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
2021/03/03	1,354	5,261	<issue_start>username_0: I'm confused about a statement by [Israel Gelfand](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Gelfand) given in the book [TOPSY TURVY: A Book for All in One](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/1434375471) Page No:155 Why did [Israel Gelfand](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Gelfand) say “You have to be fast only to catch fleas,” and how does this phrase apply to researchers?<issue_comment>username_1: To me, at least, the metaphor seems clear. Anyone can pick up pennies off the street, but it takes hard work and time to amass a fortune. Hmmm. Another metaphor. If you want to make a reputation publishing trivial (or small) results, then you have to be fast, since they are available to most mathematicians in a subfield. But if you want to do great things (catch bears, for example), it will take time and effort. It will, necessarily be slower and that is ok as the results are more profound. The word "only" in the quote is very important. Yes, you need to be fast to catch small, fleeting, things, but only for that. Without that word, the meaning would be entirely different. Gelfand, of course, is known for some pretty profound work. They didn't result from 3 week research projects. And, this is only my speculation, since he can't be asked directly. Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Not an answer, but another "catch a flea" quote from a mathematician. > > In guessing a conundrum, or in catching a flea, we do not expect the > breathless victor to give us afterwards, in cold blood, a history of > the mental or muscular efforts by which he achieved success; but a > mathematical calculation is another thing. > > > <NAME> [A Tangled Tale](http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/29042) Answers to Knot 4 Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I am only speculating, but the meaning in this context seems clear to me: "You only need to be quick about generating and publishing material when the material is relatively trivial." The implication is that you can take your time, not only not rushing, but even being somewhat slow, when you are generating momentous material, that is to say, solving big problems. Furthermore, "fleas" may allude to opportunities to generate trivial new mathematical content in the form of minor nitpicks, adjustments, corrections, and additions to a recently published big breakthrough. These "fleas" are thus perhaps small spin-offs from recent breakthroughs that are easily seen by everyone. There may be an allusion to a woolly mammoth or other large animal, brought down by some great hunter, that has fleas on it. You would need to be quick if you are to catch one or more of them before they have been caught by other hunters. I also get a sense that catching fleas is not something to be proud of. --- "You have to be fast only to catch fleas" unfortunately (I just realized) could be taken to mean, instead, "You always need to be fast. Even to catch only fleas, you have to be fast" In the context of mathematical research, that would mean you always need to quickly publish results, even trivial ones. If Gelfand meant "You don't have to be fast except to catch fleas", perhaps he should have said so, or "You only have to be fast to catch fleas". Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: This is just speculation, but as a native Russian speaker, I'm pretty sure this is a literal translation of a Russian saying, better translated as "You only need haste when catching fleas" (Спешка нужна только при ловле блох). Since Israel Gelfand had lived in USSR, I think it's pretty likely he was referencing it. It's pretty much a generic "haste makes waste" proverb that means you shouldn't rush and that you should think before doing something. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: I don't think this is accurate any more, unfortunately people are expected to come up even with big results with a reasonable amount of speed. Wiles and Fermat's Last Theorem is a bit of an exception if I remember rightly, as he was salami slicing and publishing intermediate results as separate papers on the way to the proof to give the illusion of productivity (see the book by Singh). Edit: I am aware that Wiles was publishing important articles in this period and I am just paraphrasing his own words from an interview, but I appreciate that he was being modest/self-deprecating and simplifying what actually happened to make it understandable at a popular level. I'm also interested in the extent to which this applies to scientific research and physics. I guess it still applies but then there really is a race for results and sometimes time is of the essence. In general a lot of emphasis is given towards those people that can make very quick (not necessarily non-trivial) extensions of other people's work or to come up with quick explanations of recent experimental results. In physics, Einstein said he had no time for those physicists who 'find where the board is thin and drill lots of small holes' ie. he was interested in things which took a lot of thought and conceptual understanding rather than just choosing what looked to be an area with lots of quick results which can be obtained with relative ease and speed. Upvotes: 1
2021/03/03	1,129	5,193	<issue_start>username_0: I got an opportunity to collaborate writing a mathematics paper with some professor at my university, but I'm suspecting my role won't be much more significant except doing menial work in the form of writing dozens of lines of code using Mathematica and helping my professor computing things. I can probably get in my name as a possible collaborator, but I am wondering is it really worth putting in the effort into it to do so? While I'm aware that research experience is taken into account while considering grad school applications, I am also aware that putting into papers in which I had menial contribution into my CV might even carry negative weight, in the sense they might suspect I'm trying to game the system without really doing anything substantial. Is it worth pursuing this project instead of, say, learning some new math by myself (not under the supervision of someone)? Even if I do, what are some ``red-flags" to notice for, which can indicate this might not be a great idea? [PS: I don't want to go into details regarding the subject matter of the paper, but it's a relatively advanced topic that requires a fairly good mastery of the core undergrad curriculum to understand. I believe I have such an understanding, but I'm not sure if my role in writing the paper would reflect that/I would have the opportunity to use my understanding, especially if I'm not considering the professor as my main recommenders for grad schools].<issue_comment>username_1: If you have holes in your knowledge then a course might be (marginally) better, but any involvement in a research program is a plus. You want to arrange it so that you get an acknowledgement in the paper for your work (assuming co-authorship is impossible). Then it is a line you can put in your CV. I doubt that it would be seen in a negative light, but a formal ack is important. And, if the PI later turns out to be one of your letter writers, perhaps they can mention it also for reinforcement. Beyond how it looks it is a good thing do do in itself, as it gives you an idea about research "as it is played". Even programming "at the edges" should give you a deeper insight in to the problem at hand. And insight is the real goal. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: > > writing dozens of lines of code using Mathematica and helping my professor computing things > > > That sounds like normal undergraduate research to me. It's probably not a menial contribution. Very few people can write a dozen lines of Mathematica code. If you do a good job, this could be a big help to your graduate school applications and even later career. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: The level of involvement you describe is what admission people will expect when they see that an undergraduate student coauthored a mathematics research paper with a professor. In the rare cases where an undergraduate contributed more significantly, it would be up to the professor to explain this in their letter of recommendation. Thus, there is no reason to feel that you'd be claiming more recognition than you deserve. Of course, having a publication on your CV makes it a natural topic for questions during admissions interviews. The idea here would be that a curious and smart person will pick up enough about a project they are contributing to to have an engaged conversation about it. Having contributed to a mathematics research project is a strong plus for a PhD application, because it means that you have at least a faint idea of what mathematics research is, and your decision to engage in more of it is thus better informed. Mathematics research is quite different from learning pre-existing math, and not everyone who enjoys and excells at the latter will also do so for the former. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I just want to clarify something: writing the code that will solve the problem your professor wants solved should NOT be considered "scut work". This needs to happen anyway regardless of who does it, and is actually a meaningful contribution. This code will most likely be part of the final research document that gets reviewed, and as such can probably be considered a critical part of the paper. It's important that this code does exactly what the algorithm in the paper describes, and being able to correctly transcribe these formulas into Mathematica code shows domain knowledge in both the research domain and Mathematica. This is valuable knowledge for the time when you're doing your own research projects and don't have someone under your tutelage to do this work for you. And who knows, you might be able to suggest improvements to your professor and provide an even more meaningful contribution beyond just converting their work to a computer-readable format. REAL scut work would be manual data entry: thoughtlessly transcribing thousands of lines of data that were unable to be read in manually for whatever reason, with no domain knowledge required and no option to even consult with the professor for potential ways to optimize things that may or may not be possible and change your contribution to something that rises above menial labor. Upvotes: 0
2021/03/03	7,071	28,407	<issue_start>username_0: My principal investigator (PI) and I tend to get along pretty well; however, he is often moody and has some quirks about him. Sometimes this means that he is in a bad mood and will take it out on me. He is also very gossipy about other people at the university. Nonetheless, he thinks I am doing very well in our lab and in the Biochemistry PhD program. I always keep my cool with him, even if he is stressing me the f\ck out. However, there are times in which he really likes to pick on me in front of other students/faculty. It is almost exclusively when he has an audience. Sometimes it is benign - a funny joke, or something lighthearted. But other times, it really bothers me and I get extremely embarrassed. The times when it bothers me is when he makes a disparaging remark about something I said (even though he agrees with me), or will embarrass me when I am training an undergraduate research assistant on a protocol in our lab. He has told me before that I am awkward, which makes me incredibly anxious to talk to him. He is one of those people with zero filter, but am I right in thinking that there has to be a limit to this? Again, he only really embarrasses me in front of other people. When we talk one-on-one, everything seems fine; he will even occasionally tell me that I am talented. I mean, he does talk over me at times, but it is perhaps not abnormal for a male superior-female subordinate mentorship. I am a pretty thick-skinned person, but these interactions are exhausting, anxiety-provoking, and incredibly distracting from how I want to be spending my time (i.e. on research/coursework). Why is he acting like this? What could I do to mitigate the damage from this?* Keep in mind that, ironically, he is very sensitive. I have addressed something with him before and he took it as a personal attack, which indicates that he is often anxious and paranoid himself. Thus, my options are literally to just deal with these feelings in private and push through. This is what I have been doing, but it is starting to get old.<issue_comment>username_1: He's a jackass (probably because he's insecure). He might be unaware of how he's a jackass. In that case, you might be able to fix it. Politely asking him to stop, or asking another PI you have a good relationship with to speak with him are good options. This is most likely; academia is full of jackasses (several of them are in the comments here blaming you for this. ignore them), and it's not always the case that people can recognize this in themselves and try to address it without someone pointing it out. He might just be a complete willful jackass. In this case you're kinda screwed - if you ask him to stop he's just gonna get more subtle about it, and probably meaner. That said, you can always leave him for a better PI, and it's better to know he's a jackass and leave then not know and try to make it work for years. Either way if you have to ditch him for someone better, it's not you, it's him. So I guess the take-home message is that you do need to confront him about this, you should do it in a way that lets you work together in the future if he's willing to make changes, and you should immediately get out if he's not. EDIT - My experience has also been that insecure jackasses write letters of recommendation which are more focused on themselves, and end up inadvertently sabotaging their trainees (not always intentionally). There's also the risk that if he's just a complete jackass he'll just outright sandbag you. You might think you can get through the PhD and move on but if you want to stay in academia he's going to have the ability to affect your career for at least a decade. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: It is impossible for anyone here to answer the question as asked. None of us know your adviser or have observed your interactions. Moreover, we can only get the story from your perspective, so we are operating with incomplete data. The more pertinent question to ask is: "*Are there steps that I can take to change the tone or content of these interactions?" To that, I think the answer is probably yes. I would begin by speaking with him directly about the issue. It sounds like you've tried to discuss something else with him in the past, though we don't have enough information about that interaction to judge. You might start by simply saying, "I don't like when you ridicule me. It's demeaning and discouraging." It will be helpful to have specific examples ready. If he persists, you can escalate the issue to the university ombudsman. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: The best way to mitigate the effects of his behavior is to be really, really clear on what's happening and stop making excuses for him. This will help you separate out blaming yourself for something you have no control over: his bad behavior. It's your best chance at preserving your mental health while you have to work with him. This behavior you describe from him is toxic, and it is very likely intentional. He has demonstrated that he has the self control to not make you uncomfortable in one-on-one interactions. He chooses* to make you uncomfortable in front of an audience. Also, teasing in any context, but especially in professional situations, isn't fun anymore when the target repeatedly shows discomfort. Teasing is only acceptable at work when all parties are benefitting from the relaxed atmosphere. Finally, his sensitive/negative reaction to you asking him to stop has the following effect: it creates as much friction as possible so that you won't keep complaining and will allow him to continue enjoying making you uncomfortable and embarrassing you. He is an adult and should be able to handle hearing, "hey, this was all in good fun at first, but I'm not having fun anymore, and I'd like you to stop." A person managing a lab should have the capacity to listen to that. If he can't handle that conversation, he is the problem, not you, OP. Also, I would try to avoid speculating about why he's like this or what's going on in his head. It's getting you more wrapped up and emotionally invested in keeping the peace with him, which will make it more painful when he decides to be cruel. Try to decouple from his thoughts/emotions, and just focus on behavior. His behavior is unacceptable. You've asked him to stop, he refuses. That means he's wrong to be saying these things to you. Try to keep that in mind, and hopefully it will help you stay less stressed out and not internalize the negative and inappropriate things he's saying. ETA: Upon rereading your question, it looks like you may not have directly asked him to stop teasing, but that you know him well enough to know it will go badly. You have the higher moral high ground if you directly ask him to stop, and I would try it once, but you know him best. If he's created an environment where you are sure speaking up will just cause more difficulty, he's still the problem and my advice stands. Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: First off, nothing about his behavior is acceptable or excusable, and if you weren't in his lab the ideal solution would be to get away from him and never look back. What you're experiencing is absolutely a form of abuse. Unfortunately, I'm assuming you want to finish your degree with minimal interruption and without having to start over, which is totally understandable. Obviously we can't actually diagnose why he's doing this, but, far from being some kind of harmless insecurity, his behavior - particularly the combination of putting others down while being super sensitive to criticism himself - sounds a lot like narcissist traits to me. My suggestion would be to use the [Grey Rock](https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/toxic-relationships/201911/the-price-and-payoff-gray-rock-strategy) strategy of dealing with toxic relationships, which should work regardless of his motivations. These sorts of people often thrive on the disorder and attention that comes with their erratic behavior. If you're reacting negatively, or feeling bad, or trying to discuss it with him like you would a reasonable adult, or literally any other response, that's both interesting and part of the point of his behavior. The gist of the Grey Rock strategy is to make yourself as uninteresting as possible to this sort of person. It can be hard to enact, but it can be incredibly liberating when you stick to it. Do your work, collaborate when necessary, and show zero emotional reaction to anything he does. Don't laugh, don't cry, don't complain. Another way to frame it is "customer service polite". Smile and do business with him with no real emotion behind it. This serves two purposes. First, it helps you emotionally distance yourself from the abuse, and second, it makes you very boring and uninteresting to the abuser. Both are good. Now obviously you will need to evaluate as you go here, in case he tries to escalate his abuse. I would also strongly suggest discussing this with an advisor or counselor in advance, both for your own well-being, and as a hedge against escalation. I'm sorry you found yourself in this spot! Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Over many years, I have learned how to deal with people like this. There are several ways forward but they depend on your character. For this reason there is no "correct" answer. A very simple riposte to a cruel joke is just to say, "That's not very nice." I learned this from a woman who was an out and out bully to others and would go out of her way to embarrass them. If anyone tried to do it back to her, she would literally say, "That's not very nice" in a calm and collected way and then change the subject. People who are quick-thinking can come back with a funny remark. I'm not like that. Sometimes I don't even realise I've been insulted until afterwards. The method that works for me as a slow but deep thinker is to ask questions at an opportune moment, even weeks later, and keep going until I get an answer. Example I've been meaning to ask you. A couple of weeks ago, you said XYZ in front of the students. Was that a joke or did you intend it as a real criticism? If they say it's a real criticism, say, "Thanks for the feedback. I'll give it some thought" If they say it's a joke, then next time he says something you can say to the room in general, "Don't worry, he's always like that. He's just joking." --- If they continue at a later date, you can simply ask in private, in a neutral tone, "Were you trying to embarrass me the other day?" If they say Yes, you can say, "Oh, that's a bit mean of you. I hope you won't do it again." If they say No, you can say, "Oh well, you did embarrass me. I'd prefer it if you didn't." --- The point is not to reproach the person. It is to make them pause and think about what they are doing. Do it repeatedly until they get the message. I could say more but I have found this works for me. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_6: You have to act officially on this matter. It has got to the point where any risk of confrontation is outweighed by the reality of distress on your part. With a trusted friend (perferably someone working outside the institution) as a witness, go to the Head of Department (do not entertain any attempts by the HoD to demote the matter to a professor in your research group) and say that you have a serious complaint to make about the PI. The HoD, in the interest of fairness, should immediately summon the PI (plus a witness of their choice) to the meeting so that the accused can hear the accuser with the HoD listening. The PI has a right of reply. The HoD can ask questions of both parties. At the end, the HoD may either decide there and then or else ask you to let the matter be considered for a while. if the HoD's decisions on the matter are not workable to you, you have to consider your next steps in the context of university procedure and in law. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: I think his behavior is wrong. I've worked with two people who routinely did that to me. The first one almost ran me out of academia. The second was my PhD adviser who did that just because he was a bully. Actually, they were both bullies, if I think of it. Working with the first guy was really stressful for me, and we never really made progress. With my PhD adviser, I just found a way to tolerate his occasionally insufferable personality, and we did a lot of great work together. I actually think it was one of the good periods in my academic life. The difference between the two guys was that my PhD adviser really cared if I made it or not. So, although I thought of leaving him, I stayed because he took his role seriously. After three years of PhD, I got used to his rough edges, and him to mine, and we were finally doing good research together. What I mean to say by this example is that the main thing to look at is your bottom line. Is the adviser helping you advance with your PhD research? Are you getting published together? Is he paying for your research? Is he sending you to summer schools, conferences, is he connecting you with future collaborators or employers? If all those questions above have a positive answer, maybe you should find ways to deal with his quirks and inappropriate behavior. If not, you should just leave him. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: I have been struggling throughout my PhD to figure out how to deal with my PI who is very much like yours. Similar to your situation, my PI is famous for being moody. Everyone in the group must be very careful talking with him when he obviously seems mad, which happens frequently for around every three days. Sometimes, he asks someone who is unlucky enough into his office and yells at him/her for at least 2 hours. Once I was asked to stay in the lab until 11 pm to listen to his personal lectures without rest and dinner. Another student was shouted at for 5 hours in his office every week for about 2 months. During this long time, nothing was solved actually. He just complains about every mistake from us he remembers since he knows us. He just wants to release his mood. He humiliates people using very bad words. Once in a lab meeting, a student who just asked for a sick leave said one of her family members had COVID. My PI replied, "Now I see what your family gene is like." We were shocked but nobody dared to say a word. He provides very little help within academia. For his 2-hour lectures, the most frequent sentence is like "You did something, this shows you're xxx(lazy, not careful, not honest, not reading)." We don't dare to ask him questions because he'll judge us and just asks us to read the paper. No contributing answers were given. Our researches are all very slow and our group hasn't published any paper for nearly 5 years. He doesn't financially support us in our study and conferences. We need to write a report if we want to buy expensive reagents or use expensive equipment. He eats his lunch 1/2 of the time in our office. This means during 12-2 pm, we need to either read the paper or join him if we want to eat in our office. This is very stressful. He'll be furious if we take a vacation for more than 3 weeks a year. Though our university allows 8 weeks of vacation per year, nobody in our lab had a break for more than 4 weeks in total every year. The result of this toxic environment is: up to now, among the 7 students I know in this lab, 1 had the autoimmune disease during her study and her face was ruined; 1 student nearly didn't pass her PhD viva; 6 had to extend the time of study because of anxiety or depression. 2 students became toxic themselves - they not only gave my PI an insulting name, but also avoid helping others in the lab to see them being yelled at by my PI. No undergrads or master students remained in our lab after "a taste" of this environment. When I found the situation unhealthy in the first year of my PhD, I started to try many solutions: (1) Directly tell him that I'm not happy about this. He didn't care and thought I challenged his authority. He said directly: "I won't change. You need to change." After this, I was worse treated like a punishment. His "punishment" is: first, he said my writing/experiment was very bad and I need to change; when I did according to what he said, he judged me again and changed back to the previous way. He used this method with other “brave” students as I heard and success every time. (2) Cry. This worked to his tone and reduced humiliating words. But he used a soft tone giving lectures for even longer. He would also add "I do this because I care about you" when he sees us cry. (3) Tell my college tutor and advisor. They helped me a lot. They listened to me and calmed me down. They even talked to my PI to let him stop using threatening/humiliating words. They provided suggestions on how to pull the talk with him onto academia and tell my examiners about this situation in my PhD viva. It's definitely very important to let someone in your supervisor group know about your situation. (4) Avoid talking to my PI. During the lockdown, we are able to not see him every day and this truly helped. We just had weekly lab meetings and everybody talked very shortly. When he asked whether anyone needed individual meetings with him, no one replied. When he asked for personal meetings himself, what we do is lowing down the speaker and looking at other websites when he starts to list our previous mistakes and repeat judging us. (5) Agree on everything he says without emotion. This is the best way I found to deal with him for now. You know that a PI like him just wants to release his emotions. It's totally not your problem. We cannot escape this environment for now, so just let him do. Whatever he says, I say 'Yes you're right. Yes I understand.' Keep in mind what he says is not always right. Then I discovered that the time wasted on him repeating himself, judging me or listing my previous mistakes largely reduced. Why is this? I think I just let his bad mood quickly released and he feels satisfying in announcing his authority. Sorry that all my practical suggestions sound passive. This is because aggressive ways didn't work for my situation. However, I know what I am inside. Now I am able to protect myself in the lab, and show my personality in other areas. My PI is the reason I plan to quit academia after my PhD, but he is also the reason for me to look into other opportunities and open other doors. Although I spent nearly one year to rebuild myself, now I'm as confident as before and on my way to use my talent in other areas. Consider your PI as a difficulty that you have to pass to become stronger. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I have decided to offer a second answer from a different point of view. That of the bully. 1. Years ago I went on a residential course in the US (I'm British). It was about personal development and I paid for it myself. It lasted for 8 weeks and the participants did a lot of sharing in front of the group. One session was about "the worst thing you have ever done". A young woman stood up and said that she had been a bully at school. She picked on one particular girl whenever she could. She said that she had no understanding of the damage it was causing and did it because it made her friends laugh and made her feel clever and popular. She had only come to realise the profound damage this caused to another young person after hearing another member of our course confessing their own experience of being bullied. Some bullies, especially verbal bullies, are blind to the effect on the recipient, they simply revel in the acclaim and laughter of their friends. Is it a good idea to admit your vulnerability to the bully? In my opinion this is a strong *No. Outside of the long-term close-knit group situation, where others are listening, this could be seen as an encouragement to escalate. Be strong, not vulnerable. --- 2. Me as the bully. When I was in my early teens I was annoying in class to teachers who could not keep good order. It was all verbal - silly noises, chanting, etc. One day, when I was about fourteen, I noticed that our French teacher almost ran to the back of the room and stood behind us with his back against the wall. I turned to look and realised that he had tears in his eyes. This was the first time I had thought of a teacher as a human being with feelings. From that day onwards I observed him and came to understand that he was really enthusiastic about his subject and all he wanted to do was treat us like adults who wanted to learn. He would have done well at an evening class but he had no idea how to control unruly teenagers. At that point I also started to notice that other teachers somehow had a presence that precluded anyone trying to make fun of them. I've never fully understood it but it was somehow a manner that simply expected good manners and would be disappointed with anything less. We were more interested in getting their approval than that of our classmates. I think it was because they showed* their approval for good thinking in class. --- 3. My father He was not a bully, or at least not much of one. However he completely lacked any understanding of another's point of view. When I wanted to go to music college, he was testing me by playing simple tunes on the piano that I had to write down in music notation without looking. He grew very impatient with me at one point. In frustration, I said, "Let's swap". He was amazed to discover that he had as much trouble as I did. Some people are like that - they simply can't stand in the shoes of another. --- 4. A woman at work I came to think of her as evil. She would deliberately make fun of anyone who she perceived to be vulnerable - especially if they were going through a difficult time. Example: Someone said their mother had died and they had scattered the ashes in her favourite place. Her remark was, "Oh, you can never be sure you get the right ashes, they could be anybody's." She was acutely sensitive to weakness but had zero empathy. I later discovered that she recorded conversations on her phone so that if anyone said anything nasty to her, she could complain they were the bully. I know of at least two people who left their jobs because of her. Moral: Never try to use a true bully's tactics back to them. They have a lifetime of experience and you will lose, just as surely as if you are an amateur at chess playing a grand master.. Retain your own morals and standards. --- Conclusion The true sociopaths are rare. They will never give you credit for anything, in private or in public. Their purpose is to pull you down. There are two ways forward, (a) Leave and avoid them as much as possible. If you stay nearby, they will still continue to undermine when possible (b) Become sure of your own worth. This may not be at all easy. Keep your behaviour impeccable including being polite to the bully - but firm. Have a few phrases, e.g. "Please don't speak to me like that", "That's not very nice" or a fake laugh pronounced as words, "Ha ha" if they try to be funny. Notice their criticisms and internalise them as feedback. Compare with your honest beliefs about yourself. If you know deep down that what you are doing is okay, then think that to yourself when necessary --- Summary They may simply be unaware of others feelings - help them to understand but without showing weakness. They may be a genuinely nasty person. Do not stoop to their level -- they will win. Behave impeccably but make a non-emotional response when they cross the line. Prepare the phrases ahead of time. You only need a few and they don't need to be funny - just an expression of disapproval as from a parent who expects better. Finally Treat the whole thing as a fascinating psychological experiment that does not affect you or your emotions. Observe their behaviour and your own behaviour as would a third party. Have fun analysing what is happening. You may like to experiment with complimenting the bully in public when they do something good. This will give a pleasant shock to their system. If you combine this with mild criticism when they are not good, they will start to crave your praise. It's like dog training. Above all, keep clean yourself. The more you define your standards and stick to them, the more you can expect from others. Don't lower yourself to anyone else's level. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: You are not alone, and not the only one embarrassed. For sure, other people are taking notice and finding the behavior cringe-inducing when he says something humiliating, which is confirmed that way by your reaction. Also, quite likely, some recipients of his gossip are unwilling, but polite about it. People just don't say anything because they don't want to generate animosity, let alone between themselves and someone who oversteps boundaries. When people are confronted with a gossiper, of course they don't want that person saying anything negative about themselves to anyone, so they nod and act nice. I think, someone needs to send this person an anonymous, but kindly worded letter about their obnoxious social behaviors, keeping in mind that it could be the first piece of concrete feedback they have ever received, and therefore surprising and shocking. Any specifics that could identify the author of the letter should be carefully omitted using anonymized examples. The letter could even take the form of a fictional story about a similar person, with a different name, at a different institution. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: This is not specific to Academia, you have assholes everywhere. What you can do depends on your character. Case 1: Professor A ------------------- I was in your case with a very, very senior professor A. He told me publicly in front of 200 people that my research is for kindergarten and his precious time is wasted. I answered that this is research that requires a minimum level of intelligence so I understand that he does not get it. PhD student: 1 - professor A: 0 He made sure to make my life a hell, and I made sure to pay back. I went to the dean and what not to tell I was harassed, they told me that he is a well known professor etc. so I told the dean that I will now call Prof A "<NAME>" publicly and I want him to know it in advance. Fun times. My PhD defence was moved at a time Dumb Prick was in hospital. I left academia mostly for this. Not because of Dumb Prick but because of the medieval state of mind. My recommendation: if you want to go for the fight, make sure you enjoy it because otherwise it will be very, very tough. The documentary about how to best do this is here: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pJC0FLA3Sk> Case 2: Professor B ------------------- I had an exam in quantum mechanics with Prof B. We did not like each other (these were the only two cases in my academia time, do not think that I had an issue with everyone :)). Prof B told me once that I can call him by name because "all clever grad students realize that they can call him by name by year 5". To what I replied "Well, I guess I will have to keep on calling you Professor, then". Quelle ambiance, quelle ambiance! as a French movies says. Comes the time of the exam (an oral one). I get 5 questions, 4 are easy and one is extra super mega complicated. I am sure I won't be able to do it. I answer easily to the first 4 and tell him that I only have a partial answer for answer 5. To what he says "Well, only the very good students can answer it. Sorry, I will have to only give you a 20/20 mark - you could have gotten more" (20 is the highest mark, you could in exceptional cases get a small extra). I was seriously impressed. Despite our relationship, he remained extremely fair. It was a great lesson learned for me. I visited my lab some 15 years later and met him. I told him that we will never get along but I would like to highlight how much I was impressed by what he did and it was something I learned from. We had lunch together, it was quite stiff but I will never forget that prof. My recommendation: it is sometimes useful to take a step back. Upvotes: 1
