especially if you offer to return the favour. Seek those you cite, work alongside (in your department), or those you've met (at conferences or elsewhere). Finally, you might look for professional reviewing services that are widely advertised. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/03	1,051	4,301	<issue_start>username_0: I am currently writing a conference paper (an IEEE conf, if that matters) in which I include a piece of code. Pertaining to the license of the code, should I, at the beginning of the code, write something like ``` -- Author: <NAME>, 2021. -- License: MIT License. ------> this -- Below is code to help you make a better world ... ``` Or should I just put the code without any license terms? In any case, what would the license of the code be? Related questions: [License of code accompanying a published article](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/59121/license-of-code-accompanying-a-published-article) [Is there a default license for code libraries that accompany scientific research papers](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/121453/is-there-a-default-license-for-code-libraries-that-accompany-scientific-research) [Include code snippet which is licensed under the MIT License in a paper](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/110558/include-code-snippet-which-is-licensed-under-the-mit-license-in-a-paper)<issue_comment>username_1: Ask your university's lawyers. They'll need to check whether the publisher's copyright agreement attempts to overreach, perhaps resulting in the inadvertent transfer of rights to the publisher. Alternatively, include code extracts under fair use, attributing yourself as the programmer (rather than the author), removing any claim that the code is a contribution, and mentioning somewhere that the code is under MIT License. (Strictly speaking, university lawyers should still check whether you've complied with fair use and not violated the MIT license.) --- I assume code was written by the OP. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: I would suggest that you deposit your code (with whatever license you want) in [zenodo](https://zenodo.org/) and include a link to it from your paper, in addition to including it in your text. It doesn't matter what the conference copyright transfer is if your code is released under MIT. I guess they could refuse to take your paper as a result but that's never happened to the best of my knowledge. As there is no provision for revoking the MIT licence, even if you give them the copyright, you'll be able to do anything you want with the code because it is licensed to you under the MIT license (including continuing to distribute it), as will anyone else who obtains it from zenodo. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: If you publish something and don't give an explicit license (US, anyway), the default is "all rights reserved". You can provide the license elsewhere if you like, as long as you still hold copyright. But if you transfer copyright to someone else, and it doesn't already have an explicit license, then they own copyright and you can no longer provide a license. If you do provide a license before copyright transfer then, for most such licenses, the license is "sticky" and can't be withdrawn, even by the new copyright holder. If you do that without informing the new copyright owner then you can be in some trouble, since you can no longer transfer "all rights", but only the limited rights you still hold. Some publishers, including conferences, will be fine with this. Others not and you could wind up having a paper rejected/withdrawn. I suspect IEEE might be lenient here, but they need to be informed of any prior license to anything they publish. Putting it in the paper itself makes it obvious, of course. However, it isn't where you provide the license terms (in the paper or elsewhere), but when you detail the license terms, assuming that you can, at all. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Technically, you should include the full MIT license at the head of any major source files in your code. ([here's a link to the full license text](https://github.com/git/git-scm.com/blob/main/MIT-LICENSE.txt)). Since you are using the MIT license, which is incredibly permissive, it functionally doesn't make much of a difference if you include it or not in all your source files. This is assuming you are posting a link to the actual code (e.g. to the github page or personal website etc.). If you are posting the code in your paper, definitely do not include the license there, as no one ever does that. Upvotes: 0
2021/03/03	806	3,284	<issue_start>username_0: Good Day - I am writing a review paper of some techniques, which involve mathematical models. The authors utilize some equations to represent their model comprised of different components. Since I need to explain their methodology, its not possible to do it without referring to their equations. So I have to add their equations in the review. I will properly cite every author's work, which makes sense as I am explaining their work. What could be the issues I might face when it comes to plagiarism in this case?<issue_comment>username_1: I assume that the work of other authors that you are referring to has already been published. You can add someone else's equation in your work, but it has to be absolutely clear to the reader that this is the original work of someone else. And it must be clear if you chose to modify it a bit, e.g., by using different greek letters, or maybe shorten it a bit for the benefit of your readers. We all lean heavily on other's work; plagiarism is about making the impression that the work is yours. It can for sure be a bit difficult in the beginning to reference correctly. This two-pager by Neidinger can be a place to start: <https://zdaugherty.ccnysites.cuny.edu/teaching/plagiarism.pdf> Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Plagiarism is representing the work of another as you own. You aren't doing this here if you properly cite the work, so no, it isn't plagiarism. Just make sure that your citation is somehow "attached" to the equations, perhaps by using appropriate phrasing when including them in addition to the citation. "The following, from the paper:...". Don't confuse simple copying with plagiarism. Even paraphrasing can be plagiarism if it isn't cited. I'll also assume here that you don't have copyright issues (copying too much from covered works), since there are some exceptions for mathematical work. But copyright and plagiarism are, again, different issues. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Since you will properly cite every author's work, you shouldn't face any plagiarism issues. Just make sure to explain that the mathematical models include the equations you present. For instance: > > Alice, Bob, and Charlie propose a mathematical model comprising Equations (1)-(3) [ABC21]. > > > You can then go on to explain a bit more about the model and present each of the equations. It is absolutely clear to the reader that each of those equations belongs to Alice, Bob, and Charlie, rather than you. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: Following up on my comments, you state that your context is writing a review article on variational approximations. There's no need to cite individual equations. The standard format might be: "Rasmussen et al 2021 introduce the SuperVar method, which uses a factorised joint p(x, y) = p(x)p(y). Under these assumptions, they show that [ equations ]. They also bound the variance of the SuperVar estimator as [ equations involving a,b,c ] where a,b,c are some things." Since this is a review article, there's no a priori expectation that any equations/results are your own. So much so that if you were to give any of your own results, I'd point that out, rather than pointing out equations from other papers. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]