2021/03/04	613	2,774	<issue_start>username_0: As a PhD student I have been part of my fair share of projects where multiple students are competing for leadership and the first-author title of a paper. This is because project PIs often simply ask several students to go off and work on a problem, without any explicit designation of who should lead the work. Authorship is then only determined at the conclusion of the project when the paper is submitted. While this causes stress, the advantage is that the competition can sometimes force students to push themselves and produce better work to 'outdo' other students. Additionally it can be hard to pre-assign authorship as this can cause non-first authors to be less motivated. And the pre-assigned first author may not necessarily be the most productive student. As a graduating student who will soon be a PI of my own lab I would rather not create such competitive situations, but at the same time, there will be projects with multiple students that needs motivation. What advice do you have about defining projects in such a way to meet these requirements.<issue_comment>username_1: If it is possible to determine at the outset who will make the greatest contribution to the research, then you may do so, and set the author order in advance. In the (more likely) case that you have to actually go through with the research in order to see who contributed the most, then it's probably best to save discussions about author order until the end. I'm not sure I understand your concern about students competing to "produce better work." If students are overstating their own contributions or sabotaging each other's work, then that is an issue to bring up with the PI. But anything short of that can only be good for the research project, no? How inclined would you be help out with a project if you were told at the outset that you would be the lowest-ranked author? Participating in the research for its own sake, rather than because you think that doing a little more will earn you the spot of second author instead of third, is an essential component of academic maturity. But because people aren't perfect, allowing the final author order to adjust in acknowledgement of participants' actual contributions is the best way to incentivize active research participation. In some fields, you may also consider alternative author-ordering schemes such as alphabetical. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: > > In the (more likely) case that you have to actually go through with the research in order to see who contributed the most, then it's probably best to save discussions about author order until the end. > > > In such cases, using [CRediT - Contributor Roles Taxonomy](https://casrai.org/credit/) may be of help. Upvotes: 0
2021/03/04	328	1,344	<issue_start>username_0: I have seen a paper recently published in a reputable IEEE journal but this paper is completely wrong, using other algorithms and making false statements. This is degrading the complete research quality. How can we complain regarding the journal with proof.<issue_comment>username_1: Is the paper wrong in the sense that it is incorrect? Or is it wrong in the sense that it is bogus, to the point where one wonders how the journal could possibly have published such nonsense? In the former scenario: you don't complain. You write a new paper that says the original paper is wrong because [reasons]. You can submit it to the same journal, although you don't have to. In the latter scenario: write to the editor and tell them your concerns. Be ready to back up your claims, because the result you're seeking (retraction) is a serious one. Alternatively, you can criticize the paper on social media. If enough people agree with you, you can cause quite some waves ([example](http://rrresearch.fieldofscience.com/2011/03/is-this-claim-of-bacteria-in-meteorite.html)). Of course, you also risk looking like an idiot if you turn out to be wrong. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If you want to make your criticisms against a published paper public, you can use the platform [PubPeer](https://pubpeer.com/). Upvotes: 0
2021/03/04	3,116	13,038	<issue_start>username_0: \\I'm asking this in the context of mathematical research if that changes the answer. I've heard stories on Quora and from my professors about instances where researchers were banned from journals and, in some cases, thrown out of their universities for plagiarizing research. It did seem that their plagiarism was blatant, but the explanations weren't too specific. I was wondering, with the number of papers that exist today and the number of journals they can be published to, it seems almost impossible to definitively know whether research already exists. With all the work that's been published in any one field, is it the sole responsibility of the researcher to make sure their paper does not exist in any journal? And if they're unable to find prior proof of their work, will the consequences be so severe? It seems like two people stumbling across the same idea is not an uncommon occurrence. I think the most popular instance of this is between Leibniz and Newton. So, at second glance it doesn't seem feasible to discipline every researcher who manages to mistakingly publish existing work. But I'd like to know for sure. Am I right? And what would the consequences be?<issue_comment>username_1: Authors and their reviewers are responsible for research novelty. Authors must distinguish their research from existing works, and reviewers should be convinced by claims of novelty. Authors and reviewers sometimes miss existing works that limit novelty. Ultimately, some novelty will likely remain, since two distinct works will likely have solved a problem differently. Consequently, research impact will likely be reduced. I'm unaware of broader consequences (except in cases of plagiarism). Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I partially disagree with the answer given by astronat, since I think it does not reflect how common it is in mathematics to rediscover existing results (and to publish them without knowing that they already exist). So here is a somewhat different perspective: Terminology. What the OP calls mistakingly publishing existing research is, in my experience, more commonly and with a less negative connotation, referred to as rediscovery of existing research. Distinction from plagiarism. This point has already been explained in astronat's answer: independently rediscovering a result (and publishing it without knowing about its former existence) is something completely different from plagiarism. Consequences. What will happen if you publish a result which is already in the literature but you have not been aware of? Nothing. The math departments of this world would be empty halls if every mathematics professor who has unconsciously published a theorem or idea that already existed in the literature was banned from the university. (See the point "Prevalence" below.) Of course, if this happens very often to you, this might have a negative impact on your reputation; but it happens to almost everybody now and then, so there is not much reason to worry in case that it does happen to you. (Unless in very, very obvious situations - if, for instance, I claimed to be a functional analyst and then published a "novel" result which turns out to simply be the Hahn-Banach theorem, chances are that I would have a much harder time to be taken seriously from now own. But this really refers to extreme cases only.) Prevalence. This is one of the points where I disagree with the assessment in astronat's answer. Experience shows that results are rediscovered and re-published (without the authors knowing or citing the earlier occurrance(s) of the result) all the time. I could write a lengthy list of examples where this happened in papers I read or to people I know or to myself. But there are much better sources for this claim than my personal experience. Just to get an impression, see for instance these two MathOverflow posts ([post 1](https://mathoverflow.net/q/66075/102946), [post 2](https://mathoverflow.net/q/176425/102946)) or this [blog post](https://terrytao.wordpress.com/2019/12/03/eigenvectors-from-eigenvalues-a-survey-of-a-basic-identity-in-linear-algebra/) by <NAME>. Some reasons why this happens. * In earlier days, mathematical results could not be distributed as quickly as they are now (in particular, due to the internet). * Even today, access to many results is somewhat restricted, for instance if they are published in somewhat obscure journals (or, say, proceedings of small conferences) which are hardly accessible, or if they are published in languages which are not widely spoken. * While we have the internet and search engines available nowadays, the amount of published mathematical literature has also become much larger than only a few decades ago, which makes it literally impossible to know everything that could be relevant to your work. * Moreover, search engines are only useful if you know the right key words to search (which is often not the case due to varying terminological conventions). * There a many different ways to phrase or describe a mathematical result (and every more so for a mathematical idea). So even if our idea / argument / theorem is essentially present in a paper and even if we have a close look at this paper, it can sometimes be very hard to recognize it there. Since there are numerous papers which we ought to take a look at before we publish a result, there is simply no way to read all related papers in depth, and we will probably spend more time reading those papers which are obviously very closely related to our work. So if a similar idea occurs in a related, but not closely related paper, and if it is worded quite differently from how we would phrase it, there is a considerable chance that we just miss it. * Many ideas are so fundamental that they occur in many different fields of mathematics (and in many different forms). Our knowledge of a particular mathematical field will typically depend monotonically on how close the field is to our own field. So if a similar idea or result occurs in another area, it is quite likely that we are unaware of it. (The fact that different mathematical areas often use quite different terminology and notation for the same thing doesn't make it easier.) * In my experience, people tend to publish a lot of research work, while it is less common to write expository work (to some extent, this is certainly due to incentives imposed by typical career options in academia). For instance, I can think of various mathematical topics where, in my opinion, a comphrehensive survey article or an up-to-date monograph is missing. This is part of the problem since well-written surveys and books are an excellent aid in identifying relevant earlier results. Some points to be aware of. * While results or arguments or ideas are often re-discovered, it happens more rarely that two papers have very similar content. Quite often, while some results in a paper might already be in the literature (but unknown to the author), there will be other results or insights in the paper that are still new. This is closely related to the point about novelty that username_1 made in their answer. * Even if some results in two papers are very similar, it will sometimes (though not always) happen that their proofs are quite different. What to do? That's a difficult question, and the answer that any particular mathematician gives to this might depend very much on their personality. Here are a few suggestions (biased by my own point of view, of course): * Obviously, we should carefully study the literature before we publish something. Citation databases (in mathematics these are, in particular [MathSciNet](https://mathscinet.ams.org/mathscinet) und [zbMATH](https://zbmath.org/)) can be very helpful for this. * The more work we put into putting our results into context, the more we help potential readers of our paper to also become familiar with earlier research and results on the topic. For instance, there is a considerable difference between merely citing papers and explaining, if only briefly, the relevance of these papers. For instance, compare the following to ways to cite relevant literature: -- "Recently, there has bee a lot of work on this topic [1, 3, 9, 10, 12, 15, 21, 23, 24, 25, 31, 36]" -- "Interest in the topic abc originally stems from the study of xyz spaces, because their geometric properties can be classified by abc [9, 10, 36]. Later, abc has been extended to a more abstract setting in [1, 3, 21, 23] which made it possible to also classify the geometry of xyz' spaces [24, 25]. In the present paper, we build on the so-called fgh approach to abc recently developped in [12, 15]; combining it with the, at first glance unrelated, ijk technique from operator theory published in [4], we show that all major results in abc theory are actually independent of the foo assumption. This allows us to classify the geometric properties of very large classes of xyz\* spaces. In addition, we obtain recent results from [31] as special cases of our general theory." * When writing a referee's report about a paper, we should take much care to point out missing references. In particular, I strongly support the idea that, as a referee, we should point to relevant articles by different authors, and not only to our own (obviously super-important but - heaven knows why - completely underappreciated) work which might not have been cited in the paper under review. * If we have made a preprint publicly available, and - before publication - we get aware you relevant literature that we have missed, we should, of course, make a serious effort to include it in the paper before publication. * If it is too late and you get aware of relevant references after publication, don't rack your brains over it. As explained above, this happens very often. Just make sure to properly include your newly gained knowledge when you write another article on a related topic (of course, this does not only mean to cite the references you now became aware of; it also means to take these references as a starting point for yet another literature search). * It is, in my experience, very uncommon to take any formal actions (such as notifying the journal, or even submitting an erratum) if you become aware of prior relevant work after publication. (But please note that I don't make any assessment as to whether I approve or disapprove of this practice; I'm just pointing out what is common practice.) Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: If my mathematics paper mistakenly duplicates existing results, and I submit it to a math journal, it is hoped that the referee will know that it is not new and point that out. The following sometimes happens, though. A physicist (or other scientist) finds a mathematical result, and submits it to a physics journal. The referee for the physics journal does not realize that it is already known in mathematics. So the physics journal publishes it.1 There was an [infamous example](https://foothillscientia.org/2019/03/24/mary-tai-rediscovers-calculus-in-a-1994-paper/) in 1994 where a medical journal published something, but it [turned out](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7677819/) that actually it was what is called the "trapezoidal rule" in calculus texts. > > 1 Why a physics journal would publish a pure math result is another question > > > Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I'm restating, in greater brevity, what other answers have expressed somewhat circuitously. > > I've heard stories... where researchers were banned from journals and, > in some cases, thrown out of their universities for plagiarizing > research... It seems like two people stumbling across the same idea is > not an uncommon occurrence. > > > These are two distinct situations. [Plagiarism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism) is taking the actual written words of another person and re-presenting them, fraudulently, as your own piece of writing. It is among the highest violations in academia and publishing, and well worth harsh sanctions. It's basically impossible to do by accident. [Multiple discovery](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_discovery) is when two or more people independently discover the same principle, and separately write up different accounts of it. This is moderately common in science, and it's indeed possible without any fraud involved. It is passingly common that Nobel awards need to take this into account, possibly giving the award to multiple simultaneous discoverers. Now, if someone re-discovers and tries to publish an idea that was first discovered and published some time ago, the person who tries to do so will look rather foolish and appear to be a poor researcher for not having found that in their literature review -- and be highly unlikely to get published. But this is not the same as plagiarism, and no further sanctions are due in this case. Upvotes: -1
2021/03/04	1,316	5,430	<issue_start>username_0: I came across a multiple choice exam paper where the professor had included a funny fifth option in almost every question. There was also a bonus question at the end, where students can earn 0.5 extra points for writing their own humorous multiple choice question. It was the final examination of a bachelor-level course, though I have no reason to believe that the professor does not do the same in master-level exam papers as well. For example, the fifth option for one of the questions was, “I don’t know, but a vanilla latte would be perfect right now.” Another one was, “Come one man, stop it with these lame jokes.” On a question regarding why someone might have a [conditioned taste aversion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conditioned_taste_aversion) to sushi, the fifth option was, “They certainly did not try sushi from [popular local sushi place].” The exam papers I saw were those of students who had done well in the exam, and they seemed to appreciate the humor, since they provided their own funny question at the end for the extra 0.5 points. However, I did not get the chance to see the rest of the papers. Also, the questions did not cause any disruption during the exam itself. No student was visibly laughing or trying to communicate with another student. On the one hand, I myself find this hilarious and it seems others, including students, find it too. It might help lighten up the mood and ease anxiety during the exam. However, I am afraid that it might be a distraction, especially since it was not a single joke but a running joke throughout most of the questions in the 33-question exam. Students might lose time reading these responses, or they may feel that the professor is belittling what is otherwise an important and serious exam for them. Is this, perhaps, unprofessional?<issue_comment>username_1: That is hard for us to determine. This could be a legitimate way to help students relax during the exam. The fact that the professor includes this at a fixed spot at the end of each question, that this seems to be an established tradition with students expecting this and being encouraged to participate in it, points in that direction. On the other hand attempts at humor directed towards a large number of people in a context where you cannot easily defuse misunderstandings is risky. So based on the information you have given us, it could be either. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't know the complete context, so can't say whether it is unprofessional or not in this instance. But it is dangerous in a multi-cultural situation. If I were sure that everyone taking the class shared the same overall context (cultural base, familiarity with the language....) then I wouldn't be worried about it, otherwise it seems very ill-advised. If you "get" the joke, then fine. But jokes often depend on language and cultural context. Some jokes are also racist or sexist, but I assume that these would be avoided. My guess about the example you give is that the professor was really trying to reduce the number of viable options. In fact, that is usually recommended: one answer that is very clearly not correct. But, another possibility is that the "jokes" somehow depend on some deep insight into the subject matter itself in order to work. That would be interesting and might require some research to judge, but I don't think there are many people who could manage to create such exams very often as it requires too much thought. My suggestion to you is that you avoid such things unless you have a very deep understanding of both the subject and the students taking the course. Most of us have students with many backgrounds and what "works" as a joke in one context can be either confusing or insulting in another. Even if it is merely confusing, it will disadvantage some students. Just. Say. No. Some students, thinking it were "just fun" might actually pick such an answer "just for fun". What is the instructor's grading strategy for such choices? --- For the record, I'm not humorless and enjoy such subtle plays on language and such. But not for exam purposes in my field. And, I'll also note that some such "jokes" appear on this site from time to time, and we get comments from people not understanding the intent. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: > > Is this, perhaps, unprofessional? > > > Yes, to the extent that students: > > may feel that the professor is belittling what is otherwise an important and serious exam for them > > > Presumably this objection can be overcome by simply asking the students what they think! Cultural issues have been addressed in other answers. The other big concern is distraction. This depends on whether the situation was clearly explained to the students before the exam (which should be done anyway for the reasons discussed above). It also depends on the exam being consistently laid out, so students can train themselves to read everything that matters and nothing that does not. Consistency seems to be a problem, based on these quotes from the question (emphasis added): > > I came across a multiple choice exam paper where the professor had included a funny fifth option in almost every question. > > > > > it was not a single joke but a running joke throughout most of the questions in the 33-question exam. > > > Upvotes: 2
2021/03/04	996	4,099	<issue_start>username_0: This is something that has been troubling me for a long while now. I am an undergraduate mathematics major (a sophomore), and I wish to apply to Ph.D. programs in pure mathematics in the future. I'm very passionate about research and academia. On basis of what I've read on this website, graduate admission committees (mathematics) select candidates on basis of how capable they are of doing research in the future, and there are several indicators for this, of which grades are just one. Everyone knows that research in math and in general is a lengthy process. It is not like working on problem sets for courses or writing exam papers in 2-3 hours. It is a lengthy process in the sense that people take months, sometimes years to solve problems and publish papers (I hope that I'm right?) That being said, to what extent are grades and potential for research (and in turn, graduate admissions) correlated? While getting As does signify that one has probably mastered the material, is getting a few Bs really that bad? I'm sure this isn't something new that I've thought of, so how do graduate admissions committees deal with this problem - i.e. making sure capable and deserving candidates are not left just because of their grades (none less than B) in some courses? P.S. We know that LoRs, and other things matter too - but I don't know how important each component is, and hence the question. This question specifically targets to ask how important grades are and how this obvious problem is addressed.<issue_comment>username_1: Like most things, there is some correlation, but it's not perfect. In other words, good grades are an indicator of future success, but not proof. This is why most places look at a wide variety of things, not just GPA or individual grades. In the US, letters of recommendation carry quite a lot of weight, for example. No, a few B grades probably won't hurt (much), especially if they are in a topic that you don't intend to pursue further. Note that true insight into mathematics isn't uniform across sub fields. For example, I had great insight into real analysis and point-set topology, but very little in algebra or even in some other aspects of analysis. But I did fine, since I worked in an area where my insight was deep. I'll note that when I took the GRE subject test in mathematics I was extremely discouraged when I left the test center. There were so many questions that I had no insight in to at all. But that was really because mathematics is so broad that no one (anymore) can understand all of it (not since the early 20th century, I think). I did well and got into good graduate programs. However, don't neglect the fact that good programs are very competitive. The key is to put together a complete application (including letters) through which a reader can have confidence in making a prediction of your future success. If you get to write a Statement of Purpose (SoP), make it forward looking, not just a recapitulation of what is in the CV. Goals, plans, ... Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: > > to what extent are grades and potential for research (and in turn, graduate admissions) correlated? > > > You need to be good enough: A broad understanding of your chosen research field is needed. That can be demonstrated by good grades. But good grades are neither sufficient nor necessary. (See [Good Will Hunting](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bylkoiyz7Ww) for a dramatisation.) Grades have, however, become a heuristic for research potential. They're imperfect (and other factors are considered too), they're just better than other metrics. That's why you needn't have the best grades. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: In good departments such as mine grades (GPA) are considered after other parameters: evidence of ability to do research, letters of recommendation, how good is the undergraduate University. We did admit a grad. student with undergraduate degree from Harvard and low GPA (she, unfortunately, did not finish her degree). Upvotes: 1
2021/03/04	921	4,032	<issue_start>username_0: What does it mean, that a professor says: "I think it would be great to have you at X university, and your suggested dissertation topic is a great idea, But, I think you should apply broadly, not just to my university" ? I mean, does that imply he's really into accepting you? Is there any hidden subtext here?<issue_comment>username_1: You should interpret it as good advice. Apply broadly. Find the program that's the best fit for you. Many graduate programs are sufficiently competitive that many qualified applicants are not admitted. It's impossible to admit everyone qualified who applies if there are more qualified applicants than slots, and there is a lot of subjectiveness and a bit of luck in who makes that cut. Maybe the professor is gently saying you are unlikely to be admitted to their program and lab, maybe not; there is little benefit for you in attempting to divinate their meaning. There is lots of benefit for you in following their advice (more choice, higher chance of admission), and risk in failing to do so (no choice, chance of not being admitted and not having a backup plan). Sometimes advice is just advice. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think the statement is one of general encouragement. But take the words literally. They might even be boilerplate if it was a first email exchange. In the US, individual professors don't normally have the power to admit students. Elsewhere they might, but I'm guessing that if he has the power you aren't his top choice. Apply broadly. If it is something other than boilerplate then the person seems to be saying that you are a good candidate, generally, for graduate study, but that, for whatever reason, your acceptance here isn't guaranteed. You may be trying to apply at too competitive an institution, or even one that isn't competitive enough. I would normally just ignore a lot of blind emails from students, especially when it was clear they were in some different field and had no knowledge of what I did. But, perhaps this person is a bit more polite and, thus, boilerplate is the result. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Put yourself in the shoes of a professor trying to recruit a PhD student. You get many emails from students wanting to work with you. Even if you find one that you like a lot, the application deadline has not passed yet and there is still a chance you will find a student who’s even more impressive and more worthy of the position. (Also, it may be that it’s the department who needs to admit the student so even if you are sure you want the student, you cannot guarantee to them that they will be admitted since other people are involved in making those decisions.) You also know that any word you write in an email to the student will be seized on by the student (and analyzed and over-analyzed to death, in conversations with friends and on academia.stackexchange) as evidence that they are going to be admitted or as evidence they will be rejected, potentially leading the student to make bad decisions in case the words are misinterpreted. So you do not want to set up unrealistic expectations. Imagine saying to a student “I was very impressed with you and think you have a great dissertation topic. Please apply!” Well, the student may well interpret this as “you’re in” and not bother applying anywhere else. This is a recipe for disaster if one of many things that can go wrong between now and the time that you receive an official acceptance letter, does. It is much better to be cautious and use language that indicates to the student that while you like them, nothing is guaranteed at this point. Bottom line: there isn’t a subtext. “Apply broadly” is sound advice to give to anyone, both good applicants and less good ones. If anything, this is a small sign that the professor is a person of integrity who does not try to manipulate or mislead applicants to further his own self-interest. But even that is a very weak signal at best. Upvotes: 4
2021/03/04	1,145	4,753	<issue_start>username_0: The field is mathematics (including applied and computational mathematics). While there are plenty of visiting assistant professor position on sites like MathJobs.org, I rarely see visiting associate professor positions, especially in USA. Is it because departments do not advertise these positions? Or that they just don't have such positions? In either case, how would one look for such a position?<issue_comment>username_1: I think (a guess, mostly though I know of at least one case ) that those are mostly done by invitation. A professor wants to work with someone for a year and the person has a sabbatical year coming up, so they find a bit of money, etc. Or the visitor seeks out a potential colleague and proposes a year of collaboration. If a sabbatical is rich enough the host institution may not need to provide much. For non-permanent positions it may be that different rules apply, not requiring a search. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Even before the pandemic, not only in upper-tier "research" universities, but also smaller colleges, in the U.S., in math, "visiting assistant professor" positions were/are mostly for very junior people who somehow did not have any better job offer in the current cycle, but/and will come and teach. Prompted by @<NAME> to be more precise: in some cases these positions do not have such an onerous teaching load but that maybe they can enhance their CV in a year or two, and then go back on the job market. In others, the teaching load is "normal" or worse. In fact, this ambiguity is surely worth tracking for people contemplating taking such a job: they're not all the same. Get details. More senior people, who do not need any sort of temporary job to keep a paycheck while looking for something better, would usually just be "visitor", or not even have any title. This might include people, with tenure elsewhere, on sabbatical from their home institution, who may or may not teach at the host institution. If they are given a title, it might well be "visiting assoc prof" or "visiting prof"... but/and, often, by the time people get to such positions, they are full professors at their home institutions, so they'd just be "visiting professor". Hence, few visible "visiting assoc profs". Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: My impression, which may certainly not describe all cases, is that "Visiting Assistant Professor" translates to "non-tenure track assistant professor" and fills a role in the academic hierarchy similar to what is called a "post doc" in some fields. Therefore, it makes little sense to refer to a "visiting associate professor", since "associate professor" typically means "tenured". Someone could still have a "visiting"/temporary role while holding a tenured spot someplace else, but this isn't likely to be a job you advertise for candidates at large, it's a position created for a specific person, likely aligned with some source of funding. VAPs seem to be more common in areas like math where post-PhD academics are mostly funded through teaching appointment (perhaps also in social sciences and the humanities? I can't speak much to this). In fields like biomedical science where most post-PhD academics are funded by the grants of more senior professors, these "VAP" positions hardly exist; I have only seen them in clinical settings where someone is given a "VAP" title to be a research post doc + teach med students in the clinic, or perhaps at (especially smaller) institutions who are trying to lure people in to be adjuncts. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: At many research universities, "visiting assistant professor" actually means "postdoc with teaching duties". In other words, they are postdoc positions paid for by the department and financed at least in part through the revenues that come in through teaching. The positions are not called "postdoc" because it is a "faculty position" so that the holder of the position is entitled to teach certain courses that only "faculty" can teach, and so that certain visa rules apply for candidates who come from abroad. The requirement for it to be a "faculty" position then prompted universities to call them "X professor". But because these are not tenure-track positions, one needs a different prefix in front of "professor" from the usual "assistant" entry-level position, and so universities chose "visiting assistant" to make it clear that the position is temporary. "Visiting" in this context is not meant to imply that that person has a position somewhere else and is only temporarily "visiting while traveling". Given all of this, it is clear (hopefully) why there are no "visiting associate professor" positions. Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]
2021/03/05	4,954	21,430	<issue_start>username_0: I am struggling with note taking during lectures for a long time. I find that if I only listen to the lecture I am able to understand the concepts properly. But the downside is that I often forget some important details. On the other hand, when I concentrate on taking notes, often I just end up writing a lot of things without paying much attention to the concepts. I have been trying to improve my note taking skills by watching video lectures from OCW or YouTube. My lecture notes look more like lecture transcripts. I pause and rewind the video and end up writing a lot. I can't figure out how to improve. I would really appreciate if anyone could have any suggestion. PS. I take notes with pen and paper and I haven't tried note taking on a computer.<issue_comment>username_1: I [answered a similar question](https://cseducators.stackexchange.com/a/1168/1293) at CSEducators a few years ago. I agree that taking notes with pencil/pen and paper is superior to doing it by typing into a laptop (see the reference). But to be truly effective you need to do more than just take the notes. I suggest that you re-read and annotate them as soon as possible after a lecture, adding questions as well as notes/corrections. The second pass will help firm up the ideas. This is best done immediately, but certainly within a few hours if classes are taken back to back. Another trick is to capture, from the notes, the most important ideas given in the lecture. The instructor will possibly point them out, but most of us would go in to a lecture wanting to especially make one or two points. It is good if you capture them. But a single pass over anything is unlikely to lead to deep learning. And utilizing the information (exercises) is even better for firming up the ideas. As to taking transcripts of video lectures, the same can apply. When you finish such a video, re-read and annotate the notes, marking or extracting the key ideas and making sure you understand what is being presented. For situations in which you have access to the lecturer, write out any questions you still have and try to ask them at the start of the next lecture, or using some other communication channel. --- There is a joke that the "purpose" of a lecture is to get the teacher's notes into the student's notes without going through the mind of either. Don't let that become a reality. I once took a "course" in which that was literally true. Two of us had an independent study with a professor who gave us the task of literally copying his written notes (no lectures) but gave no real opportunity for questions, exercises or feedback. It was among my worst educational experiences ever. --- Also note that learning requires reinforcement. The review of the notes, with annotations, provides the start of that. See The Art of Changing the Brain by <NAME> for some of the science behind that. A search of this site for "Zull" will turn up some further mentions of these ideas. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: What is the purpose of a course lecture for you? Do you see it as a resource to improve your understanding of the topics being presented based on what you have already read about them. Or do you approach it mostly as your first (and perhaps first in-depth) exposure to the course topics? You will more likely be caught in the quandary that you express for the latter case rather than the former. The less prepared you are with some knowledge of the topics in advance, the more you will fill a strong pull to one of two approaches. You will be pulled to listen intently to learn the topics for the first time, thereby having less time to take notes. Alternatively, you will be pulled to take copious notes to read later, thereby having less time to digest (learn) the topics as they are being presented. One starting point to improve how you take notes during a course lecture is to read about the topics in advance of attending the course lecture. Indeed, take notes as you are doing your reading. Mark places from the textbook or course resources for the upcoming lecture where you recognize that you would like to learn more during the lecture itself. The additional advantage to preparing in advance on what you know should be in the lecture is that you will be able to capture full context of any surprises. You might always anticipate that you will see something that you have not seen yet even in the best preparation. How comforting to be able to reflect on the new information in real time because your mind is not occupied still trying to make the best sense of where the new information originated or should fit in everything up to that point. A useful advantage here is to have the course lecture notes in advance. If this is your situation, here are some additional questions that you might answer to find ways to improve how you take notes during the lecture: How intently have you reviewed the lecture slides in advance of attending the lecture? Have you matched the content on the lecture slides to the topics in the textbook in advance of attending the lecture? Have you marked the places on the lecture slides where you will ask for help during the lecture? What is the purpose of having the notes after you take them? Do you use them as your only resource for study? Do you use them as supplements to the other resources on the topics? You will be pulled to the quandary when you see lecture notes as the only study resource. When you develop habits to review the lecture notes in parallel with other resources from the course, you will be less anxious at the outset about the need to take copious lecture notes during the lecture itself. You will learn how to fill in the gaps from the lecture notes with the information from the other resources. Finally, what do you do if you discover that your lecture notes have gaps in them? Do you skip over those gaps hoping for future insights? Do you try to fill in the gaps using the other resources for the course? Or even … Do you schedule a meeting with the instructor to ask for help on the missing information? A useful advantage here is to have recordings of the course lectures. If this is your situation, you can certainly review the videos to see if you can fill in the gaps. What do you do if the lecture does not fill in the gaps? Again … Do you schedule a meeting with the instructor to ask for help on the missing information? In summary, to improve how you take notes during a course lecture, determine the reasons why you are taking them. Do so at the front end: What preparations do you make before you attend a course lecture? Do so at the back end: What do you want to do with your lecture notes once you have them? Finally, taking notes is only equivalent to making an inventory of information. Developing the expertise to review notes and put them in their fullest context to themselves and the other resources around them is where the real learning starts. Whether this is done with notecards or with the latest and greatest electronic gadgets, the goal is the same. For further insights, search for readings on personal knowledge management systems. A recent hot-topic approach in this field is the Zettlekasten method. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I'm going to give you a very tactical recommendation. This is hard to keep up with, but is the premier way to engage with material in lectures is to PRE-WORK the content. 1. For math/science/applied: Pre-read the chapter. Work any examples in the chapter. On paper, in your notebook. Work the homework problems. All of them. Check your answers to the extent possible. Rework (from scratch) any problems missed. Use your notebook to do this work. 2. In the BACK of the notebook, write down any questions you have, with space to fill in an answer. Quite often, you'll actually figure it out yourself. Then fill it in. But in the cases, you didn't, these become questions to ask in class (or if too minute, will allow a very quick, targeted, efficient questioning of the instructor in office hours or even just ad hoc few minutes after class.) Note, that it is NOT just the answers to the questions that educate you. But the WORK you did to develop them and then record the answers. 3. When you are in lecture, the entire lecture will be a refresher. Write down what you feel is important. The good thing is even if you do take long notes (not needed), because you know the material already, it will be very quick/easy to write down the content (more so than if fresh). Put little star icons on the pages with class notes (segregate by page, but will be in the "rolling forward" part of the notebook) for lecture notes. This allows you to differentiate them from HW practice. If anything new/important (as opposed to just a practice problem or derivation you already understand) is covered, than box or give it some little star or the like on the margin. Again, note that it is not just the nuance content itself that is educating you, but the act of thinking about it and registering it as such.\* Also, given your level of understanding of the topic, lecture notes will NOT be a key to look at in the future. Your key content is the textbook and drill problems, when doing exam prep. 4. Note, classes in history, lit, art, etc. will be a little less drill oriented. And the professor may do a bit more enrichment, discussion, etc. outside the text. However, even in this case, you should have read the reading AHEAD of time. At a minimum, this will make you familiar with the basic content. And able to come up with insights like what is ADDITIVE to the content versus what is in the text. Another insight might be differences in rationale or interpretation or emphasis.\\ Even in a pure discussion class, pre-work can make a difference. I took a 10 person at a round table history class (with a real historian and top majors types)...we had two discussions a week of comparative history. For the TUE, we had done a 2-page compare/contrast essay ahead of time. For the THU, not. And you can bet your sweet ass which day had a better discussion/argument amongst the students! 5. Similarly, of course, classes with case methods and Q&A (think <NAME> in The Paper Chase, or perhaps Harvard MBAs) are much better, the MORE you have pre-studied the material. And it's not just not looking stupid when called on (though sure, that's a feature) but getting more out of the session. \Humans are NOT computers (sorry comp sci folks) that just need a clear instruction set. Instead, we are more like animals (literally we ARE animals) that need training and repetition so that the learning is engrained in longer term memory and working ability. This is "pedagogy" as opposed to "content". \\For instance in history, there is a common issue of "historiography" (scare quotes intentional, this is basically people interpreting history in terms of whatever left/right, dreamy/practical, original/not-sin views they have). Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Here are a few practical suggestions from a former student who also only took notes with pen and paper. 1. You can't write everything down from a lecture, to attempt to do so is counterproductive. Unless you are an incredibly fast writer, there is no way you are going to be able to simultaneously write everything down that is said and understand/learn what is being said. Based on your post, it sounds like you have already encountered this conundrum. 2. Because you can't write everything down, you need to filter the incoming information stream for core concepts or important ideas/insights When I took notes, I was constantly monitoring what was being said and trying to pick out what the key ideas and important points were, and then only writing those down. This sort of forces you to learn/comprehend on the spot, because you can't figure out what is a key concept vs just an example unless you actually understand what is being communicated to you. The main idea here is to differentiate between what you think will be important to know/remember later and what is closer to "trivial" information (anecdote/filler material/example). For example, if a professor introduces a new equation that is related to the theme of the lecture, write it down. If he then talks about how that equation was developed in the 1800s by some scientist or briefly shows another equation that seems unrelated, don't worry too much about not* writing that down. The chance this information ends up being important later is much lower. 3. This method actually follows the flow of most lectures fairly well Most lectures generally follow the pattern of `core concept`, `further details`, `examples and background`, `core concept`, `...` If you follow my strategy, you will identify and write down the core concept immediately. You then have some time to digest the core concept while also half listening to the details and examples that inevitably follow. If something jumps out from that section you can also write it down, but if not, now you have more time to chew over the main ideas in the background while continuing to listen to what is being said. This essentially ensures you are focusing on what is critical for keeping up with the lecture (and by extension learning). If you get all of the core concepts but miss a few details along the way, will you still be able to keep up? Yes. If you record lots of the details but then miss or are fuzzy on some of the core concepts, will you be able to keep up? Probably not. Your ability to comprehend and record information is both a fixed and limited resource during a lecture, so spend it on what matters. 4. What if I have trouble figuring out what matters and what doesn't? This is a skill you develop over time and also something that often develops over the course of a class as you begin to learn the material and understand how it all fits together. That being said, there are a few practical tips I can offer. * Is this something I can easily look up later (either in your book or online)? If it is not, then consider writing it down. A good example of this might be a mathematical proof. If you know your course textbook doesn't contain very many proofs, and the professor is starting to give one on what seems like an important equation, then you should consider writing it down. This might be one of those situations where you have to decide to sacrifice understanding for the sake of recording information. Often for me this went something like, "I am just going to focus on writing this down as fast as possible without errors. I won't be able to understand it because I am so focused on writing it, but that's ok. I know I have it written down here and I will come back and actually review/learn it later if it ends up being important." If, on the other hand, you know your book often contains proofs for important equations, or you will be getting a copy of the lecture notes later, I would recommend not trying to write it down. Focus all of your energy on trying to understand it instead, and maybe just write down "proof given" in your notebook to record that it was discussed. This gives you an opportunity to understand how the proof was constructed and potentially develop and ask questions if something is not clear. You can always consult your book/lecture notes later if you really need to review. * Think "meta" A big part of being able to filter information well is not just thinking in terms of the current lecture, but how the information provided fits into the bigger picture (of the week, the unit, the course, your degree, ect.). Try to ask yourself, "Why am I learning this? Why would this be important for me to know?" Often people will recommend you read/skim the material before hand to help you get a better sense of what the key points are. If you have time to then go ahead, but being in an intense program myself I found I never had time to do this. What worked better for me was to just review the syllabus and skim over the table of contents/chapter headings to get a rough roadmap of the course. This helps you know what topics are going to be covered and roughly how they all fit together. For example, if I'm taking an algorithms course and a whole week is going to be spent on learning how to measure algorithm performance, I am going to pay careful attention and make sure I really understand the concepts because they are likely foundational and going to come up a lot during the rest of the course. If we are covering a particular algorithm one week, however, and there are some technical details I can't quite get, I might not worry too much about needing to fully understand that information. Especially if I already know we are going to cover 20 other algorithms as part of the course, there is no way I will be able to remember that level of detail for all 20 of them, so it is a poor use of my limited resources to try. * Filtering is learning Simply being able to take in information, understand it, and then pass judgment on it's relevance is an act of learning in and of itself. In this sense, learning how to take good notes is also learning how to learn. Once I became good at taking notes, I found I needed to do very little review outside of lecture because I had already grasped a lot of the material simply by ingesting it. I bring this point up mostly because I don't want you to be discouraged. Learning to learn is hard, but it will pay big dividends in all of your future coursework. Don't be afraid that you are struggling now, because that is a normal and expected part of the process. If you really lean into that struggle and keep going at it until you improve, it will pay off big for the rest of your time as a student. Essentially, I encourage you to view taking good notes (and learning how to learn) as an additional class you are enrolled in every semester. Things are going to start out hard and uncertain, but if you continue to put time and effort into your "course" you will improve and things will begin to make a lot more sense. A few final suggestions. If you are really worried about missing information, see if you can record each lecture on your phone or laptop. Rules around this likely vary by institution, but it probably involves asking each professor for permission. I don't think this should be a long-term solution for you, but it might help in the short-term if it removes some of the pressure to feel like you must write everything down. Finally, as I alluded to before, view note-taking as more of a learning method and less as an archive of everything the professor said. I often took a ton of notes while reading and during lectures but then rarely reviewed any of them. In retrospect this was because the act of ingesting, processing, and then writing the information I was receiving was really how I was learning. The fact it produced information on paper that I could review later was really more of a byproduct rather than the primary benefit. EDIT: One important thing I forgot to mention is that shorthand is your friend. You shouldn't be writing in full sentences (and frequently not even full words). Jot down the minimal amount of characters necessary for you to remember what was said. Instead of ``` <NAME> published the universal law of gravitation in 1687 ``` Write ``` Newton pub univ law grav 1687 ``` If Newton is mentioned frequently in the lecture or course, you could further abbreviate to `Newt` or even `N/` as long as you think you will remember what `N/` means if you were to review your notes later. Other shorthand notation such as `w/` for which, what, and when, `bc` for because, `eg` for example, et cetera are also useful. It might not seem like much, but for a slow writer like me the small time saves from shorthand really add up over the course of a lecture and are instrumental in my ability to keep pace. You want to do anything you can to minimize the amount of time your brain is distracted from processing the key concepts being presented, so try to shorten/condense what you need to write as much as possible. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I personally adapt the method found in [this talk by <NAME>](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlU-zDU6aQ0). The dilemma of writing to little or to much is solved by - doing both! * during the lecture, you quickly and superficially jot down keywords/concepts from the lecture, with no regard to utility even a day after the lecture * right after the lecture, take a new sheet of paper and now summarize the lecture using the keywords you wrote down, such that the note is usable later Advantages are: * You can focus on what's being talked about during the lecture. It can help you from dozing off because you have to listen in order to write usable notes * You process the entire lecture again afterwards, expressing it it in your own words, which aids and tests your understanding, and shows you where it's still lacking * It's easier to judge what's actually important after you saw the entire class, so the notes get better for later reference The disadvantage is, of course, that it's more time intensive - it my experience it usually pays off though in the long run, as it reduces the time you have to study later. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/05	889	3,909	<issue_start>username_0: I have been collaborating with an individual on a scientific paper. I have documents showing that this individual has shared the paper content with other people. Also, the individual has added co-author to the paper without my consent. I have the following questions: Question 1) Is there any ethical, policy or law that is violated by this individual? Question 2) Where should I report the actions of this individual?<issue_comment>username_1: > > I have documents showing that this individual has shared the paper content with other people > > > Nothing necessarily wrong with this. It's polite to get permission from co-authors especially before sharing broadly outside your group, and can be rude not to, but it's normal for academics to talk about what they are working on with other academics close to them. > > Also, the individual has added co-author to the paper without my consent > > > If this third person has done work on the paper amounting to authorship, then they must be an author. If not, then they must not. You and your co-author(s) and potential co-authors should come to some agreement on who meets this qualification, but I don't think it's really time to call out an ethical breach or "report" to someone, it's just time for you to have a conversation about authorship with your co-author. Lastly, think about what you're trying to achieve here. Starting some sort of ethics proceedings against someone you work with is an absolute last resort action. It's unlikely your relationship will escape this action without irreparable damage. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Each academic field likely differs in the norms regarding co-authorship. You've brought up two different points: 1. Your co-author has shared the content of your manuscript without first consulting you. This is not necessarily an ethical issue, but it does highlight the importance of codifying specific behaviors before you begin working on a co-authored project. Whether this is an ethical breach depends on many things. What type of data are you using and who collected them? Had you discussed whether the disclosure of the project was okay at any time earlier? It certainly sounds like you need to have a direct conversation about the norms on the project, particularly given that you are the corresponding author. 2. Your co-author has decided to invite another person to the project without first consulting you. This is a much clearer issue. Put simply - yes, this is an ethical violation and you should be clear and firm in informing your co-author that this is unacceptable and cannot happen without agreement from all current authors. If your co-author already had the other individual put work into the manuscript, then you need to convene a group meeting to discuss this together. As for whether you can report your co-author, I'm unsure. I suppose that depends in part on your university. Who owns the data that you collected? Regardless, it's clear that you shouldn't work with this individual again. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: ### Talk to your IRB. Before you conduct any research involving human data (including things like surveys), you need to get approval from your university's Institutional Review Board, and that approval might come with restrictions on how you are allowed to handle or store the human data you've collected. If your colleague has violated these restrictions, then you should report them to the IRB so that a proper investigation into the incident can take place, and the disciplinary process can be started by the IRB if they deem it necessary. If your research doesn't involve human data, you might not be required to get IRB approval, but it might be worth your time speaking to them regardless if you haven't done so already, to make sure that your research is being conducted ethically. Upvotes: -1
2021/03/05	1,075	4,701	<issue_start>username_0: EDIT: I am referring to short duration (1-2 years) small grants (10k-30k $/euros) usually given to PhD or post-docs. The amount needs to cover material, conferences, publications, etc. Publishers now charge up to 10k for open access, so towards the end of the funding period when most work is being published the grantee might be short of 10k for a publication. It is becoming increasingly common for research funded with public money to be published as open access with gold (expensive but immediately open access) or green standard ( free self archiving after 6 months). This is part of the grant agreement which is a binding legal contract. What happens if a researcher publishes not in open access because cannot afford to pay the open access fee? Some publishers are increasing the open access fees and I have discussed with colleagues, particularly junior scientists and postdocs with limited funding, about this dilemma. Careers depend also on publications appearing in certain journals, so choosing a target journal for financial reasons seem to be a great disadvantage for younger scientists. * Will there be any legal or other potential consequences such as being banned from applying for grants from the same institution? * Will there be any non-written consequences such as being flagged as a noncomplying grantee?\\ PS: I'm not looking for advice on how to find money for paying the open access fees, there are already questions covering that topic.<issue_comment>username_1: I'm most familiar with the US NIH. [They write](https://publicaccess.nih.gov/FAQ.htm): > > Non-compliance will be addressed administratively, and may delay or prevent awarding of funds. > > > For the most part, NIH seems focused on awareness and trying to encourage compliance, rather than strict enforcement. It seems many are not fully aware of the guidelines, which are quite new for some researchers who have published a different way for decades. More generally, big funding agencies like to act through the institutions researchers belong to in encouraging compliance, whether for policies like this or for ethical policies like those for human/animal subjects research. They can threaten to withhold their funds and even government funding more broadly from entire institutions, not just individuals. While cases of this threat actually being carried out are rare, it may mean that researchers find themselves more directly responsible to their institution rather than the funder. The institution has a large incentive to ensure local compliance and likely has more resources than the funding agency to follow up, as well as a broader range of sanctions. For your particular situation, I have a hard time imagining a funding agency feeling too bad for your circumstance. If they're funding your work and demanding open access, they're implying that they expect you to use their funds towards those costs in addition to all the others (either directly or through the fungibility of money). "I spent my money on other things and now can't afford to comply with your publishing requirements" doesn't seem like a very good argument, since everyone they fund is in the same boat and since you've accepted their terms by accepting their funding. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In the UK, it depends on the Funder. The biggest non-governmental funder in the UK is the Wellcome Trust, and they will count non-open access publication against you when applying for grants in the future. Government funding comes primarily from UKRI. It is against the rules to spend UKRI grant money on open-access publication, but all publications arising from UKRI funded work must be at least green open-access. How is this circle squared? Institutions are given block grants proportional to the average amount of UKRI funds they hold to pay for open-access publication. But it is entirely possible for this money to run out in a year before a particular grant holder has had chance to use it. Protection against this comes via the Research Excellence Framework (REF). The REF happens every 5 years and the UKRI assess all scholarly output from an institution in the period covered, ranking papers. Top ranking papers win institutions funding that is not tied any particular project (Quality Related or QR money). This is often a univeresity's biggest income stream after undergraduate tuition. In order for a paper to be considered in the REF it must be publish open-access. Thus, paper that might be awarded 4\* might cost a uni $5000 to publish, but would get them $140,000 in funding in return via QR, if it is not open access, it gets them nothing. . Upvotes: 2
2021/03/05	949	4,301	<issue_start>username_0: I'm applying to a prestigious funding program for early-career researchers\* that places a heavy emphasis on the "scientific excellence" and "intellectual capacity and creativity" of the PI. To demonstrate this, the proposal is required to include a section on "early achievements" that lists five top publications, "highlighting those as main author and/or without the co-authorship of [the applicant's] PhD supervisor". My problem is that my best publications overall, as well as the publications most relevant to my proposal, list my PhD supervisor as the co-author, even though they had no significant involvement, neither in the formulation of the research questions, nor the planning and execution of the experiments, nor the writing up of the research results. This is because I worked in a fairly large research lab where the more experienced doctoral candidates and postdocs were granted considerable autonomy in pursuing their research, but it was the official, documented policy for the lab head to be credited as co-author on all publications, irrespective of their involvement. There was a minor kerfuffle when a colleague of mine pointed out that this policy was at odds with the ethics and authorship guidelines of the journals and proceedings we regularly published in. This resulted in the deletion of the policy from our lab's internal handbook, but the policy continued to be applied in practice. So I'm wondering what to do about my publication list in the grant application. Should I focus on the publications without my supervisor as the co-author, even though these aren't my strongest or most relevant work? If I do include one or more publications that list my supervisor as co-author, should I explain in the proposal that the co-authorship is purely nominal, or will this come across as suspicious, egotistical, and/or desperate? What course of action is most likely to leave a favorable impression on the reviewers? --- \*The program is the ERC Starting Grant, though my question is probably relevant for others applying for an ERC Consolidator Grant (which has the same evaluation criteria) or to similar programs from other funding agencies.<issue_comment>username_1: Assuming that you're not already too close to the 7-year maximum of post-doctoral experience for the ERC starting grant, I think the usual approach would be to work (and publish during) at least one postdoc contract in a lab other than your Ph.D. supervisor's before applying for the grant. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The guidance in the general description of the ERC suggests that applicants must show ["the potential for research independence ... for example by having produced at least one important publication without the participation of their PhD supervisor."](https://cordis.europa.eu/programme/id/H2020_ERC-2016-STG) I think there are two key points from this. Firstly, it is not necessary to fully avoid publications with your PhD supervisor - these are (relatively) early career grants, so your PhD will represent a sizeable fraction of your research experience and publication record. Particularly if the papers are strongly relevant to the proposal, don't shy away entirely from including them. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, is the purpose of this recommendation - to show independence, and this is important even in schemes without that explicit criteria. If all of your 'good' papers are in the same PI's lab, in an area associated with the group, then just saying your PI's co-authorship is nominal is unlikely to convince anyone. This is doubly so if you feel your research since leaving the group is of a significantly lower quality. If you can make a clear case about how you instigated and/or developed this research area in a way you can show some ownership, you might be able to convince the referees, but you would be giving yourself an uphill struggle. As noted by another answer, the easiest way to address these sorts of concerns is through mobility, and publishing good quality work as part of another group or smaller independent fellowship. If another year or two will give you the time you need to achieve that, then that might be well worth considering as it would significantly strengthen your position. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/05	342	1,525	<issue_start>username_0: Is it ethical for PhD advisor to collect ideas or even project description text from students/postdocs for his/her own funding proposal? Not sure how common this situation is, but this seems strange. Could anyone help?<issue_comment>username_1: Part of your training is learning how to write competitive funding applications. Contributing to them is part of your training and doing so early in your career generally means you're working for someone who's good at training. Being asked to write a funding proposal in it's entirely for your supervisor to sign would be inappropriate. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In many places, your stipend (including overhead) as well as the costs of running the lab, buying computers, publishing papers, and traveling to conferences all comes out of your PI's budget. That budget does not magically appear, but is funded through grants. Those grants have some leeway in what work they might support, but not infinite latitude. So: going forward do you want to be supported? If so, would you not prefer to be supported to do something that you want to do, rather than whatever your advisor can get funding for without any help from you? So, yes, it is entirely ethical for your professor/PI/advisor to ask you for ideas and even text to contribute to the grant application. Should you have no desire to help procure funding for the group to work on problems of interest to you, you really need to contemplate just how you are currently funded. Upvotes: 3
2021/03/05	647	2,732	<issue_start>username_0: Complex analysis (or more particularly contour integrals) is kicking me downhill (again), and I may need to drop it (again). If I do, I would only have to take a single course in my 5th undergraduate math degree, another 3rd year math course like complex analysis (3rd times a charm???). If I don't drop it, I risk getting a low enough GPA to not get into graduate school. I already applied. So how bad is taking another year? Did anyone else do this? How many of you were able to get into graduate school even after taking another year? Is there a bias? What are the pros versus the cons? People have mentioned this to me before in the past, like it was inevitable, but I never really considered it until now. When I ask others if they would do it, they act like it's unthinkable for them. Like they are inherently better than me so course they wouldn't need to do this.<issue_comment>username_1: If you have a really good relationship with one (or more) of your math profs then you could make a fifth year work to your advantage. Ask them what research opportunities you have with them, perhaps as an independent study. If you could put together a nice, but do-able, project to fill up the rest of the time for the additional year, then it could work out to be a plus. But this assumes, for purposes of graduate study, that your GPA is good enough and you have some insight into one or more math subfields. You don't need (nor is it possible to have) universal insight, but something with which you can be clearly predicted to be a success by letter writers. You are in a difficult place, I think, but is may still be possible to recover through hard work and faculty contacts. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Your future grades have zero impact on the outcome of graduate school applications made in the past. You say you have already applied, so most likely your question is not related to achieving the outcome you want. You probably do need to complete the bachelor's degree to start the graduate degree. Any admissions offers you receive may be rescinded if your final grades are too low, but I have never heard of an offer being rescinded, and some universities will not actually check those grades. Once you have a graduate degree, it is unlikely that anyone will care how long your undergraduate degree took. If your undergraduate degree overlapped the pandemic, then taking longer to finish will not be remarkable. Meeting the minimum standards for graduate school is not a good goal for your undergraduate studies. I suggest you make a longer term plan for your career. Graduate school is not a career, and not all graduate degrees are actually helpful. Upvotes: 1
2021/03/06	507	2,093	<issue_start>username_0: I’m starting my PhD this September in an Interdisciplinary degree that would fall in the realm of “resource economics” + “mathematical biology”. FWIW, I chose the interdisciplinary route because I want to carve out my own niche in the bioeconomics literature and my undergrad was in economics / math, my masters in renewable resource economics. Speaking to my two supervisors, I was told I can bring a third advisor on that is not necessarily at my institution - and this offered a world of options to approach authors who’s works have encouraged me. However, while there’s so much benefit for me to have a third committee member from, say, the United States (my PhD is in Canada), it’s not clear to me what value there is for the third member. One of my supervisors is an established mathematical biologist, the other is an economist with a similar interest in bioeconomic modelling. So I’d be curious to know, from an academic’s POV, if they were to be approached with something like this, where would the potential value proposition be for you? Keeping in mind that everything would be mostly virtual, and maybe at best case I could do a visiting appointment to work on collaborations.<issue_comment>username_1: Academics are ego driven and getting asked to be an outside committee member is a nice boost to the old "people have heard of me" ego. Plus someone's advisor is gonna owe me a favor, which means letter of support for a grant or maybe a letter supporting my promotion. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I suggest two things. First, most important, is that you don't make the pitch. Let one or both of your advisors do so, perhaps to a person you suggest. You might even give them a couple of suggestions and get their feedback. It is harder to turn down an invitation from a peer than from an unknown student. The email, if that is the communication mechanism, will be read and likely not ignored. Second make sure you lay out the responsibilities of the advisor early on so they are comfortable with the task they are taking on. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/06	772	3,194	<issue_start>username_0: (I don't believe this is a duplicate to [Can I publish a paper with new proof but the same result?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/95399/can-i-publish-a-paper-with-new-proof-but-the-same-result), because not only am I using a different proof, but also an axiomatisation that could perhaps be seen as controversial) I am a post graduate student of pure mathematics that hasn't published anything yet. Hypothetically, let's say that there's an established result in mathematics that was stated and proven using a popular axiomatisation. Let's say that if you state and prove the same result using a different (non-standard) axiomatisation, then the result becomes (perhaps debatably) more elegant. Is it possible for paper like this to be worthy of publication? If so, are there any specific journals that you think might be more likely to accept such a paper? Slightly more detail: The established result uses ZFC as axiomatisation, my approach uses ZFC + Atoms as axiomatisation. The result that I'm restating and reproving concerns general mathematical structures.<issue_comment>username_1: Often enough the proof of a theorem is more important than the statement of it. This is especially true when a new proof gives some insight into a problem that the original proof did not. I don't know whether your new proof is different enough or interesting enough or gives new insight, but if it is, then it would be an important thing to publish. An example of such a problem is the [Four Color Theorem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_color_theorem). When I was in school it was the Four Color Hypothesis and nearly everyone in my age cohort thought about it for a while I suspect. It was originally proved using computers to examine a very large number of special cases. But to a mathematician, this is a very unsatisfactory proof. One would love a short and insightful proof not depending on computation as it would be very likely to give insights into the nature of planar maps. The reason that such insight is important is that it can often lead to solving additional, unsolved, problems. So, you can certainly submit such a paper for publication, but it is editors and reviewers that will decide whether it "can" be published. But the feedback you get will be valuable in any case. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Presumably you'll do the work anyway, so you might as well attempt to get it published. The opinionated majority (tongue in cheek) may find it "unworthy", sure. Yet there may well be someone who'll get inspired by your work, or find the little insight they needed to keep moving in their work on another problem. I'd say that you may wish to keep at it until the publishing pursuits clearly won't be resolving in a constructive manner anymore - that is if the idea gets rejected without any feedback that you could use it to improve it. When it comes to such a dead-end, you can just stick it on your personal website as a "white paper", push it to arxiv, etc. But perhaps don't do that until you're sure that all avenues of pursuit available to get it published in mainstream journals get exhausted. Upvotes: 0
2021/03/06	4,096	17,705	<issue_start>username_0: TLDR: PhD student mentoring an undergrad in super competitive field. Undergrad has an amazing non-research CV, but no research experience. He says he's motivated but got very little done in 8 months. I will have to write him a letter of recommendation in the Fall and if things continue, it won't be good. What should I do now to avoid this without pressuring him too much into doing work? I'm an international PhD student doing Machine Learning at a top-4 US university. Last Summer I started mentoring 3 great students from my home university trying to create a win-win: I teach them about research and ML and help them get a paper to have a chance at entering a good grad school (ML is so hot it's now super hard), and I get help from top, motivated students and improve my mentoring skills. Before that, I had already mentored 10 students from the US university with the full range of success: from students that stopped coming after a couple of months, and 3 others that published with me, applied to grad school, and got into another top-4. The plan with these 3 students was to work virtually (everything is virtual in 2020-21) and I would try to bring them as visiting students once we could show something to my PIs. Out of the 3 students, one is doing amazing work and we invited him to come this summer and another realized he didn't like research and quickly dropped out. In a way, both are good endings. The third student is essentially the perfect undergrad: won gold medals in multiple national olympiads, top 1-3 in his promotion while doing 2 separate degrees in Math and CS, and winning international CS competitions in undergrad. However, you now need research to get into a top university in ML. * During the Summer, the student and I were meeting 5x per week and he did a bit of progress, but much less than I expected and a bit below the average of the students I've mentored. In particular, I gave him a concrete project which I was hoping to submit on a September deadline and it's now February. I avoided telling him anything because he's doing it for free: no credits, no money, just for the CV. He didn't realize he hadn't performed well during the Summer until I told him much later. * In the Fall he got close to nothing done even though we were meeting 3 times a week. In November I told him: "Hey, we're not making progress, maybe we should stop working together. We're losing our time and I would like the project to be completed since ML moves very fast.". He told me he's very motivated and he'd put more hours in. Didn't happen. * In January the subdepartment of my home university where I studied contacted me: I had previously convinced my PIs to bring one student to do a final degree project. This subdepartment has gained an international reputation and now has lots of spots all over top places for students to go. They do a matching so that students with the highest GPA get to choose where they go first. Because the non-working student has a top GPA he got to choose me. So next Fall he's coming to do paid full-time research with me. This also "guarantees" that one of my PIs will write him a letter based on my first draft. * In February, he asked me for a letter for a fellowship. I told him I couldn't write him a very good letter. He said he hadn't really understood that getting into grad school implied having good research, not just good GPA and Scientific extra-curriculars, where he was indeed investing a lot of time. So we agreed I would write that he had lots of potential, but he hadn't had much time because of all his academic commitments. This was indeed 100% true and maaaybe good enough for the fellowship, but it's not going to cut it for grad school. He told me he realized that he hadn't done much and he would now devote 20h/week. Spoiler alert: hasn't happened. In the meantime, the idea I gave him is stuck, terrible in a rapidly moving field, and it's increasingly likely he won't have anything published by the grad application deadline. Having now mentored 15 students, I'm pretty confident I'm giving him reasonably easy work. I've kept simplifying and concretizing and for the last few months, it involved just something slightly more complicated than the introductory 1h Deep Learning tutorial. I once tried myself to make progress on what I was asking him and got more done in 2h than him in 2 months. I believe he thinks that because the subdepartment has many students in top places, and he's one of the best in GPA, that he'll get accepted. But, having helped with ML admissions, he doesn't stand a chance with zero papers. More importantly, right now my opinion of him isn't good and a sincere letter (which I 100% intend to write) would have to convey this. However, I've read in this community that you shouldn't write a negative letter. Given that there are 8 months left, some of which he'll be working full time, there is time for a change. What can I do to maximize the chances of a good outcome? Some solutions involve being extremely pushy. However, I have seen what exploitative advisors can do to some friends of mine and I don't want to be such a PI. Finally, not sure if relevant context, but I'll be applying for professor myself next Fall.<issue_comment>username_1: If you think your letter won't be good, you should refuse to write the letter. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: > > right now I'm very dissatisfied with him and a sincere letter (which I 100% intend to write) would have to convey this > > > First, let's cut the student some slack. They are probably exhausted and burnt out from all the coursework and other academic activities. The problem doesn't seem to be laziness; rather, it seems to be self-awareness: they overestimate the number of things they can do well at any given time and underestimate the importance of having successfully completed a (research) project. The dilemma you must face is how much of this to discuss with the student. * On one hand, it is worth making your expectations (and grad schools' expectations) clear; you don't want them to say "I did everything you told me and got screwed" when grad school decisions come out. And certainly, there is a limit to how much time you want to spend on a student that is not performing. * On the other hand, forcing students to be successful undergraduate researchers is not necessarily the right thing (even if it were possible); students who have unsuccessful research experiences and end up with mediocre letters of recommendation and no publications can learn a lot in the process (both about science and about themselves). > > So next Fall he's coming to do paid full-time research with me...What can I do to maximize the chances of a good outcome...[without] being extremely pushy? > > > I have two pieces of advice. The first is to make your technical expectations clear. Presumably, you want this idea submitted to a journal by November. You can work with the student to come up with a roadmap for this, with interim milestones. For a student, seeing the long-term plan, with a concrete outcome, can be very helpful. And both of you can objectively measure the student's performance against the roadmap; there are no surprises in the fall. The second is an attendance requirement. There is no need to change your supervision practice, but consider requiring the student to spend time physically in the building doing work each day. You may consider this pushy, but for paid, full-time research, I think it is reasonable, and has two key advantages: * Sometimes getting started on research is the hardest part. After things start happening, the project becomes fun. * Lots of great interactions happen between people who are physically writing code together. Certainly the student will learn more from you if you can drop by their desk and work together at the same computer. And if multiple students are working in a room together (even on different projects), they can learn from each other as well. I'm not suggesting that the student has to do the entire project at their desk in the building, but requiring their physical presence, say, 6 hours a day for the first month or two might help break the logjam and get the project moving. And certainly it will give you a better view of the situation, which can only help your letter. > > This also guarantees that one of my PIs will write him a letter based on my first draft. > > > I would consider discussing the situation with the PIs now; this brings the potential issue to their attention early, and they may be able to provide advice that takes all the individual local factors into account. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: It is not your job to get the student into graduate school. As a recommender, it is your job to decide if you want to recommend the student and to write an honest letter if you do. You may wish to give the student advice on how to improve their chances of getting into school, but ultimately it is their path. There is nothing forcing you to write a letter. If you do not wish to do so, then you should politely decline. If you do decide to recommend the student, your letter should focus on the positive qualities that you can speak to. It would be good to communicate to the student how much stronger your letter would be if they had more research experience. But your letter should focus on the student’s accomplishments and potential that you see. As another answer has already pointed out, the student might be exhausted with all of the work that they have done; perhaps you could discuss that in your letter. Ultimately you do not decide if the student is fit for graduate school. The admission committee will see the lack of research experience without you pointing it out in a letter. Again, it would be good to communicate frankly with the student about how much stronger their chances would be if they improved their research, but they are entitled to their own path. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Your job as a mentor is not to “maximize the chances of a good outcome”. The problem with that mindset is that your definition of a good outcome won’t be the same as everyone else’s. And an outcome that might appear good in the short term (e.g., getting into an ultra-competitive grad program) might end up disastrous in the longer term if it is achieved by someone who doesn’t have what it takes to succeed in such a program. So I suggest adopting the mindset that your job as a mentor is simply to offer good mentorship. Give good advice, give honest, accurate information about what it takes to succeed in research and to get into a good grad school, and what your standards are for writing a helpful letter of recommendation (and of course, as you yourself said, don’t compromise your integrity when writing the letter). However “good” or “not good” the outcome turns out to be, if you did those things then you’ve fulfilled your responsibilities as a mentor in the best possible way. Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: Inform the student that because of the fact that them did not produce anything of value, your letter will reflect that and it is not going to help them. Tell them that them would be better off not listing their time with you on thier applications. If they persists in asking for a letter, send a short missive that summarizes the project and its outcomes but do not "evaluate". The institutions are not interested in you or your opinions, they are interested in what this person can do. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: It is obvious that the student is highly capable, but simply has too much going on in their life, and haven't had time to dedicate themselves to this project that they are doing with you for free. So obviously your work will be at the bottom of their priority list. To me, it seems obvious what's going on. The student signed up for this project so he could write on his resume "I did this". You signed the student up expecting him to deliver tangible results. These are two different things entirely. The student is just looking for experience, you're looking for results. And honestly, I think that's on you. Considering the way you've sold this idea to your students, and considering the way it sounds like your student is very confused as to what you expect from him, it sounds to me like there's been a complete miscommunication (from you) regarding what this project is actually about. If you wanted him to produce results in a summer, that should've been made clear from the get-go. But the fact that you expected results in September and yet you didn't even tell him that until February, is a clear sign that you might be the one mishandling this situation, and causing confusion due to bad communication. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: If your account is accurate the this student is clearly prioritizing his undergrad studies over this research assisting work. And it also shows that you have been too willing to entertain promises of future work from him than you have been to insist that he call it a day. Your post highlights so many things wrong with academic research today. Having bright overseas undergrads sent to top US university departments for a prelude to "research" on a topic chosen for them rather than something they envisioned themselves and having them "supervised" by PhD candidates just a few years older than them is just plain foolish. They would be far better focussing on their own final year undergrad dissertation (on a topic they devised for themselves) with constructive comment from a lecturer. That is the best way to learn how to marry novelty and monotony, harmonize imagination and rigour and extract essence from substance to produce valuable research. Many students require a Master's program to get a clear sense of this. Getting it from a Y3/Y4 undergrad is simply impossible. From the "amazing work" student, you have either got: 1. A natural researcher, the rare combination of intuition, intelligence and good luck; or 2. Someone sacrificing their own ideas to devote their mind to validating yours. They hope someday to attain a position where they can finally do their own thing: but this is just another El Dorado. If I were you, I'd advise your problem student to stop this research assistance work under you to focus on his undergrad work and on trying to find his own research perspective, if not finding himself. I sense that this chap has a way of charming people into believing in him, then using the same charm to diminish the usual consequence of letting someone down: this cannot be encouraged - it's bad for his life and for the patience of those around him. More importantly, I would advise you to drop this mentoring work altogether. A programme that selects potential researchers from a field of students who have only proven that they are good absorbers and synthesizers of knowledge found by others is not going to be successful. Experience shows that while good synthesizers may well become good teachers if they have a desire to enlighten young people, they never come up with innovative ideas by themselves - they just hijack those of others and vary the look of them. Nobody wins if you start injecting this kind of individual into a research environment. They will never leave an unsuitable work environment of their own accord - and they may well use their intelligence and charm to cause division there. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: I want to add one thought to all the previous answers. Although not your problem to.solve, be aware that underperformance can arise as a result of mental health ("MH") issues - problems that haven't come up before, or in the same way. That's not uncommon at undergraduate level. A student has suffered from undiagnosed MH issues, ADHD, depression, trauma, BPD, autism spectrum/aspergers, take your choice. They now have to.self manage much more, in an environment with high pressure challenges and either away from home, without peer support, in a new environment, in a home-but-covid environment that leaves them dejected, something happens or happened maybe... and they just can't cope,or gradually things falter apart. The energy and skillset to handle it is low. Sometimes they know what's up but not where to get help, sometimes they don't really realise it themselves. You might want to be aware of it and consider if there is a way you can check if they feel okay, if the issue is about the course, their study circumstances, or their personal/emotional circumstances. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: This is really a management and leadership question. The student cannot perform unless he/she receives periodic feedback which serves to inform where effort should be increased or redirected. These intervals should be as short as possible so the student can immediately see how his redirected efforts are doing. For example if the student has received mentoring that he should increase his research efforts, in what direction those efforts should be directed, and what parameters should be set. At the next feedback session his work should be compared with what he mentor recommended at the previous session. The mentor should advise the student if minor corrections are needed and commend him for the work done in that period, wish him well for the next period. This periodic feedback serves to keep the student on track, allows him to know where his efforts should be focused, and gives ample time for correcting faults. If this is not done I feel it is the mentor's failure not the students. Upvotes: 1
2021/03/07	1,348	5,781	<issue_start>username_0: When I hear a lecture, If the instructor is the kind I like, then I can easily understand what part of what I'm learning is important and the true crux of the ideas. Like I can pick it up from how the varying their tone , how loudly they speak and how many times they repeat an idea. However when I read a book, I don't get that same effect. Each idea is stated only once and I have a hard time figuring out what is significant from what is not. So, when self studying from a book, how do you know which part of a book is significant and important? Or is the described above just a feature of lectures? Context subjects: Physics and Mathematics<issue_comment>username_1: > > how do you know which part of a book is significant and important? > > > It's all important. Since you mention physics, I'll use the example of Griffiths' E&M book, which goes into quite a bit of detail about waveguides. Many professors (quite reasonably) skip this material, as it is "less significant" than other chapters which discuss general topics like Maxwell's Equations, the Wave Equation, radiation, and relativistic electrodynamics. Yet, waveguides are an entire industry (of which Griffiths only scratches the surface), so I would hesitate to say that the discussion is insignificant or unimportant. > > Or is the described above just a feature of lectures? > > > I think the real feature of lectures is brevity. By turning a long book (or a portion of the book) into 42 bite-sized pieces, it is easier to make sense of things. And once you've had 42 bites, it is easier to read the book and fill in the rest of the gaps. In the absence of lectures, then, you could instead treat each subsection as a "bite", and try to understand it in isolation. > > Context subjects: Physics and Mathematics > > > The key to most physics and math courses is the problem solving. Many introductory students make the mistake of reading the textbook, making beautiful notes, memorizing the examples, etc., but their first time working on a previously-unseen problem is during the exam. In my experience, the ideal balance is almost exactly the opposite -- students should spend ~90% of their time working problems, even if this means they don't read much of the book. For self-study, this means that the availability of a solutions manual is an absolutely essential criterion when choosing a textbook. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The experimental evidence shows that neither reading a book nor listening to lectures are effective ways for average students to learn physics. Instead of trying those things, try solving problems. The problems can come from a book or a lecture if you want. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: You've accurately described a major advantage of most lectures over most textbooks. A well-written textbook will try to compensate by making good use of highlighting, section separation, introductions/conclusions to sections and other textual features, but this is tricky to do, and to the author often feels like unnecessary padding so that many textbooks end up highly information-dense with little indication of what are considered the key definitions/results/explanations and what plays more of a supporting role. However, textbooks have a major advantage over lectures which is that they stay put and can be read multiple times, at multiple speeds, and you can easily return to certain parts. So my recommendations would be: * Make sure to pay attention to section introductions and conclusions, since they are likely to signpost the kind of key points/overall structure you are interested in. * The first time you read, don't try to commit everything to memory or understand it in any detail. Your aim should be to build up a feeling for the 'geography' of the chapter and how each part fits (roughly) into the wider context. You can then get a sense of what to pay most attention to when you read it a second time. * You can supplement this by using other resources simultaneously: for example, you might have the Wikipedia article or a YouTube video open as well. The key points which every presentation mentions are probably important to focus on. For example, suppose you have a dense analysis textbook. Hopefully the chapter introductions will give a rough roadmap of what the key results in the chapter are, which is a great starting point. Read the chapter fairly briskly, not attempting to follow the proofs, and you will gain a sense for which are the key definitions that get used again and again, and which proofs play a less crucial supporting role. Then you can go through the chapter again in more detail paying attention to those key points. At the same time, you might have a Wikipedia article open which mentions certain points but doesn't mention others, so that is another indication of what to focus on (although of course notation might differ). Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Different people have different ways in which they learn most efficiently. There are [four main types of learners](https://www.rasmussen.edu/student-experience/college-life/most-common-types-of-learners/): * Visual learners who can learn best from diagrams, videos or by making observations in real life. * Auditory learners who can learn best from listening to other people. * Reading and writing learners who can learn best from reading texts or writing texts themselves. * Kinesthetic learners who can learn best from doing things themselves. It appears that you are more of an auditory learner rather than a reading learner. So when you want to learn about a subject, you might want to try learning from resources like audio-books or podcasts. Upvotes: -1
2021/03/07	845	3,575	<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently enrolled for a master's degree in pure mathematics. My supervisor agrees with me that I discovered a new and noteworthy branch of mathematics (and rigorously proved the results). We both also agree that discovering a new branch of mathematics is not a trivial task. I asked him about the possibility of upgrading my master's thesis to a PhD thesis. He says it is theoretically possible to upgrade a Master's to a PhD at our university, but he reckons my thesis does not have enough sustenance for the upgrade. (At our university there is an option to do a thesis-only masters and a thesis-only PhD, without formal coursework.) He reckons that I would only be able to publish one paper with my current thesis. He also says that he would normally expect at least three publications to come from a PhD thesis in pure mathematics, but because my discovery required a greater than normal amount of creativity, he reckons an upgrade would still be possible if two publications came from my thesis. Is this reasonable? Is discovering a new and noteworthy branch of Mathematics not necessarily worth a PhD (regardless of the quantity of papers that get published from it)?<issue_comment>username_1: Without more details it's obviously impossible to tell from the outside, but in general, the supervisor is usually right. After all they know what their student did intimately, they know what the institution's requirements are, and so on. Note your supervisor isn't saying your discovery isn't significant. They aren't even saying your work isn't at PhD level. They could very well be thinking of engaging more Masters/PhD students to follow up on what you've done. What they're saying is that you need to do more work (aka: get more results) to be awarded a PhD. Viewed another way, you're like a PhD student who's completed the first year of a three-year program. Said PhD student can't just decide to graduate because the results they got during the first year are robust; they need two more years of work to have enough material for their thesis. So it's not unreasonable. If you want the PhD you'll have to put in more time. If money is a concern, you could ask if funding is available for you to convert to PhD studies; otherwise you'll have to be content with a Masters degree. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: For readers here, the question is too abstract. We haven't seen the work. And our opinion is worth exactly nothing if your advisor and the university don't agree. The work might be great, or good, or OK. The "new branch" might be significant or not. "Noteworthy" is a judgement that hasn't been tested yet in the wider world. We can't make the evaluation. But your advisor has seen it and is in a position to judge. I suggest that you follow his advice and do what is necessary to complete the degree. It is probably best to move from the MS track to the PhD track, I think, rather than just take the lesser degree and then have to start over. You will probably benefit from taking a bit more time and a deeper look. You will really only learn of the potential impact of your work by submitting it for publication and letting the wider world have a look at it. Maybe you get a Fields Medal. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: If he says you need more work, do it. If this is a new and significant branch of mathematics, then lots of research should be possible starting with it. Now (before publication) you have a head start on everyone else who will surely jump in to work on it after you publish. Upvotes: 1
2021/03/07	735	2,999	<issue_start>username_0: I am working on an application for a job ad that lists available tenure-track and non-tenure track jobs in the same ad. I would want (and am qualified for) either position, but there are, of course, more non-tt positions. Is there an industry standard for how I should approach the cover letter. For example, should I: * Just choose one job to apply for. * Mention in my letter that I would like to be considered for both/either. * Send in separate applications for both? Any advice would be appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: Assuming that this is a university that does not have a billion-dollar endowment, if you state in your letter that you are willing to accept either tenure-track or non-tenure-track jobs, you are unlikely to get a tenure-track offer. Apply for the lowest ranked position you will accept. The job market is currently at its lowest point since 1945. If that does not apply to your situation, then this advice might not apply. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Schools sometimes double up their job ads in ways confusing to applicants. For instance, a school may identify a single position as "Instructor, Assistant, Associate, or Full Professor," or as "Instructor/Assistant Professor/Associate Professor," signalling that they would offer a title based on the chosen applicant's experience and credentials. Alternatively, they may have multiple positions open but file one job ad. (It could be a deliberate [cluster hire](https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/05/01/new-report-says-cluster-hiring-can-lead-increased-faculty-diversity), or just a matter of how the department filed the positions.) What you're describing is a blend of both approaches - hiring for positions of multiple ranks in one institution in one ad. There is no industry standard for how applicants should handle this exact situation. Instead, I'd advise treating each position like a separate search. File applications for each position you would like that you are qualified for. This is the recommendation of [<NAME> (The Professor Is In)](https://community.chronicle.com/news/295-the-professor-is-in-1-department-2-jobs-should-i-apply-to-both), for instance, if a department advertises two positions: > > But anyway, my answer is yes. If you are a plausible candidate for both searches, apply for both. In most cases the search committees will be made up of different faculty members, and while files may be shared across searches, you can’t assume that they will be. So to make sure your file is read by all concerned parties, send it to both searches. > > > So you should tailor cover letters and other materials to each position and its requirements. If that means applying for an NTT position that emphasizes teaching and a TT position that emphasizes research, address teaching more in the NTT application and foreground research in the TT position. Let the respective committees behind the ad decide whether they want you. Upvotes: 1
2021/03/08	794	3,593	<issue_start>username_0: I have been applying to a bunch of grad programs recently and I have noticed that some schools, specially those based in the UK, ask students to upload the reference letters themselves to the application platform, instead of sending an e-mail to the nominated referees. This puts me in an awkward position because the point of the letters is to be confidential and asking the professors to send them to me would mean that they would either refuse or send me a "plain" letter, as I have heard from colleagues that those are the replies they have been getting. What is the proper way to proceed in this situation? How do I ask a professor to send me a decent letter that they would not mind me seeing?<issue_comment>username_1: I had this experience as a letter writer (in France). I just sent my letter to the applicant and she uploaded it. My letter was very positive so I did not think much about the situation although it did seem weird to me. I think in some US Universities (in California?), when you submit your letter, you should indicate whether you allow the applicant to look at it or not. I do not write bad letters so I always indicate that I do not mind. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: For what it's worth, in the US you are in fact legally entitled to see your letters under FERPA. Most schools ask you to waive your right by checking a box on the application. So it's not exactly true that the point of letters is to be confidential, it's just that programs think the letter is more reliable if it is. A professor who is honest with you shouldn't much care one way or the other. Most professors already know that different countries have different standards for applications, so they shouldn't think it's weird that a UK school wants you to upload the letter yourself. If you have some concerns about whether they believe you, just send them a link to the instructions. As for what kind of letter you will get, if a professor balks at giving you an open letter, then you probably don't want the letter anyway. I never understood why people make a big deal out of "confidentiality" when it comes to this. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: As an applicant, the best and only thing you can do is follow the application guidelines. When asking your professors for letters, explain the situation clearly, and perhaps provide a link to the application guidelines indicating that you are supposed to upload the letter yourself. Perhaps you could encourage your recommenders to include their contact information in the text of the letter itself. This is not only a gesture of integrity, but it also assures the recommender that reviewer will be able to contact them to confirm it hasn't been altered. Ultimately, unless you have previously given your letter writers some reason to think that you will forge their letter (in which case you have bigger problems to deal with), I wouldn't worry about this at all. Although it's usually standard practice to keep letters secret, there are some programs like yours that ask applicants to upload or forward their letters themselves. If your recommenders haven't encountered this situation yet, they are bound to sooner or later. Finally, some letter writers send a copy to the student anyway, just to offer encouragement or for use in later recommendations. For certain job applications, I used to include a quote from one of my letters of recommendation as a sort of "testimonial" to my work ethic. Depending on the field, you may find this useful—just ask permission first. Upvotes: 0
2021/03/08	2,404	10,048	<issue_start>username_0: I have BSc and MSc in Chemistry, and I have enrolled in a PhD project in Europe since mid of last year. The project is funded by the food department that means I would officially be a "PhD in Food Science" after completion. I think I have made the wrong decision to be here because I want to find a position in chemistry department or industry. I have checked job advertisements from chemistry institutions and found that none of them hiring PhD in Food even for the subfield (not Food chemistry, unfortunately) I'm working on. Chemistry is a highly competitive field and I think I would lose my competence. I also doubt if I'm qualified to be a food scientist without previous education in food. In the end, my choice would be to quit or stick it out. But I'm debating if an MSc in A plus PhD in B better than MSc in A for a job in A field. Anyone have experienced this situation before?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't know what is right for you, but I'll tell you that there is little in life that is worse than a career in something that you don't care about while having unfulfilled dreams. I suspect that you are early enough in your studies that a change won't cost you much, and spending a year now to avoid 30 years of boredom might (might) be a good investment. There are a lot of people in the world who don't get a chance to choose. If you do, then, perhaps you should look for an optimal path and see if you have a way to follow it. Changing fields after a doctorate is not impossible, but hard since you need to perform in the old field while preparing for the new. That takes time also. I can't answer the specific question about balancing MS degrees and such since I don't know your goals for a "job". --- Your life isn't a "dress rehearsal" for something else. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: If you want to be a successful chemist you generally will need a PhD, at least if you plan to work in Europe. You should worry less about the specific designation of your PhD than about if you will acquire useful skills that transfer well to the type of industry you are interested in working in. Other options are working in the public service (e.g., in a consumer protection agency?) or staying in academia. Even with the latter two, the content of your research will matter more than the designation of your PhD. So, you need to answer two questions: 1. Are you interested in your PhD project and will that interest last until the finish line? 2. Can this PhD project lead to a career path that you will be happy with? If you answer any of these with "No.", you should switch to a different project. However, you should have considered all of this before accepting the position. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I’m not European, but I assume PhDs in Food are not the most common thing and are not offered by most universities. This answer is proceeding under that assumption. Assuming that you are doing research in chemistry and developing the necessary skills and competencies to work as an industrial chemist, I do not think having a PhD that’s officially in “Food” will be a significant hurdle. There are a lot of things that you can get a PhD in, and it’s impossible for job postings to list all possibly relevant departments. This is why you will often see language like “PhD in X, Y, Z, or a related field.” Institutions are aware that there are all sorts of unusual official degree titles, and tend to not be very strict about only allowing people with PhDs in a short list of approved fields get jobs. What is important is that your CV clearly indicates that you are a chemist. This means that you are a member of chemistry academic associations, publish in chemistry journals, and speak at chemistry conferences. It’s fine if you also do those things at food science venues, but it’s important that someone with no knowledge of food looks at your CV and says “ah yes, this person is a chemist.” If you have members of the chemistry department on your dissertation committee, ask them for advice about positioning yourself as a chemist. The same goes for professors in the chemistry department who you collaborate with or who have expressed interest in your research. If you do not have any such people, that may be a sign that your current trajectory isn’t “chemistry enough” to be recognized as chemistry by the academic community. Another good strategy is to look at recent placements for people with degrees in Food at your university. Do they get jobs at the kinds of places you want to be? If there are a variety of types of people in the Food program (food anthropologists, food chemists, food historians, etc) you should focus on the Food chemists specifically. Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Having no career at all is worse than a career in something that you don't care about while having unfulfilled dreams. Overqualifying yourself out of the jobs you want to do is bad news. It's good that you've spotted this as a potential problem before you invested the years necessary to get the PhD. On the bright side, statistics indicate it's rare for PhDs to be unemployed - so you should be able to get a job somewhere, even if it's not something you really want to do. I suggest visiting your university's career center. They will be familiar with your local job market. They can confirm if your conclusions are correct, and advise you on your options if you decide to quit now. For example, it could be possible that employers aren't advertising for for PhDs, but they will accept PhDs anyway. It's an important decision, so make sure you have all the information you can get before you make it. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: PhDs are all unique - I've heard it said that a PhD is the process of becoming so specialised in a field that you are the world expert by default. As a consequence, when hiring someone with a PhD a (good!) recruiter won't worry about exactly what the PhD was in (because it'll never match what they want) so much as what skills you learnt along the way - scientific method, many forms of communication skills, evidence evaluation, structuring large documents and long projects, and, most importantly, how quickly you can learn new stuff. Job adverts are a poor guide to what recruiters want. Many are badly written and/or managed, and those ones go unfilled and thus stay open for longer. Good job adverts by good recruiters disappear fast because they get an appropriate candidate quickly. So at at any particular time, bad job adverts are over-represented compared to the good adverts. I suggest you talk to your university / department / course careers advice and/or pastoral care contact. They will be able to give you a far more accurate view of possible career paths, and opportunities that might be available for you e.g. industrial placement, which are great if you see yourself outside of academia in the long term. A PhD is a long and difficult process, and many that start see them selves as an academic at the end - but that is impractical for the vast majority simply because 1 academic will have 20+ PhD students over their career when only 1 is needed to replace them. You may find that career paths are available to you that you had not considered, or you may find that you don't want what you thought you did. I strongly recommend no rash actions - take at least 3 months to think it over, and get a wide range of viewpoints on your situation. I think you would find it hard to get a second PhD opportunity without a life and death reason for stopping the first. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: in which country specifically are you doing your PhD? I live in Europe and I've been a scientist for some years already, but I've never heard of a title "PhD in Food". Usually the titles sound more serious than that. Quick internet search showed me, there's "Professional Doctorate in Agriculture and Food (DAgriFood)" in the UK, but as I understand it's not a PhD (Brits, correct me if I'm wrong). There's also "PhD in Food Science" in Finland, which I'd assume would be accepted as similar field in job offers for PhD in Chemistry (especially in the food industry). You should definitely have it checked, what exactly the title is, perhaps you are worrying for nothing. There are two things you should keep in mind. The PhD studies are quite formative, but with a high probability you won't use the very specific knowledge you'll obtain working on your PhD project, if you leave academia. In that sense, the project itself doesn't play much of a role, the point is you get the title. The other thing to consider is, however, whether the project is interesting to you. PhD studies can be a great adventure, but only when you are happy about what you are doing. If you are disinterested, you are doing a disservice both yourself and your supervisor. Hope that helps a little. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: ### Context: In Germany, the Doctor title is usually completed with the field in a crude historic way. What kind of Doctor is available depends on the faculty - in my case my faculty (which also deals with food and more) awarded some funny Dr. types (engineering, food, etc.), but not a Dr. rer. nat (natural science, fitting for chemistry, physics, biology, environmental science and more). I, along with half of the PhD students of the faculty just did the dissertation with some formal cooperation with the "real science" faculty and we got our Dr. rer. nat. After at least 20 years of this practice my faculty decided at last to award the Dr. rer. nat. directly, thus solving this "problem". Answer to the question: ----------------------- You might be able to get the "right" PhD by cooperating with another faculty, but it depends on culture, written and unwritten rules of your department / faculty. There is a good chance you are not the first with that situation. So the answer is, as in most cases at this site: Speak with your advisor. Upvotes: 0
2021/03/08	2,611	10,949	<issue_start>username_0: Perhaps this question is slightly out of scope for this page, but I still ask here. Can you work for a university/academic institution as a researcher or as a teacher, with the status of a freelancer? In case this helps, I'm based in France and have applied for a freelance status (called auto-entrepreneur/micro entrepreneur in the French administrative terms), and even though I'm searching for regular temporary/permanent position in France, this hasn't seen any success yet, so I want to use that freelance status to do research at a high level (at least postdoctoral) as I strongly feel I'm genuinely passionate by fundamental research, so I've to find a way to do so, even if I may or may not be good enough to secure a formal position. Just in case this helps: my subject(s) will be ideally the intersection between differential geometry and statistics/statistical machine learning, manifold learning, but open to other topics, e.g. applied differential geometry, or just statistical learning etc. From my having spent long time in academia, I've never seen this happening, because normally the academic contracts are either regular CDD or CDI's. But I wonder if the above possibilities still exist in France or abroad? EDIT: Some people asked me about my motivation for the same. It is my continued interest to do research and publish, but also to earn some money on the side by consulting or freelance jobs etc. IN fact once you're a freelance, you can hire other freelance to do your freelance projects not related to academia/research, so essentially some income without working, where I work on academic research projects myself. This is the reason I want my postdoc related contract to be a freelance once, where I can be employed as a consultant for a project.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't know what is right for you, but I'll tell you that there is little in life that is worse than a career in something that you don't care about while having unfulfilled dreams. I suspect that you are early enough in your studies that a change won't cost you much, and spending a year now to avoid 30 years of boredom might (might) be a good investment. There are a lot of people in the world who don't get a chance to choose. If you do, then, perhaps you should look for an optimal path and see if you have a way to follow it. Changing fields after a doctorate is not impossible, but hard since you need to perform in the old field while preparing for the new. That takes time also. I can't answer the specific question about balancing MS degrees and such since I don't know your goals for a "job". --- Your life isn't a "dress rehearsal" for something else. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: If you want to be a successful chemist you generally will need a PhD, at least if you plan to work in Europe. You should worry less about the specific designation of your PhD than about if you will acquire useful skills that transfer well to the type of industry you are interested in working in. Other options are working in the public service (e.g., in a consumer protection agency?) or staying in academia. Even with the latter two, the content of your research will matter more than the designation of your PhD. So, you need to answer two questions: 1. Are you interested in your PhD project and will that interest last until the finish line? 2. Can this PhD project lead to a career path that you will be happy with? If you answer any of these with "No.", you should switch to a different project. However, you should have considered all of this before accepting the position. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I’m not European, but I assume PhDs in Food are not the most common thing and are not offered by most universities. This answer is proceeding under that assumption. Assuming that you are doing research in chemistry and developing the necessary skills and competencies to work as an industrial chemist, I do not think having a PhD that’s officially in “Food” will be a significant hurdle. There are a lot of things that you can get a PhD in, and it’s impossible for job postings to list all possibly relevant departments. This is why you will often see language like “PhD in X, Y, Z, or a related field.” Institutions are aware that there are all sorts of unusual official degree titles, and tend to not be very strict about only allowing people with PhDs in a short list of approved fields get jobs. What is important is that your CV clearly indicates that you are a chemist. This means that you are a member of chemistry academic associations, publish in chemistry journals, and speak at chemistry conferences. It’s fine if you also do those things at food science venues, but it’s important that someone with no knowledge of food looks at your CV and says “ah yes, this person is a chemist.” If you have members of the chemistry department on your dissertation committee, ask them for advice about positioning yourself as a chemist. The same goes for professors in the chemistry department who you collaborate with or who have expressed interest in your research. If you do not have any such people, that may be a sign that your current trajectory isn’t “chemistry enough” to be recognized as chemistry by the academic community. Another good strategy is to look at recent placements for people with degrees in Food at your university. Do they get jobs at the kinds of places you want to be? If there are a variety of types of people in the Food program (food anthropologists, food chemists, food historians, etc) you should focus on the Food chemists specifically. Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Having no career at all is worse than a career in something that you don't care about while having unfulfilled dreams. Overqualifying yourself out of the jobs you want to do is bad news. It's good that you've spotted this as a potential problem before you invested the years necessary to get the PhD. On the bright side, statistics indicate it's rare for PhDs to be unemployed - so you should be able to get a job somewhere, even if it's not something you really want to do. I suggest visiting your university's career center. They will be familiar with your local job market. They can confirm if your conclusions are correct, and advise you on your options if you decide to quit now. For example, it could be possible that employers aren't advertising for for PhDs, but they will accept PhDs anyway. It's an important decision, so make sure you have all the information you can get before you make it. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: PhDs are all unique - I've heard it said that a PhD is the process of becoming so specialised in a field that you are the world expert by default. As a consequence, when hiring someone with a PhD a (good!) recruiter won't worry about exactly what the PhD was in (because it'll never match what they want) so much as what skills you learnt along the way - scientific method, many forms of communication skills, evidence evaluation, structuring large documents and long projects, and, most importantly, how quickly you can learn new stuff. Job adverts are a poor guide to what recruiters want. Many are badly written and/or managed, and those ones go unfilled and thus stay open for longer. Good job adverts by good recruiters disappear fast because they get an appropriate candidate quickly. So at at any particular time, bad job adverts are over-represented compared to the good adverts. I suggest you talk to your university / department / course careers advice and/or pastoral care contact. They will be able to give you a far more accurate view of possible career paths, and opportunities that might be available for you e.g. industrial placement, which are great if you see yourself outside of academia in the long term. A PhD is a long and difficult process, and many that start see them selves as an academic at the end - but that is impractical for the vast majority simply because 1 academic will have 20+ PhD students over their career when only 1 is needed to replace them. You may find that career paths are available to you that you had not considered, or you may find that you don't want what you thought you did. I strongly recommend no rash actions - take at least 3 months to think it over, and get a wide range of viewpoints on your situation. I think you would find it hard to get a second PhD opportunity without a life and death reason for stopping the first. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: in which country specifically are you doing your PhD? I live in Europe and I've been a scientist for some years already, but I've never heard of a title "PhD in Food". Usually the titles sound more serious than that. Quick internet search showed me, there's "Professional Doctorate in Agriculture and Food (DAgriFood)" in the UK, but as I understand it's not a PhD (Brits, correct me if I'm wrong). There's also "PhD in Food Science" in Finland, which I'd assume would be accepted as similar field in job offers for PhD in Chemistry (especially in the food industry). You should definitely have it checked, what exactly the title is, perhaps you are worrying for nothing. There are two things you should keep in mind. The PhD studies are quite formative, but with a high probability you won't use the very specific knowledge you'll obtain working on your PhD project, if you leave academia. In that sense, the project itself doesn't play much of a role, the point is you get the title. The other thing to consider is, however, whether the project is interesting to you. PhD studies can be a great adventure, but only when you are happy about what you are doing. If you are disinterested, you are doing a disservice both yourself and your supervisor. Hope that helps a little. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: ### Context: In Germany, the Doctor title is usually completed with the field in a crude historic way. What kind of Doctor is available depends on the faculty - in my case my faculty (which also deals with food and more) awarded some funny Dr. types (engineering, food, etc.), but not a Dr. rer. nat (natural science, fitting for chemistry, physics, biology, environmental science and more). I, along with half of the PhD students of the faculty just did the dissertation with some formal cooperation with the "real science" faculty and we got our Dr. rer. nat. After at least 20 years of this practice my faculty decided at last to award the Dr. rer. nat. directly, thus solving this "problem". Answer to the question: ----------------------- You might be able to get the "right" PhD by cooperating with another faculty, but it depends on culture, written and unwritten rules of your department / faculty. There is a good chance you are not the first with that situation. So the answer is, as in most cases at this site: Speak with your advisor. Upvotes: 0
2021/03/08	2,573	10,926	<issue_start>username_0: My journey through academia has been a hard-fought battle against myself and all my worst traits. I'm now finishing my PhD and concurrently teaching courses in which I inevitably come across students who do things that remind me of my own mistakes. I find myself empathizing and trying to find bits of 'life wisdom' to impart, with the goal of being helpful. I don't remember ever being on the receiving end of such an email. I'm also certain that my colleagues don't it, which, given that they're quite good at their jobs and I'm relatively new at this, makes me want to evaluate this tendency critically. Here's an example: > > Student missed a deadline for a makeup assignment. Class policy > (decided elsewhere) is that this forfeits their right to an exam > retake. So I send all the boilerplate emails, and they apologize, > saying that they didn't have the time or energy to get it done before > the deadline. > > > I totally get it, so I write back that I'm sorry, I understand it's > rough to play catch-up in these situations. Then I said that teachers > often have greater leeway to offer students who ask for extensions > before it's due, and that sending a quick email to a teacher explaining the situation upfront can be really helpful. I say that I > was totally oblivious to this fact when I was a student, so I try to > tell students this now. > > > Then, I explained that it was still really important to complete the > replacement assignment anyway, because it's easy to glance at it, > think you understand it, then realize during the test that there were > nuances in its application that you didn't actually understand. > > > Then I offered to look at the student's assignment if they could send > it within a few days, just to make sure there weren't any obvious > knowledge gaps. > > > It seemed reasonable as I was writing it, but afterwards I wonder if it's preachy and patronizing. Given that it's exactly the sort of advice I give my teenager on the regular, it makes me wonder if it's the sort of communication best left to their parents and not their teachers.<issue_comment>username_1: It looks like you give your advice because you care and this is all that is important. The notions of being "preachy" and "patronizing" may be applicable to the wording of your message in this case but not to the message itself. In any case, your advice makes no harm and can potentially make some good. As usual, a fool will ignore it and a smart person will listen and decide for himself whether it makes sense or not and that is all you can expect, but I wouldn't be afraid of "stating the obvious" if it once was not obvious to you. I would even put a few things like that in the syllabus. Unfortunately (at least in the USA) we cannot rely on parents guiding our students because we are not even legally allowed to discuss their performance with them and guess what type of students are most prone to hide their achievements and problems from their parents. So just continue what you are doing. It makes perfect sense. If you wonder why your colleagues are not doing that, just discuss it with them. You may discover that they have other ways to communicate such messages that they find more efficient. As to myself, I usually give advice like that in class rather than sending individual e-mails (so if I see that obvious thing that can benefit one student, I just tell it to everybody). Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: It's totally appropriate especially for first year students. Learning college level study skills is one of the crucial tasks of the first year. Additionally, many students whose parents did not attend college (and even some who do have such parents) are totally unaware that they can do things such as attend office hours or email the professor if they need an extension or have a problem. In fact the way you have structured this, you could even in the future think of developing such knowledge as a learning outcome. Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I think it is great that you care both about your students and about doing things rights. Having had similar questions and being myself a child of parent that did not have higher education on top of having to move to a different city to study, reducing my interaction with my parents, I fully share your concerns that some sudents may not have access to the information this kind of arrangements are possible from their family. A core concern I have about this is: how are you making sure it is not unfair? To build on you example, some other students in similar situation may have been able to meet the deadline in a way damaging to themselves (e.g. poor quality assignment, overwork or even straight up giving up on university before getting your boilerplate emails). If I was in the second group I would be very upset about the fact that some other could get out of it by simply asking nicely, especially since I would never have imagined it was possible or considered acceptable in any way. This is not to say that you should not give these kinds of advice, but rather that they are so essential that if possible you should distribute them to every students equally before they even need it. If universities had clearly layed out and broadly publicized policies about when getting an exception to a rule is possible and acceptable, it would probably be ideal and you would not have to be concerned about it yourself. Things being what they are, your inputs are unvaluable. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Advising better ways to handle academic life is not, IMHO, stepping outside of your boundaries as a teacher. Sure, if you were meddling in their personal lives then, yes, it would be better to leave it to their parents. A second point is that, from your message, it seems some students might get different conditions than others. This is dangerous territory and I would not recommend going into it. Specially since, with experience, you'll realize that these occurrences are the norm, not exceptions. In my experience, students that ask for more time (and get it) during their first year continue to do so until they eventually graduate. Also, some students might start pressuring other teachers to open exceptions and soften rules. A strategy that I implement is to make these "exceptions" part of the rules. For instance, delivering assignments late (up to a certain point) deducts points from their grade as long as it does not make a passing student fail. So there is a consequence to delivering late (smaller grade), but it does not fail a student that has (eventually) achieved all the courses' objectives. Another strategy I use is to allow for individual time extensions, but students must ask for it one week before the deadline and must also have at least X% of the assignment done. This one is great to communicate that if the student plans to do the assignment on the last moment and then something unexpected happens, it's the student's fault and they do not deserve more time. Shit happens in adult life and they should start taking that into account. Of course, we can throw a "shit happens" rule so students can deliver at most one late assignment without consequences. I usually present all this upfront at the start of the semester, so student know what they will have to live up to. It can also be a nice way of bringing up the subject of how to handle academic life and help students that are struggling. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I'd like to chime in with some experience from my PhD time (as a student, we either had deadlines about which there was no discussion, or there wasn't any deadline as in, submit whenever you like, but there won't be a grade before) My professor had a very good reputation for teaching. That is, teaching analytical chemistry. As a PhD student, however, there were a whole lot of points which I did not understand - not chemistry related, but more about the management of research and research politics and the like. Many years later, I can now see likely (and good) reasons why he said what he said, wanted me to do things the way he wanted, and acted the way he did. I'd now say that after receiving a formal tertiary education in chemistry, as a PhD student I did an apprenticeship of learning by doing a 2nd profession: that of an academic researcher. Back then I had only the hazy idea that I did not quite understand what was going on. And I'd also say now that he probably also never had the idea that - maybe - the profession of research (or group leading, academic management, lecturing, ...) could be taught in an explicit way like we teach chemistry. With that in mind, I'd like to encourage you to go on reflecting also these "secondary" professions and then teaching it to your students, like you teach your field. The same applies to dos and don'ts of how studying at university works. (BTW, we were told as first year students e.g. that the failure rates are usually high [we performed as usual, with about 1/4 passing the 1st semester at the 1st time, and another ≈ 1/4 passing after re-doing 1st semester], and has always been so since university works quite differntly from school and most people need time to adapt to this.) Like teaching your field, the question what to email or say in a one-to-one setting vs. bringing up a topic in the lecture is a decision that may differ depending on what the point in question is. --- > > I wonder if it's preachy and patronizing > > > This is a valid concern, but to me the very fact that you worry about it indicates that you are much less likely to err in this way than others who never waste a single thought on it. :-) Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Increasingly, late-stage undergrads are being recruited to do some mentoring to address similar concerns. That indicates a need for it. I suspect similar conversations happened face-to-face until recently, in tutorials or project-related discussions - I've had similar ones. Transferring this to email communication should be easy enough, but some of the nuance is lost, making things harder. It's also harder to spot problems early on when you're not meeting face-to-face. Students need support, and it's good that you're someone who offers it. You might want to check what else is happening, either to help you support them, or to avoid stepping on any toes. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: I am not a doctoral student, but the question seems weird. Is it okay to help someone with something you believe you can help them with. Yes, it's okay, I would even say, it's a moral obligation to remove a stumbling block from before the blind. Once you clearly voiced your advice, especially if the other person is mentally an adult, it's their responsibility to decide whether to follow your advice. Upvotes: 0
2021/03/08	844	3,663	<issue_start>username_0: I am teaching a college level course, and a few students had technical issues during exam 1 (held online) and where not able to complete various parts of the exam. One option that I could think of is to use their grade from a future exam (also held online) as their exam 1 grade. Designing another complete exam 1 is not an option in our case. But I am wondering if there are better alternatives.... could you share your experiences regarding dealing with such issues?<issue_comment>username_1: I guess this answer won't be popular, but my strong suggestion is that you rethink student evaluation from the start. Exams aren't the only way that you can assess student learning and they are a poor way, in any case, to assess real competence in a field like CS. Add in all of the ways to creatively cheat on online exams and it quickly becomes a near impossible task to validate results. Some ideas, but I don't have a comprehensive list: Assess in smaller units more frequently so that "high risk" isn't a factor. Make the grading scheme somewhat forgiving, so that a few bad answers don't have a large effect on grades. Take "time to finish" out of the equation as much as possible to account for technical glitches. Lessen the importance of "question - answer" grading in favor of things like projects that require deeper and more comprehensive knowledge. Use questions that don't have trivial answers than can be quickly looked up. Likewise don't reuse questions that might have archived answers. Lessen the importance of "individual work" at least somewhat. Effective teamwork is an important skill in many fields, including CS. For some students it may be necessary to provide a communication channel to clear up misunderstandings. But make it global. Everyone should see every question and its answer. For some student issues it may be necessary to talk to professionals skilled in the various communication difficulties that arise (dyslexia...). Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: My philosophy is that the vote is my best statistical estimate of the student's preparation on the whole of the course's contents, based on what I can evaluate during the exam. If I taught 30 topics during the course and I ask 3 of them during the exam, then I can assume their answers reflect their preparation also on the other 27 topics. There is an error bar, of course, but that's unavoidable, given the limited time I can put in for each student. So, if you have more tests, you are good; just skip Exam 1 (EDIT: I mean, ignore it just for the students that could not complete it; students who have a full set of grades should still be evaluated on all of them) and renormalize the outcomes of the further exams. The error bars will be larger, but this is unavoidable. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: What I have been doing this year, depending on the class, is to either allow the students who have technical problems to take a makeup exam in another day on the part they couldn't complete, or to compensate with an additional question at the oral exam. From your question, I'd either integrate the missing parts with an oral discussion, if oral exams are acceptable in your country or university, or with a written test with a few questions around the missing parts without redesigning the whole exam though. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Grade the complete exams, for everyone, then remove all the "various parts of the exam" that could not be completed for everyone, give marks again, pick the higher mark for each student. It's the only fair thing you can do, given the conditions. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/08	1,554	6,487	<issue_start>username_0: So I'm taking a storyboarding class at my college and we have a big project coming up. I've been working on it a lot and talked about the story with my professor and he seemed to really enjoy it. We're on week two of working on it and I've finished my treatment and have been working on the storyboards digitally at home. When I went to class, my friend who gets sick often was there (a rare occurrence even though she tries her hardest) and we chatted a bit at the beginning of class. The professor handed out a list of shots we should use in our story if we wanted. As I already had my shot list at home with my storyboards, I decided to help my friend since she didn't completely know what to do. I was helping her develop her story and we decided to watch some videos on my computer for inspiration. The project theme was "Escape" so we were watching escape scenes from movies. The professor notices and comes over and I make a joke about how we're watching one of the best scenes in film history (it was a scene from Shrek with the princesses). He tells me to stop the video so I do, but at this point I can't tell if he's joking or not. I stop the video and he tells me to turn it off so I exit full screen and close the video. He then proceeds to ask me a question I don't hear (tight fitting mask plus my anxiety making my blood pound made it hard to hear). I ask him to repeat his question and he gets mad. He then asks me what the video has to do with my story and if I'm using it for my shot list. I explain to him, no, I'm helping my friend since I'm pretty much done with my project. Then he asks me something else, this time I didn't understand him at all and my anxiety was through the roof. The class by now is dead silent. I ask him to repeat his question and he takes my handout of shots he gave us earlier and rips it in half. He asked me what about the shots we talked about last week. This still confuses me because we didn't discuss shots. I told him about my story and that was it. He then asked how long we've been working on this project. I say "around two weeks" he said it's been longer than that (it really hasn't). Then he tells me if I don't tell him what shots I have I get a zero in class for the day. I said that I have my shot list at home but I can gladly go through the script with him and tell him what I remember I wrote down for that scene. He gets mad and rips the paper in half again. At this point, he turns to another student and makes him read what he has so far for a shot list. Then other students. By now, my friend has gone to the bathroom because she started crying. She can't handle being yelled at.However, the teacher keeps going. One class member has less than I do, but he tells them good job. I keep working silently and decide to just copy down what I have on my computer at home onto my notebook so he won't blow a gasket again. I felt humiliated and angry, and I don't know what to do about it. My brother says I should go talk to the head of the department but I don't know if that's appropriate to do in this situation. TL;DR: I was helping my friend in class and my professor thought I had done zero work, embarrassed me and my friend, yelled at us, threatened me with a 0, then humiliated me by using my classmates as "examples"<issue_comment>username_1: I guess this answer won't be popular, but my strong suggestion is that you rethink student evaluation from the start. Exams aren't the only way that you can assess student learning and they are a poor way, in any case, to assess real competence in a field like CS. Add in all of the ways to creatively cheat on online exams and it quickly becomes a near impossible task to validate results. Some ideas, but I don't have a comprehensive list: Assess in smaller units more frequently so that "high risk" isn't a factor. Make the grading scheme somewhat forgiving, so that a few bad answers don't have a large effect on grades. Take "time to finish" out of the equation as much as possible to account for technical glitches. Lessen the importance of "question - answer" grading in favor of things like projects that require deeper and more comprehensive knowledge. Use questions that don't have trivial answers than can be quickly looked up. Likewise don't reuse questions that might have archived answers. Lessen the importance of "individual work" at least somewhat. Effective teamwork is an important skill in many fields, including CS. For some students it may be necessary to provide a communication channel to clear up misunderstandings. But make it global. Everyone should see every question and its answer. For some student issues it may be necessary to talk to professionals skilled in the various communication difficulties that arise (dyslexia...). Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: My philosophy is that the vote is my best statistical estimate of the student's preparation on the whole of the course's contents, based on what I can evaluate during the exam. If I taught 30 topics during the course and I ask 3 of them during the exam, then I can assume their answers reflect their preparation also on the other 27 topics. There is an error bar, of course, but that's unavoidable, given the limited time I can put in for each student. So, if you have more tests, you are good; just skip Exam 1 (EDIT: I mean, ignore it just for the students that could not complete it; students who have a full set of grades should still be evaluated on all of them) and renormalize the outcomes of the further exams. The error bars will be larger, but this is unavoidable. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: What I have been doing this year, depending on the class, is to either allow the students who have technical problems to take a makeup exam in another day on the part they couldn't complete, or to compensate with an additional question at the oral exam. From your question, I'd either integrate the missing parts with an oral discussion, if oral exams are acceptable in your country or university, or with a written test with a few questions around the missing parts without redesigning the whole exam though. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Grade the complete exams, for everyone, then remove all the "various parts of the exam" that could not be completed for everyone, give marks again, pick the higher mark for each student. It's the only fair thing you can do, given the conditions. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/08	531	2,250	<issue_start>username_0: Social Science PhD student (in the US) here. My advisor does not meet with me (met twice in a year, did not meet the entire summer, took 2 months to reply to email). I feel extremely demotivated. I see other students in my program meeting with their advisors weekly, working out a dissertation topic, finding datasets and co-authoring. Should I change advisors? I am concerned because that would mean I'd need to change my research area and faculty can always put the blame on me and question my performance. I am 2 years into the PhD program, about to take comprehensive exams.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes. You are early on in the program and you should begin to work on changing advisors if you are not thriving under this advisor. When talking to new potential advisors, you can ask how they would handle the question of evaluating your performance given the switch. They can help to “go to bat” for you with their colleagues if questions come up about your performance. They may ask you to wait until after comps to officially switch if there is a chance that the switch could affect your passing. Usually, provided you pass comps, your performance is evaluated mainly by your advisor so this should not be a big issue. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This is hard to answer. Some people do well under such a system. Others actually need more frequent advice. It depends on how much progress you are making. But if you are still yet to take comprehensives, I don't see a particular issue as your dissertation research is still, I suspect, mostly ahead of you. But this may also be the right time to switch if you think someone else will be better for you. Ask around. In the US, it is pretty often the case that an "advisor" is assigned at entry to give advice on coursework and such as you go along. But also pretty common to switch at the point of starting comps. I chose my own dissertation advisor after finishing comprehensives and asking around for a bit to get ideas about who would be good. I didn't have to change sub-fields, however, as I had a few choices. If this is the US, don't feel like you need to stick with an assigned advisor. Other places, I can't say, maybe it also works out. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/09	1,653	7,125	<issue_start>username_0: In short: I'm three years into my Ph.D. program, have learned some things about what I seem to be good at and what not so much, and have realized I don't have as much in common with my advisor's research goals as I thought. We talked about me switching advisors, but discovered that anyone else at the university is an even worse match. I'm now facing the question of whether to: * Do what I'm good at, but with not much guidance from my advisor; * Do what my advisor works on, although this has not been very productive so far; * Switch universities, despite having 3 years getting to know my current institution. Probably relevant is that my field often has very small groups; I'm currently my advisor's only student and had basically been working with just him. So I am not abandoning a large group project. In slightly more detail: halfway through my first year I began working with my advisor, on a sort of toy project to 'test me out', I think. He does computational work and wanted to apply a new algorithm to a particular set of problems. My background is also heavily computational, so I could understand the algorithm very well, but I do not know much at all about the problems we were trying to apply it to. This became a continual sticking point. We worked on this for about a year and a half, and it turned out to be quite a bit trickier and slower than we thought. We never got any results, although often feeling like we were "just a few issues away". On my own, I was continuing to learn things about algorithmic problems in our field and wrote them up as notes. Last summer I showed a couple of these notes to my advisor, and he said they might be interesting, but he didn't know much about those topics at all and couldn't give much feedback. He said -- quite reasonably -- that I should focus on our main project, as I should have real work to present by the end of my third year (roughly, this coming May, so maybe 9 months after he said this). I tried sending the notes to a couple of other contacts I had who would know about it, but they were both too busy to read them. I put them on the shelf. Over winter break I chatted about my notes with a friend-of-a-friend who has a hobbyist's interest in the field, and he suggested just emailing the notes to a 'big name' in the field. Reluctantly I tried this with the first note and was quite surprised when the 'big name' got back with positive feedback encouraging me to publish. I uploaded the first note to arxiv and got good feedback via email. Upon this further encouragement, I spoke to my advisor and said I would like to pursue this type of work further. He agreed that we've been doing so well has not worked out well and that perhaps we should change projects, or maybe I look for a new advisor at my institution. We've basically dropped the 1.5-year project, and are switching to a much simpler shorter problem to prove the algorithm. It will be a much less interesting thing in the end, but we want something to write given the work we've done. We looked around the university and found no one who actually knows anything about what I've written about. This is disappointing because it's a topic I want to pursue. There are other universities I could go to with people much more interested in my work. My second paper is almost done now, it resolves a well-studied open problem in the same subfield (so is generally something people are excited about), and is again something no one at my institution knows anything about. I'm quite lost on what to do moving forward.<issue_comment>username_1: Seek an external co-advisor who can give you the guidance you need. A co-advising arrangement can be a win-win situation: your advisor would still have you as a graduated student under his belt, the co-advisor gets to be a co-author of the resulting papers, and you don't have to seek a new position and deal with the complexities of moving and changing your living circumstances halfway during your Ph.D. Candidates for being a co-advisor are researchers that are enthusiastic about the research problem and possess the required expertise. Examples would be the "big name" researcher and some of the other people who gave you feedback. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: One reasonable course of action here is to pursue both projects, to see how they each pan out. Both sound promising and may lead to publications, so they are probably both worth pursuing. Obviously, it is a lot of work to pursue two research areas concurrently, but one of the skills you want to develop as a researcher is to be able to pursue multiple topics and lines of inquiry simultaneously to see how they progress. Practicing researchers in academia often have a number of different projects/papers under production at one time, and sometimes we are not really sure if we will turn out to be viable publishable research until we are pretty near the end. Pursuing multiple projects gives higher odds of getting something worthwhile to publish. In regard to pursuing your personal project (the one where your advisor can't help you much), it sounds like you are already making good progress without him. The fact that a "big name" in the field has given positive feedback and encouraged you to publish your work suggests that you might be able to bring it up to a published standard without external help. Moreover, if you get stuck, you could ask this big name researcher to be a co-author on your paper --- something which is an attractive prospect for another researcher if you have already done most of the legwork. It sounds like this project is already near to the point where you could make a peer-reviewed submission, so I'd encourage you to push forward and submit it to a journal; at least then you will get the feedback of a formal referee report. In the longer term, pursuing both projects also gives you some more options in your program. If you decide that your present department is a dead end then you will have another contact and project that you are already part-way through, and this will make it easier to apply to work with your "big name" researcher as an advisor. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: If you are good enough to get it done, then having an affinity in research with your advisor is immaterial so long as they support you. My advice is to find the shortest path to a degree and don't deviate from that unnecessarily. If an external advisor would help, then do that. Even an informal source of advice should be considered. Changing universities will cost you time, perhaps a lot of time. Your current research project/direction isn't your last and only. Plan for the long term and find the path. My best guess is that it involves plunging on. If your advisor will support you, work more or less independently. If they require you to work on their projects then consider that it might still be the best path in the short term to achieve the long term goal. Lots of students work independently. Some insist on it. If the advisor isn't hostile to the idea then it can work out. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/09	809	3,313	<issue_start>username_0: I am currently writing my master's thesis. The project is a cooperation of the lab of my university supervisor, where I am writing the thesis, and a research institute, where I am employed part-time as a research assistant. My thesis work involves analyzing measurements that were taken from someone else who is affiliated with the research institute. The measurements are not part of a public dataset and, as far as I know, will not be published. The data is not being reused from previous work, but was measured for this project. I want to explicitly state in my thesis that taking these measurements are not part of my thesis, but I am unsure how to do this properly. Throughout the majority of my work, the data is used, so I would like to avoid mentioning its origin each time. It would of course make sense for me to acknowledge the contribution of the person who conducted the measurements, but I do not think this is sufficient. The reason I am asking about this is that in order to submit my thesis, I am required to sign a form stating 'I am the sole author of this document and did everything myself, unless stated otherwise', which I believe is quite common. For other documents, a citation would be appropriate. However, I believe this case is different because there is no formal document accompanying the dataset. * How can I sufficiently state that the data used throughout my thesis was not measured by me, and at which point in the thesis should I do so? * Is it sufficient to mention the origin of data once, such as in the introduction? * Should I write a section (perhaps in the appendix) where the measurements are described in detail, including who conducted them? --- Related Questions: * [How to write the data section when data is reused from a previous work?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/149445/how-to-write-the-data-section-when-data-is-reused-from-a-previous-work) (different, because it is about re-using data from a previous paper of the same author) * [How to use data from a colleague who retired in my thesis without commiting fraud or plagiarism](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/43779/how-to-use-data-from-a-colleague-who-retired-in-my-thesis-without-commiting-frau) (The person who gathered the data is suggested as a co-author, which is not allowed for my master thesis)<issue_comment>username_1: Just write about the data source in your introduction, list the data source in your bibliography as "unpublished" and sign the statement. If you want to publish your results in a (peer reviewed) journal you may encounter difficulties with private data, but that should be no problem for a Master's thesis. If a detailed description of how the measurements were made is important information for understanding your work then do write a section containing that information. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: In my opinion, stating in the introduction "the data were taken in the such and such experiment prepared and run by A.Becede" would be enough. It's not unusual to analyse data from someone else's experiments, especially at MSc level. Just as a tip, in my field when we cite something unpublished, we cite it as: "A.Becede - private communication" or "courtesy of A.Becede". Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2021/03/09	2,226	9,210	<issue_start>username_0: I just received the grade of an oral exam and I do not satisfied with it. I want to appeal, but I am not sure if this is appropriate. Since I am in Germany, I heard that professors can give any grades they wanted to students. I worried that the act of appeal will worsen my mark(or even fail). And I also don't know who to make an appeal to. I don't even know how to review an non-recorded oral exam. Can someone give some advice about how this should be done in Germany university?<issue_comment>username_1: Students can not use appeals to challenge the academic judgement of their professors. Otherwise, academic system would be swarmed by students who are not happy with their results and want to change them. Appeals are usually allowed for administrative reasons only. For example, if this was a written exam, and a part of your script was lost before it reached your professor, and you were not awarded marks for something you actually did. For an oral exam, there is typically not enough paper trail to challenge your professor's decision, unless you held an exam before a committee or you had an audio record of your answers. In any case, you would need to have a solid evidence that you answered all questions correctly. Simply saying "but I did" is not going to be enough. Finally, the mark for an oral exam also takes in account how much initiative student took during their answer. Consider an example: * Q: Tell us about the multiplication of matrices, please. * A: Well, a matrix is an array of numbers. The numbers can be real. They can also be complex. Sometimes we write a matrix with symbols instead of numbers. One lecturer wrote us a matrix with dots in it. * Q: It is good, but can you tell us about multiplication of matrices? * A: Yes, of course! * Q: So, how do you multiply them? * A: Well, we can multiply matrices. We need to write them side-by-side. Suppose, I have a matrix A here and a matrix B. * Q: OK, so what do you do? * A: Well, OK, lemme see... * Q: Perhaps, show us a simple example with 2-by-2 matrices. * A: Ah, OK. Can I do 1-by-1 first? Here's A=[a], and B=[b], so AB = [ab], right? * Q: Very nice. Next question. Here the student won't get full marks for their answer. They may be under impression that they answered the question, but in fact their answer arrived after a lot of prompting, it was incomplete and demonstrated less than solid knowledge of the subject. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Here's my experience with oral exams in Germany: * Ask the professor to explain to you how they arrived at the grade, and what they'd expected you to say for a better grade. Maybe more important about this than the grade you got now is what you can learn for future oral exams. (When I asked the "lemon squeezing professor" below, he explained that from the grades I got in the labwork exam he was examining "for a top mark", and would not waste time asking me easy questions about the lecture but that he examined my ability to draw field-specific conclusions on the basis but outside what was explicitly discussed in the lecture... wow...) --- * The burocratic trail corresponds to the importance of the exam. Oral exams with only 1 student + 1 examiner and no paper trail typically end up contributing low percentages to the final grade for the semester and even lower percentages to your Bachelor/Master grades. The next more important ones already had a 2nd observer (usually PhD student or postdoc) though still without protocol. Everything of higher importance (including legally relevant exams) is done with someone writing a protocol, and in some cases even audio records are taken. This is done exactly in case there is dispute about the grading. * Rather than complaining about the grade in order to get a better grade, I've only met students who asked to have their grade lowered to "failed" so they could re-take the exam. * For the "low importance" oral exams I've been involved with, a complaint would usually have resulted in the offer to have another exam which for sure would have someone writing a protocol. * Back when I was studying, for the low-importance exams in many cases it would have been possible to retake them the next semester/year (sometimes even the high-importance ones, under certain conditions). However, I've never met anyone who did care sufficiently to do so. * As always, the exam regulations of your department are what matters. You need to look them up and/or ask at the exam office. * Grades are submitted to the exam office, and the professor thus cannot easily change the grade. Thus, the risk of getting your grade lowered if you complain to the professor is small. But so is your chance to get it raised: both will likely need a (very) formal procedure with you, the professor and the exam office. * A professor "can give any grades they want[ed]" only in the sense any public servant in government administration can do anything they want to an application/procedure you filed there: professors in Germany are public servants and exams are one of their public servant duties. Violations of these duties are considered quite serious in general (they took an oath to fulfil these duties). (Which does not mean that unfair grading does not happen - but it does mean that if you file a complaint about unfair treatment in an exam, that is a serious accusation) --- * One thing you may consider for future exams: as students, we were allowed to "bring a friend", who would then automatically be a potential witness. If there's a problem with the professor's grading, such a potential witness may make the whole procedure more fair already by just being there. This happened very rarely, but I remember a professor recommending this for an entirely different reason: so that the friend can find out what kind of exam to expect. I.e., they recommended that we look for someone who'd be comfortable taking us along before doing the exam ourselves. --- A last thing is to bear in mind that the perceived difficulty of question and your difficulty of answers may not predict well even a rather objectively justified grade. There are (legitimate) differences in the style how different professors approach the task of examining. Some will ask everyone questions on a similar level of difficulty and then consider the answers, others adjust the difficulty of the question according to preliminary grades and previous answers (I found it extremely hard to judge as a student how such an exam went - but I do know since how a lemon must feel after sqeezing. Got 1,3 btw.) Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I agree with the other answers about asking the professor why they graded you the way they did, and that it is likely that there was no wrong doing. However, if after that you truly feel like your grade is unjustified and you were treated unfairly, the student council (Fachschaft) is a good first point of contact. I think your single appeal will not have much of a chance. However, they will know if the professor has a history of such cases, and they rely on a couple of students to actually make complaints in order to take action against them. They can also tell you who at your university you can contact. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I held tons of oral exams in Germany and even had an official appeal. I also served on a committee for these kind of things for several years. This is how it works in Germany: * For an oral exam there have to be written notes taken by a second person. These notes are confidential and are collected in some office (at my uni this is the "Prüfungsamt"). * If you appeal the grade you may want to speak to the professor directly first (as suggested in other answers). In case this is unsatisfactory, you need to appeal officially in written form (in my uni, again to the Prüfungsamt). Write the appeal very carefully and explain why you think that the grade in not deserved. * Then some committee (in my case the Prüfungsausschuss) has to have a close look at the situation. Usually it asks the professor for an additional statement. * This committee then uses three documents (and in most cases nothing more): The protocol of the exam, your appeal, and the statement from the professor. After careful examination of these documents if decides. You will get the result of the examination in written form (and this may take some weeks at least). Note that it is in general rare that the grade will be changed. Professors have some academic freedom which also covers a lot of teaching and grading. However, in rare cases, the committee may decide that the grade was inappropriate. But usually the committee only intervenes if the exam was not according to the rules (e.g. too short, too long, no protocol, no second examiner… what ever the rules are in your place). So in conclusion: You have the right to appeal. Appeals happen regularly but are seldom (I had to deal with about one every two years when I served the committee, but this may vary a lot). If the professor acts professionally, nothing bad will happen to you (and at my uni the professors are in fact acting professionally). Upvotes: 4
2021/03/09	916	3,973	<issue_start>username_0: I am a first year student at a UK university and submitted an essay for one of the courses a couple of months ago. Now, I received an email in which I am informed that some passages of my essay are too similar to the sources, and that the sources were not satisfactorily referenced. I have never worked by a reference system before, because my country doesn't use any. I have 10 days to write them back, and if I don't, a formal investigation will be carried against me for possible academic misconduct. What should I say in the written statement and is my lack of experience a good enough motive?<issue_comment>username_1: I would consider replying that, since you weren't writing for publication and you were using course provided resources, you didn't recognize the need, at least partly due to inexperience with such things. But make it part of an apology, I think, and a promise to take better care in the future. If there were clear instructions about citing given for the assignment or the course then such an appeal will fail, of course. But (opinion), instructors need to make the standard clear. I don't think it is fair to expect first year university students to understand all of the conventions of quoting and citations without instruction. We aren't born with a "citation" gene, for example. If that instruction was provided, then you are probably lost. A "slap on the wrist" might be the best possible outcome. Live and learn. I'll also note that the writer (yourself) and the reader (the instructor) have a common understanding of the base ideas and sources, making citation less of an issue. People seldom cite their textbooks, for example, treating the ideas there as common knowledge. But you can't attribute the ideas of others to yourself. That goes beyond copying or paraphrasing. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Since you are a first-year student, the bar here is pretty low. Still, your professor has threatened to escalate this to a formal academic misconduct matter (presumably based on an allegation of plagiarism) and so you should note the standard Miranda advice used in policing: anything you say may be used against you. In view of this, you should immediately read the academic misconduct procedure at your university, and check the rules for when you are required to make a statement in your defence. At virtually every university in the Western world, due process requirements mean that you are not required to respond to an allegation until after you are given a written statement of the details of the allegation in the formal proceeding. In the present case, since you have been told that this may be escalated to a formal matter, I recommend that you do not address the allegation at all. You should write back politely and say that you are open to talking to your professor to learn more about how to cite sources properly, but you do not propose to comment on your submission, since it is now anticipated that this may lead to a proceeding for academic misconduct. (As a final note, I think you are almost certainly wrong when you say that your country doesn't use any referencing system. Academic work in virtually every country in the world abides by some conventions and rules on referencing. Perhaps the guys in [Hutt River Province](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Hutt_River) don't, but virtually every country does.) Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: If I understand this correctly, you were under the impression that proper quotation of sources means to have them in your bibliography (and nothing else). You then quoted from those sources without quotation marks and footnotes to the reference quoted. I’d explain that to them, apologize, and ask for a good source how, in the future, to quote according to their specific guidelines. That’s the truth; it doesn’t strike me as terrible in your first year, but you’ll have to hope your professors agree. Upvotes: 3
2021/03/09	706	2,909	<issue_start>username_0: I am asking for a hint about the following issue. I have this particular (let's call it weakness) that I have to be motivated to do research. I have done a large portion of my thesis in PhD, but not for all cases. To put it in an example, assume that you are trying to prove a theorem in mathematics, which has two cases. You and your advisor are both convinced that in principle should not be any difference for the proofs i.e. if you proved the first case, you expect that the second case also holds. However, my advisor really wants to see the result directly for the second case as well. The issue lies exactly here: I am not convinced (motivated, etc.) to study the second case which is just more messy but she insists on this. In this case, I am asking for your suggestions: how would you motivate yourself to repeat the same process for the second case? I should emphasize that the problem itself is very interesting for me, and the issue is not this. The problem is that I am convinced that the second case is just a boring repetition of my first approach. I'd be so much thankful for your suggestions!<issue_comment>username_1: Sorry, but there are parts of math that are just messy. Worse, there are subtle parts that can throw you off. If you don't follow her advice you may be stepping into a mine-field. But, it also sounds a bit like burn-out, and that you need a break. How much time can you take off without thinking much about the problem and come back to it fresh. It may still be a slog, but depending on intuition only gets you to the point where you seek the proof that validates it. Insight and intuition are good (essential), but the proof is in the proof. Relax for a while (week, month?) and then get cracking. But also guard against being sloppy in your thinking. If the second case really is a bit more subtle and difficult then (a) you might skip over the real issue and (b) that part might be the essence of a better paper/thesis/whatever. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I actually struggle a lot with the motivation. For every task I'd like to do, there are three that I find boring. I came to understand though, the boring stuff is also needed. Sometimes, it even helps to understand the problem or in case of writing the reports, it gives you a look back at what you've achieved. One of the motivation techniques is to divide the task into easily accessible milestones with, if possible, achievable deadlines. Write them down, keep them in the visible place and strike them out when done. It's really satisfying. If that's not enough, you can also plan some rewards when you achieve the goal. In your case, you could also focus on some side project for a time being, so you come back to the task you are now bored with with a fresh mind. It's good, however, to set a date by which you start to work on it again. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/09	1,967	7,727	<issue_start>username_0: Someone asked a similar question here: [How to find out who funded a study / research?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/56959/how-to-find-out-who-funded-a-study-research?newreg=065470fd33814350848e37f287cd9696) several years ago, but not a single person had a real answer. So perhaps now. So...how? How do I find information on who funded a certain company or where their funds might come from in general? Specifically trying to find information on this company: <https://ridgebackbio.com/> Thank you in advance. PS: not looking to be spoon-fed information on this company, but to learn this skill on following money. I just can't find any resources to learn it in the first place.<issue_comment>username_1: To answer the "who funds a company" question, which is not the same as "who funds a study": Real biotech companies are usually pretty easy to get information on. Take [Editas](https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/editas-medicine) for example. Lots of information there about funding cause it's a real company and it helps make investors less nervous when there's transparency (and they can see other real investors have skin in the game). [Your example](https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/ridgeback-biotherapeutics) has no public information because it's not a real biotech company. It's a shell company that's brokering IP in a way that probably relies on "Political connections", which often means something that is poorly distinguishable from bribery. Any public information is just more ammo for a US attorney if they start poking around. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I upvoted the other answer, but I'd also like to say that many papers and articles will have an acknowledgement of their funding source either in the Introduction or a separate Acknowledgments section because countries I'm familiar with the funding agencies require resulting publications to acknowledge their support of the underlying studies they fund. NSF and NIH require this in the US, and then require you to say that you did so when you report the publication back to them later. Corporate money can be much less restrictive in the way that it is given. A company may ask, in my experience, for nothing more than a royalty-free license to the resulting work and no acknowledgement of the funding at all. They may just want you to tout the funding and nothing more. The good PR may be all they really want for the money. Sometimes the company just wants to write a check and give a simple gift with no strings attached and try to do some good in the world as long as everyone gets a shot as using the results. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I do not disagree with the prior answers as general answers. Virtually all biomedical journals require disclosure of all sources of funding or a statement that the research did not have a source of funding. Finding the source of funding for a published study is generally easy. I also agree that the question of the source of funding for companies is quite difficult unless the company is publicly traded. Many biotechnology companies first exist as (usually) small “start-ups” seeking to bring to market one product or to develop a line of products from some kind of technology platform (e.g., monoclonal antibodies, mRNA). The funding for such companies is often private equity—money that comes from rich people who have money to spare. Some of these people fund the company directly (they write a check to the company) and some people fund the company through investment in a private equity firm. The WIKIPEDIA has an extensive description of what private firms are, how they raise money and provide funding, and how they make money. The following is an excerpt: “A private-equity firm is an investment management company that provides financial backing and makes investments in the private equity of startup or operating companies through a variety of loosely affiliated investment strategies including leveraged buyout, venture capital, and growth capital. Often described as a financial sponsor, each firm will raise funds that will be invested in accordance with one or more specific investment strategies.” <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private-equity_firm> But the government, private foundations and large pharmaceutical companies may also be sources of funding for these “start up” companies. It is extremely difficult (maybe almost impossible) to determine which individuals are providing money to these start-ups and it is generally difficult to determine what people (or entities) are giving money to a private equity firm UNLESS the company wants to make this information available or makes it available through their communications and press releases. In my experience, reading a company’s press releases is the best way to glean information about the source of funding for a company, noting that the sources of funding may change over time. For Ridgeback Biotherapeutics LP, a December 22, 2019 press release contains much information about how development of one of its products—a monoclonal antibody used to treat Ebola—was funded. <https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20201222005421/en/> “About Ebanga: Ebanga™ (ansuvimab-zykl, formerly referred to as mAb114) is a monoclonal antibody isolated from a human survivor of the 1995 Ebola outbreak in Kikwit, a city in the DRC. <NAME>, Ph.D., Chief of the Biodefense Research Section at the NIAID, VRC and her team, alongside scientists from VIR Biotechnology’s Humabs BioMed S.A. subsidiary, discovered that the survivor retained antibodies against Ebola 11 years after infection. The team isolated the antibodies, tested the most favorable ones in both laboratory and nonhuman primate studies, and selected ansuvimab as the most promising among the set for clinical trial. Professor <NAME>, Director General of DRC’s INRB and one of the scientists involved in the original detection of the Ebola virus in 1976, played a key role in discovering Ebanga. Ebanga development has been funded in whole or in part with federal funds from the Department of Health and Human Services; Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response; Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, under Contract Numbers 75A50119C00059 and 75A50120C00009.” [bolded for emphasis] The same press release contains information about the funding of the company in general. “Headquartered in Miami, Florida, Ridgeback Biotherapeutics LP is a biotechnology company focused on emerging infectious diseases. Ridgeback markets EbangaTM for the treatment of Ebola and has a late-stage development pipeline which includes molnupiravir for the treatment of COVID-19. Development of molnupiravir is entirely funded by Ridgeback Biotherapeutics and Merck & Co. All equity capital in Ridgeback Biotherapeutics, LP originated from Wayne and <NAME>, who are committed to investing in and supporting medical technologies that will save lives.” [Bolded for emphasis] A May 30, 2019 press release is posted at the company’s website. <https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ridgeback-biotherapeutics-lp-announces-orphan-drug-designation-for-mab114-300859467.html> This press release contains a link to Ridgeback Capital. <https://www.ridgebackcap.com/> Ridgeback Capital is described as follows: “Ridgeback Capital is a private investment company that is focused on investing in life science companies. Ridgeback was started in 2006 by <NAME>, MD. Dr. Holman and his team seek long term investments in private and public companies that are creating life-saving and life changing technologies.” Upvotes: 2
2021/03/09	1,573	6,523	<issue_start>username_0: I am submitting my PhD thesis in less than two days. I have checked all the tables, figures, appendices, references, and also checked spelling and any potential typos (which I believe there might be more!). I would like to ask, in addition to all of this, for those of you who have submitted PhD theses before, what would you recommend doing the day before submission? Anything that I should check again? I am planning the read through the thesis again to spot more spelling issues, I would like to hear your thoughts. --- Update two days later. I successfully submitted my thesis this morning, WOHOOO! Due to COVID-19 restrictions, however, all the submissions in my university are online now (no pic of holding the printed thesis in front of the library unfortunately etc :/) I ended up spending the last day checking the format (my ToC crashed for no reason when I was formatting yesterday!), making sure no page numbers are missing (it turned out that the page numbers are missing in some horizontal layout pages, glad that I checked!), and finally reading through the lit review chapter (which I had first drafted three years ago, though I had revised it since then) and making sure citations are correct. Thank you everyone for your great suggestions<issue_comment>username_1: I would suggest reading through it one more time for pleasure. Savor the writing you labored so hard on, marvel at just how much work has gone into this, and reflect on where you are now compared to where you were when you started this labor. To abuse the poetry of Genesis: > > And the student saw every thing that they had made, and, behold, it was very good. > Thus the thesis was finished, and all the host of its data. And on the seventh day the student ended their work which they had made. > > > Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_2: Congratulations! It's very likely that you have a sort of tunnel vision right now and are probably not in a good position to proofread it effectively. The most useful thing you can do is double check all your submission criteria: when, where, what other documents do you need, how many copies, do you need to print it etc. Also, I would make sure it has the required structure that your department requires: title page, abstract, any declarations etc. You will have a chance to correct any typos and some style issues in your corrections. Well done, relax and maybe do a little dance. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: I would just make sure you have the copying and the like lined up. I got Kinkos to do it. Don't sweat it any more with the typos. It actually sounds like you have overdone it already. Remember this is a pass-fail (in general, in the US, blabla, caveat, blabla) situation. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Embrace the work you have done and pour yourself a drink. The work is already done. There is nothing you could do at this point to substantially improve anything. > > Funny story: a colleague of mine discovered that \LaTeX had screwed up his references a night before the defense. He spent the last night freaking out and preparing an addendum with correct reference numbering. > > > Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: In case you really want to re-check your thesis (this also holds for papers, etc.), you should probably first take some time off. Occupying your mind with something completely different will help you take a fresh look without the blind spots one develops during the process of constantly editing. (I generally recommend a few days, but that's not going to work here.) Of course, you can combine all the suggestions in the answers here: first wait and relax, then read for pleasure. It just might happen that the reading for pleasure turns into a correction suggestion as there are always issues waiting to be found, so be prepared. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Ask someone else to read the most important parts (you yourself have probably done so already and can't fully see the words anymore because you already know the sentences). Remember that the most important part of the thesis is probably the acknowledgements section. That is the part that most people will actually end up reading. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Congratulations! Most PhD reviews start of the reference section because it's easy to make a mistake, it won't show up in any spell checking software, I don't care how good you are there will be at least one mistake. I would also check the printing requirements of your college, just in case it needs to spaced at 1.5 instead of 2 lines etc. I would also check the binding services as well, with mine I had to get it bound, you had to give it to the library, they sent it off and would give back in 2 days. I groveled at the library, got the name of binding firm and drove to their office, they did it on the spot. If there is a declaration of authorship in the document, sign it, they normally check that type of detail when you hand it in, but just check it yourself. Good luck! Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: Good job, congratulations! To be honest, there is close to 100% chance that some errors are left in your thesis, no matter how many times you would re-check it. Therefore, as many has been already mentioned, I would recommend you to relax, at least try to! :-) Do something you really like but is not related to your thesis/PhD; exercise, listen music, read (non PhD related) book, ... That is probably the best way to prepare your PhD defence. Good Luck! Edit: Can't comment on username_9's answer (not enough reputation), but I think that is very good suggestion: if still reading it, better reading it out loud. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Now would be a good time to make a physically separate backup (external HDD or offsite server for instance) of the finished, clean masterpiece ! Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: I agree with others that you should probably just relax. But if you are going to read it again, I suggest reading it out loud. At this point it's very difficult to see any problems, because you've read through it all so many times already. But reading out loud will help you spot sentences that are unclear or too long, or could benefit from a comma. Two days is not enough time to read the entire thesis out loud, because unless you're a trained speaker, your voice will get hoarse after an hour or two. So perhaps just read the Introduction and Literature review out loud. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/10	1,330	5,852	<issue_start>username_0: At American colleges and universities, it is nearly universally the case, to the best of my knowledge, that students who choose to withdraw from a course after a short window early in the semester receive a grade of W on their transcript for that course. Generally this grade does not affect the GPA directly, but these W's have direct effects in that they may damage on students' academic standing or financial aid, prevent dean's listing, etc. Probably more importantly, they have indirect effects that people reading a student's transcript may assume a W indicates the student would have earned a very low grade had they finished the course. Having discussed this with some colleagues, I've had trouble generating arguments in favor of this system. There would be obvious benefits to students of allowing withdrawals not to appear on the transcript. I would argue there would be advantage to professors and universities as well, as students would have less intense pressure to succeed in a course on the first try, thus reducing some pressure on professors to dumb courses down. The best argument I can generate in favor of W's is that they encourage students to commit to their courses, and in particular not to play the lottery in the same course over and over in hopes of getting an easy instructor. But such lottery-playing would be plainly visible in a long time-to-degree, so I don't see that the W does much but add insult to injury here. What is the fundamental justification universities use for this system?<issue_comment>username_1: Like most administrative things which don't seem to make sense, it boils down to accounting and financial aid. Students can take federal financial aid and withdraw from individual classes provided they maintain at least half time status. There are a bunch of caveats & rules and making sure everyone's complying and not accidentally (or intentionally) embezzling requires record keeping. <https://studentaid.unc.edu/special-circumstances/withdrawing-dropping-classes-and-underloads/> > > Dropping a course after University census date will generally result in receiving a withdrawal indicator of “W” on your transcript. If you had already received your financial aid for the term, this generally will not result in a change to your financial aid, so long as you do not withdraw from all classes. > > > <https://sfa.osu.edu/contact-us/consumer-disclosure/drop-and-withdrawal> > > Most financial aid will not be adjusted for hour drops after the Student Financial Aid census date. All hours for which you are enrolled as of the fourth Saturday of the term or which you schedule thereafter, will be counted as “hours attempted” for determination of whether you are making Satisfactory Academic Progress for financial aid. > > > There's no other long term way to prove that the initial financial aid disbursement was correct than a transcript imo and any alternative will just be more complicated and probably screw people years down the line. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The only (very weak) justification I can see for W grades is that students who can afford to take courses multiple times will have higher GPAs than students who can't. But aside from this and the enrollment status issue, I'm inclined to agree that the honest justification is essentially punitive, since a lot of faculty would object that it's "not fair" to allow students to drop without consequence if a course is going poorly. I think it just reflects a more generally punitive attitude that US higher education has towards students, especially when it comes to sorting them as "good" or "bad" students. As further evidence of this, note there is no distinction made between a W incurred for medical reasons and one incurred because a student blew off a course. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: A transcript is a record of all academic activity, not only completed courses. Academically, you want to keep track of students who might require additional guidance because they eventually drop too many courses. Administratively there are many reasons to keep W’s around. One is that the student is (very likely) declared to funding entities (v.g. states) and thus the university will receive per-credit funding for this student even if he/she has withdrawn. Where I work, the last day to withdraw without penalty (i.e. no W) is the day before student enrolment totals are submitted to the government. In addition, there are a number of logistical issues also tied to good reporting of enrolment. The student still “requires” resources from the University to stay in the course: actual room allocation requires a headcount not only students who finish the course but also student who remain in the class for an extended period. TA allocation also requires a headcount that is not limited to students taking a final exam. The best way to keep track of this is by having an explicit mention that the course was taken but not completed. I don’t know of any faculty that “dumbs down” a course because of possible W’s in a course. On the other hand, a course with consistently many W’s may indicate the need for reflection on the part of the Chair or the instructor. Note that W (or any grade for that matter) is not necessarily a fair reflection of anything but punctual student performance. If you are sick to your stomach on the day before a midterm, or if you a have a strong fever two days before, the odds are you will underperform. It is regrettable that marks are too often taken out of context and used as a proxy for an evaluation of a person rather than their more limited indicator of the performance of this person in a class as evaluated through tests, assignments, exams etc. without knowledge of the circumstances under which such tests were made. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/10	263	1,219	<issue_start>username_0: If one suspects that their former grad studies supervisor is giving them a bad review for prospective employers or research opportunities, is there anything that can be done about it? In a country where negative recommendation letters are not legal (though they can refuse to give one).<issue_comment>username_1: Most job applications ask you to provide references or recommendation letters. Usually, you can choose which names you put on that list (and exclude former supervisors if you don't trust their reference). Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: As the other commenter said, you can pick and choose which letters of reference to provide. If you had a poor relationship with your adviser, or believe that they are slandering you in their letter of recommendation, just move on and ask someone else. Do you have other professors that would be willing to recommend you? I know someone who did very well in the job market not using their main professor, so it can be done. Particularly if you can replace them with someone who is well known in your field. Otherwise, you could ask your professor to see the letter if you feel comfortable asking, knowing that they may reject. Upvotes: 1
2021/03/10	929	4,061	<issue_start>username_0: I was informally invited to apply for a postdoc position at a university in the UK. The professor will be the PI of that project and said I can use the resume and the covering letter I had once for a postdoc. The problem is that the advertised position asks for certain skills that I didn't highlight in the cover letter. So, I'm not sure if I should use trust the PI and use the original documents or I need to customize the files a bit more. Is the PI is the only person who reads the application documents? Or the files get analyzed first by the HR team and then they're sent to the PI?<issue_comment>username_1: Caveat: I only have direct experience with one place in the UK (my current employers). Based on this experience: 1. The files pass to central HR first who are then meant to pass them onto a panel which will include the PI and selected colleagues. I am not sure if they undergo any screening beyond "were the right documents supplied". 2. It is the panel's responsibility to make a shortlist, during which they will give applications a score based on certain tick-boxes. For instance, some of the criteria mentioned in the job advertisement might say > > "Essential: experience with MATLAB or similar software" > > > and then the panel might give the application a score such as "3: exceeded" or "2: met" or "1: partially met" or "0: not met". 3. The panel should have access to all submitted documents, not just the cover letter. However they are NOT meant to make use of external private knowledge, to avoid prejudicing the decision. E.g if the PI knows that you have done X, Y and Z but you don't include this in any of the documents, then strictly speaking they are not meant to use this when making their evaluation and rankings. My observations are based on recent experience of being on such a panel, but not being the PI. Depending on the institution and the discipline, the panel might include people from outside the specialist area but with some general experience in related project management; it could potentially include cross-faculty members depending on the nature of the project. Usually the PI is the chair of the panel and hence informally gets "final say" in edge cases. Nevertheless, my recommendation would be to play safe and customize the documents a bit more -- it just makes it easier for supportive panel members to tick the appropriate boxes. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Similarly to the answer of @YemonChoi above, the way recruitment is supposed to work at the place I have experience (n=2, higher than @Yemon, but not massively) is that HR passes the documents, mostly without reading them, to a recruitment pannel chaired by the PI who holds the grant. The panel independently score the applicants on a predetermined scoring scheme matched the person specification drawn up for the position (and normally advertised with it) and the applicants with the highest scores are invited to interview. For any internal redeployment or disabled candidates that are not invited to interview, there most be an explicit reason why not. Interviews are conducted using predetermined questions/activities and the panel score the interviewees independently. After the interviews, the panel confer, but ideally, the best performing candidate is offered the job first. Thats the theory. In practice, the PI generally decides who they want to interview, and checks that the rest of the panel agrees. At interview, most panel members don't bother to score on the predetermined criteria. After the interview, they have a conversation, but in the end the PI makes the decision. Scores are then created to justify the decision made. What this means for the OP is that if the PI wants you, the rest of the panel will not get much say. That said, it probably can't hurt to make some optimizations to your materials, unless that will be very time consuming and you worry about a soft or hard deadline, or creating a poor impression to the PI for being slow. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2021/03/10	654	2,758	<issue_start>username_0: I'm writing an engineering paper which is filled with equations (physical demonstrations in the theoretical section and numerical methods demonstrations in the methods section). I want to rewrite one of the first equation I introduced, because I introduced it in a particular context and now I want to use it in another context and show different properties of it. Is this considered a bad practice? Since all equations are numbered, there would be an equation which is numbered twice. I could solve this problem by not numbering just the second appearance of this equation. Or I could just reference the number, and let the reader go back a few pages. But that would affect the readability of the text (all the other instances in which I reference some previous equation are usually in the same paragraph, so there's no need to turn a lot of pages). What should I do? Redundancy and readability or conciseness and elegance in spite of readability?<issue_comment>username_1: I'd suggest just referencing the previous entry. People reading technical articles are pretty used to skipping back if necessary. It might be confusing to repeat it with a new number, especially. An alternative would be to repeat it along with the original number, making a note of what you are doing: > > ...repeating equation (42) `x = y + z`... > > > But the reference to the equation is likely enough. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In general, I think “readability” is overrated in technical material. You should absolutely try to be as clear as possible, but repeating an equation is a micro-optimization that saves the reader only a few seconds. Remember that the vast majority of readers are not even going to read the technical content, while those that want to understand it in detail will spend much longer on the paper. Properly understanding a bunch of equations can take hours, so making the set of equations longer just to save the reader a few seconds on the first skim seems counterproductive. A better solution is to describe the equation qualitatively, such as “In this context, the dissipation equation (45) implies...” This helps the reader by giving context. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Do as you please, just be clear as to what you're doing. E.g., We rewrite Equation (1) by x, y, and z: > > ... (1a) > > > Because a, b, and c. In the example, the goal is to make it clear to the reader that an earlier equation is being rewritten and the reasons why it is being rewritten. I've labelled (1a) to show a relation with (1). Perhaps the label isn't necessary, it depends whether you want to refer back to (1a) having introduced it (or you think others might want to refer to it). Upvotes: 2
2021/03/10	4,332	18,778	<issue_start>username_0: I'm TAing an undergraduate course at a university in the US, and had a disagreement with the professor teaching the course about a question in an exam. Here's an abstract version of the relevant part: > > Select the single most appropriate method, out of the list {A, B, C, ...}, to solve problem X. > > > Both A and B are appropriate to solve X, and objectively superior to any other method on the list. Weak arguments can be made for either of them being more appropriate than the other. After a debate with the professor, we agreed that the question is ambiguous. My opinion is that we should not be asking such a question. I think students might waste a lot of time trying to find their presumed mistake, since the question asks for a single most appropriate method, and there isn't one. Therefore, I think we should either remove it, remove one of the two methods, or rephrase it to > > Select a single appropriate method... > > > The professor argues that the ambiguity is not an error on our part. They suggest we'll give full credit to either choice of A or B, and say that students shouldn't obsess over this minor detail at the expense of other parts of the exam. I feel like this is problematic in terms of ethics (because of the possibility of misleading students) and pedagogy (since I would like students to distinguish strong and weak arguments for a method being superior to another). I would like to know others' position and arguments on this issue. I'm also very interested in references that address the pedagogical aspect, based on either research or experience. The only such reference I could find is this [blogpost](https://morelomechanech.wordpress.com/2020/06/23/__trashed/) (in Hebrew), written by a teacher, that defines "what's in my pocket" questions to avoid as teachers. Edit ---- I might have overdone the abstraction, and made the example trivial. Consider the question > > Select the single most appropriate method, out of the list {A, B, C, ...}, to solve each problem in the list {X, Y, Z, ...}. > > > {A, B, C, ...} are standard methods, all taught in class. Each other problem, {Y, Z, ...}, has a unique method most appropriate for solving it, and the ambiguity rises only for X.<issue_comment>username_1: I think this would be appropriate in a written exam with no explanations of answers possible only if the professor has made a specific point of this issue. If it is actually ambiguous to the student who paid attention and did the exercises and such, then no. Multiple choice questions normally have one clearly correct answer and a couple of others that are close to being right, but are not, where the reasons should be clear to the attentive student. But that seems not to be the case if a TA is confused. Alternatively, and this sometimes is used, it would be fine if there are only small differences but the prof is willing to accept either answer as correct. Simple multiple choice questions aren't the sorts of things to be used to pick out fine subtleties, especially in a case like this, where there are multiple considerations that people make in choosing "best method...", and context matters. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: It sounds like in reality, both A and B are appropriate methods for solving X. If you artificially removed either A or B as options, would you not also be misleading students by guiding them to one specific method for X? My advice is to accept the ambiguity. Ambiguity exists in reality and there are often multiple correct ways of approaching a problem. If all correct approaches are marked as correct on the exam, then the exam is testing students' preparation for realistic application. Alternatively, if you want to test students' knowledge of a specific method, ask students to actually solve problem X specifically by using that method. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Directly to your title question ... Not purposely. We can ask open-ended questions. The two (open-ended and ambiguous) are not the same. It appears that you have a good sense of the responsibilities to be clear in how you are phrasing your questions to the students so that you can be clear to yourself later why you are marking their answers for being incomplete. Unfortunately, we do ask ambiguous questions accidentally. You have a good sense of the fairest approach. Accept both answers. I would only recommend that you follow up with the students to admit the ambiguity. Subsequently provide a clear statement to the students that presents the correct (unambiguous) question that you should have asked and might perhaps ask in the future. Finally, I would suggest that even your rephrasing of the question for this case seems questionable. If you really mean to have two answers that have exactly equal merit on their objective arguments alone, then the opening statement must not confuse that more than one answer is a possibility. You may mean instead to say this: * Select an appropriate method or methods ... This works if two (or more) of the methods are appropriate and all others are absolutely not appropriate. You may mean instead to say this: * Select the most appropriate method or methods ... This works if all methods are appropriate but one or more are MORE/MOST appropriate. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I think the focus on ethics is a bit misguided. If your professor genuinely believes that asking ambiguous, "what's in my pocket"-type questions (a closely related concept is that of a "gotcha" question) on an exam is an appropriate testing strategy and serves a useful pedagogical purpose, then I cannot say that they are behaving unethically. So the problem as I see it is not that the professor is behaving unethically, but simply that if they believe such a thing then they are wrong. I can't support this with any scientific argument based on research; but just based on my own experience with teaching, one major reason why I'm pretty sure this plan will not work as your professor expects is that students in the US (and other countries I'm familiar with) have been conditioned to expect, over their many years in the educational system, that all exam questions, in STEM and related technical subjects at least, have a single, unambiguously correct, answer (unless explicitly stated otherwise). Now, a professor might be of the view that this is poor preparation for real life, where situations are typically much more vague and nuanced, and a suboptimal way to develop critical thinking skills. So it's tempting to think "why don't I design an exam that simulates real life more closely, and this way test for more of the things that really matter and encourage students to really think". This is well-intentioned, and perhaps even correct in an idealistic sense of being closer to the Socratic method. If you were gathered together with a small group of students on an island somewhere and had all the time in the world to develop their intellect, and no earthly concerns about schedules, tuition, the need to test and grade hundreds of students in X amount of time with Y resources with no easy chance for a do-over if something goes wrong, etc., then asking such questions would be a wonderful method to stimulate their thinking. On the other hand, here in the real world, the conditioning I mentioned is so powerful, and the conditions under which students are tested so stressful and unforgiving, that asking questions with more than one correct answer (without stating that explicitly in the question) is a very clear recipe for trouble. A lot of students are already so stressed out and anxious taking tests that it's difficult to them to think creatively or be resourceful in an exam setting. What I expect will happen is that many of the students will obssess over whether A or B is really the correct answer (despite your professor saying they "shouldn't obsess over this minor detail"), will get confused and spend unreasonable amounts of time on this issue, will end up not having enough time for other questions they are perfectly capable of solving, and will end up frustrated and hurt and feeling that they have been treated unfairly over this testing strategy. And of course, they could complain, leading to a nasty headache of a problem for you and the professor to have to explain to the undergraduate program chair. Here's a final thought to consider: it's hard enough -- by which I mean essentially impossible -- to get students to believe you're treating them fairly when you're bending over backwards not to create problems of this type and "just" giving honest, error-free, clear exam questions each of which tests one unambiguous snippet of knowledge. Even then, some students will still manage to come up with explanations for why they did poorly that somehow put the blame on you and your teaching/testing/grading practices and not on themselves for not studying hard enough. So the way I see it, things being hard enough already, why make them intentionally even harder still? This particular headache is easily avoidable. Let the professor try out their creative teaching ideas during the semester and not in the high-stakes, pressure-cooker environment of an exam. For the exam, my advice would be to stick with standard principles for designing exam questions that follow the same conventions everyone else uses and that students are used to. Anyway, that's my unscientific two cents. Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: How about changing the question to "select an appropriate method"? Or perhaps "of the following methods, select one of the appropriate ones." I think that asking for "a single method" is still confusing. A number of students will absolutely obsess over this detail unless it's made clear that they should not, because they expect a multiple-choice exam to have one correct answer per question. It's fine to change that expectation and have multiple correct answers, so long as you say so. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: In a "select one" style multiple choice question, the expectation will be that there is only one correct answer. So, if you are planning on accepting either A or B as a correct answer, this should be clearly stated on the question, since it is an unusual (and therefore unexpected) format for a MCQ. If you leave it unstated but accept either answer anyway you will prejudice students who end up confused as to why there seems to be two valid answers and waste time trying to figure out which one to choose. A better choice is to use the more standard "select two" style question. This is straightforward, clear to the student, and actually a better quality question since you are now testing that the student knows A and B rather than A or B. In your question the question would become: "Select the two most appropriate methods, out of the list {A, B, C, ...}, to solve problem X". Exams exist to test knowledge, not to be tricky and make the student spend time trying to work out what the question means. Another way to look at it is: is there any need to have an ambiguous question when there is an unambiguous alternative available? What purpose does it achieve? Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_7: I don't have a lot to add to existing answers. I agree with the following point mentioned by others: Students are conditioned to not question the questions on exams, especially if they're not free response questions. Exams don't exist for the purpose of making students question the questions. It's expected that exam questions are straightforward. (I suppose the only exceptions are when the instructor has placed particular emphasis on making students question questions and their underlying assumptions.) In addition, questions that have more or fewer correct answers than implied are considered to have errors, which then need to be announced to everyone as the grading will be different than expected for the question. For example if there are more correct answers, then all of them are marked as correct. If there are fewer correct answers, then the question is thrown out entirely--and in some cases, if the instructor is made aware of this during the exam or in the time between printing the exam and handing it out, then the instructor will announce that the question should be completely ignored. I speak from personal experience from when I was a student and an undergrad TA, but I think these scenarios should be familiar to a lot of people. Perhaps this personal anecdote will give you ideas for the future: Some of my professors made multiple-choice questions that could have any number of correct answers, from no choices to all choices. These questions specified that as few as none and as many as all of the choices could be right. Grading was based on how many choices we correctly put in the correct "state", namely checked or unchecked since the choices used checkboxes. (These professors are in the same department and use the same online quiz system that belongs to the department.) Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: I'm not sure if an anecdotal answer is appropriate here. Many years ago, all children in England had to take an exam called the 11-plus (referring to the age group). This was very important in those days because it led to a binary decision about what sort of secondary education you would receive. I was never coached on how to do well in the exam and walked in a complete novice. Right from the start I saw that many of the questions had justifiable multiple answers - yet only one check box was allowed for each. I spent a lot of time trying to decide how to answer each question and which answer would most likely be considered the "right" one. I can't remember the exact questions now but let's invent one. What is the next number in the series? 1, 3, 5, 7, ... Now, as any mathematician knows, there is potentially an infinite number of answers to this question. We can guess '9' because it is more 'obvious' but, as a child, I spent a lot time looking at all the proposed answers and finding a justification for each. Luckily I got a sufficient score to go to the 'elite' type of school. However, I'm sure it was touch and go because of the extra load of trying to choose between what I perceived to be multiple, equally justifiable, possibilities. The solution Warn the students! Tell them what they should do if they meet a multi-answer question and have to choose one. Students should be taught strategies, not just rote methods. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: It seems that this question is in some ways asking for a subjective answer is but worded as asking for an objective one. As a student I would prefer to see the question phrased more along the lines of > > Select a single method you think is (most) appropriate from {A, B, ...} to > solve problem X. > > > If the student has a choice between two similarly appropriate methods then, to me, asking for the single appropriate method seems... strange. Surely if you want them to argue which they think is the most appropriate then asking for that makes more sense. If there are multiple "most" appropriate, then including wording that asks for the "most" could also be considered unfair (although much less so in my opinion) and could still lead people down a hole of questioning their understanding in a potentially unhelpful way, as others have mentioned. Simply asking for "a single appropriate method" could be "fairer". You suggested that you are asking for many solutions to many problems in the paper, so it may make more sense to include "most" in this context. Edit: Another option would be something much simpler. > > Choose an appropriate method to solve problem X from the following > options: {A, B, ...}. [Explain your answer.] > > > The original wording I suggested was trying to keep as closely to the question in OP, but in practice that feels clunky. I feel that this wording maintains most of the meaning while reading better. The problem I see with this is that while "Choose an appropriate method" is not ambiguous, it runs the risk of people thinking they have too much of a choice, and assuming that there are multiple potential answers for all of the questions - which you said is not the case for most of the questions in OP. For this reason I would stick with > > ...a method you think is (most) appropriate... > > > as it makes it clear that you are looking for a "most appropriate" solution, but that it may be open to interpretation. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: The sentence: > > Select the single most appropriate method, out of the list {A, B, C, ...}, to solve each problem in the list {X, Y, Z, ...}. > > > has very clear implications to typical English speakers. You could expand the sentence a bit, to make the implication more explicit: > > For each problem in the list {X, Y, Z, ...}, there is a single most appropriate method in the list {A, B, C, ...}. Select it. > > > If you agree that these sentences are equivalent -- that any typical English speaker would read the first as meaning the second -- then I think it's very clear what the issue with the question is. If one of the problems does NOT have a single most-appropriate method in the provided list, then this clear implication of the question is false. Would it kill your professor to add a short note to the question? "If multiple methods are perfectly and equally appropriate, select any one of them." Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: Apart from the other answers, your premise is wrong. The question does not have 2 correct answers, it has 0 correct answers. It is impossible to select the single most appropriate method as there is no "single" most appropriate method. With that in mind, if the students complain, you will have to accept every answer as correct (or remove the question). Even accepting A and B is not correct as none of those are a correct answer to the question. So your question shouldn't be if you can ask ambiguous questions. It should be if you can ask questions with no correct answer. The answer is obvious. The question should be removed. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_12: If you say "single" but accept two answers you are lying to them, that is unlikely to end well. Most multi-choice exams begin with the instruction "For each question choose the answer which you think is best" Given that, I think you should rephrase the question to > > which method listed below is appropriate. > > > They already know you want what they think is best. you also have the option for saying "E: options A and B" Upvotes: 1
2021/03/11	751	3,058	<issue_start>username_0: I have a new idea, and the experimental results are also good. But my mentor does not allow me to publish it yet. But I am worried that the idea will be robbed by others. So is there any way to not publish it now, but I will take advantage of this idea first？ I am a computer major, and I mainly publish conference papers. If I upload the paper to arxiv, will others not be able to use the same idea as me? If I upload it to arxiv, many people will have seen this paper. When I submit this paper again after a year, will it be because it is a previous one, and everyone has seen it, so it won’t be accepted.<issue_comment>username_1: > > If I upload the paper to arxiv, will others not be able to use the same idea as me? > > > They absolutely can, but because you have uploaded your paper, you have established precedence: you can claim you had the idea and did the work first. Others can still use your idea (and you should feel flattered they do!) but they would have to cite you. There are many papers on the arXiv that have accumulated lots of citations but have never been published in journals, e.g. [this one](https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.08362). If the authors of that paper ever submit it to a journal, there's a high chance it will be published quickly, simply because it is so impactful. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You can't prevent or control parallel research. If an area is "hot" at the moment or there is an outstanding problem that is blocking progress in an important area, then you can assume that there will be many people working on it in parallel. The crux of a solution may first be seen by someone, unknown to others. But if that first person doesn't get their work published (and I mean by a reviewed journal or conference) then anyone can be "first to print". You can't "own" ideas. You can claim priority, but it is in the publication that it gets recognized. It is even possible that parallel researchers "share" priority when publishing the same thing at about the same time. This gets questioned, of course, but it does happen. I know of one important case and knew the people involved. To be honest, I've had a lot of ideas that I never followed up on. Later, I've seen one or two of them appear in print. Good for the authors. Maybe I should have done something. The honor is theirs. But one of the ways in which I discovered I was "smart enough" was that some of the ideas presented at conferences and workshops didn't surprise me. Some people like to try to use arXiv (and related) to "protect" their ideas. But I don't think they really do that very well. Until a solution to some problem is, not only made public by its authors, but also vetted by the community it is subject to debate and correction. If you really want priority, finish the work and submit it to a journal or conference. ArXiv is intended for preprints of articles entering the review process, not for publishing unfinished ideas. Some things there seem to be very good, but it isn't a panacea. Upvotes: 1
2021/03/11	427	1,840	<issue_start>username_0: I recently graduated with a bachelor's degree and have been looking for part-time research positions since I can't find a job. I have not heard back from any professors at institutions other than those at the ones I attend. Why is that?<issue_comment>username_1: * Familiarity * Universities prefer to enhance their own reputations rather than enhance the reputations of other universities * Part-time research positions for recent graduates are scarce, and especially scarce following pandemic funding cuts Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In the US context, it's typically impossible to employ someone as a research assistant (a specific job title) unless that person is already a student at that university. Funds for graduate student research assistantships are often specified in grants with the understanding by the university and the funding agency that this money will go to graduate students at that university. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: All of the previous answers are correct. Plus: Student workers also have a different legal status. One can, for example, hire international students as student workers even though they are not allowed to work because they do not have a work visa. But that is only allowed if they are hired at the university they are enrolled in. That underlies a general principle: You can only be a student worker at your own university; at other universities, you'd just be a regular employee with all that entails. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Bachelor graduates are not qualified for research. Nobody outside of a PhD program will hire you when you still need 1:1 supervision. Unless of course they know you well already, have seen you work in lab courses, have taught you perhaps right what they might hire you for, in those lab courses. Upvotes: 1
2021/03/11	815	3,014	<issue_start>username_0: I've a few questions about permanent positions in the universities in France. As far as I'm aware, there are three main types of permanent positions in France: 1. [Maître des conférences](https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ma%C3%AEtre_de_conf%C3%A9rences_(France)): ("master of conferences", or MCF), which is a teacher-researcher position. 2. [Chargé de recherche](https://www.enseignementsup-recherche.gouv.fr/cid23162/charge-de-recherche.html): ("chargé of research", or CR), which is a researcher's position, very coveted, with teaching being optional. Offered by CNRS. 3. INRIA permanent researcher's position: very coveted, offered by [INRIA](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Institute_for_Research_in_Computer_Science_and_Automation). Research-only like the one at CNRS. My questions are: 1. Are CR and INRIA permanent positions necessarily more competitive than the MCF ones? I do know that MCFs are also not easy to get by any means (and I myself have neither). 2. If you get an MCF position, is it possible to switch or transfer to a CR one after a year or two? 3. Can MCFs do teaching and research in different departments? Such as teach math and research computer science?<issue_comment>username_1: 1. It's hard to give a general answer, but yes, they are more competitive. CNRS/INRIA positions are nationwide competitions (in the sense that a MCF is tied to a university, while a CR is tied to CNRS/INRIA which are national institutes, so a CR can request of change of assignment and move to another French university rather easily). They are also intrinsically more attractive than MCF positions: you get no teaching duties for the same salary, and you can still teach if you want to so long as the department has some teaching vacancies not filled by permanent teaching staff -- and they almost always do. 2. It is technically "possible" in the sense that there is no legal obstacle to it. The only way to do this is to get your MCF position, then apply like everyone else to a CR position when it opens. Maybe things are different in CS (I'm in math) but I do not know anyone who has managed to do it, or even expressed the desire to try. Recruiting committees know that giving a permanent position to a postdoc is life-changing, while giving a permanent position to someone who's already got one is only a change of assignment. They heavily lean towards the first. 3. Yes, it is possible. I have several colleagues who do it. Just a note, the positions offered by the CNRS and the INRIA are the same, "chargé de recherche", and have the same statutes. It's just a different employer. CNRS and INRIA are both the same kind of legal entity, an EPST. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Due to the French government defunding universities over the years, recruitments for MCF are decreasing, so conversely, the number of applicants per job posting is increasing. On average, there are between 50 to 150 applicants for an MCF job, depending on your field. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/11	599	2,413	<issue_start>username_0: Is it safe and legal to add articles downloaded from Sci-Hub to a meta-analysis study(unpublished)? Will it make any difference? Are there any consequences?<issue_comment>username_1: If you disclose that you downloaded it from Sci-Hub, one cannot rule out that you will suffer legal consequences one day (alongside, perhaps, social punishments based on moral grounds). But given the almost non-existence of a legal enforcement against the individual use of this 'pirate', I find it unlikely. To be on the safe side, you should simply not disclose the source from which you downloaded that publication. Mention it, discuss it, cite it, but do so without telling the reader how you acquired the PDF. This would be too much detail anyway. (Yes, a meta-analysis would do good to disclose how it came to include certain studies, but it does not have to tell the reader in minute detail how you downloaded each study's PDF.) Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: No. > > Yet Sci-Hub has drawbacks for text-mining research, Hart-Davidson says. The pirated papers are in unstructured PDF format, which is hard for programs to parse. But the bigger issue, he says, is that the data source is illegal. “How are you going to publish your work?” Then again, having a massive private repository of papers does allow a researcher to rapidly test hypotheses before bothering with libraries at all. And it's all just a click away. > > > [Source](https://science.sciencemag.org/content/352/6285/508.full) Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: One use of Sci-Hub is just laziness. There is a lot of stuff there that was put there illegally, but most of that stuff is also available from ethical sources. An academic librarian, for example, can get access to an enormous amount of stuff perfectly within copyright law. Perhaps it isn't so convenient, but no one will, at any time, question your ethics. Some things can even be provided by their authors and/or publishers if it supports research. There may be some expense, but grants can cover such things. Better, I think that you use only things ethically obtained. Getting proper access also makes the question about reproducibility moot. --- If I understand it correctly, some of the stuff on Sci-Hub was uploaded by authors perfectly legally and without copyright restriction. For such things, the source is immaterial. Upvotes: -1
2021/03/11	1,168	5,360	<issue_start>username_0: I had my very first-ever interview for a Ph.D. position (program analysis) in computer science in Germany today. Well, after sending my application, I was asked to prepare a two-page research statement which I was given positive feedback on and, consequently, was invited to take an interview so that "[...] You will be asked some non-technical and some technical questions, including some programming questions". In the interview, and after saying hi, how are you, and tell me a little about yourself, the professor started firing algorithmic questions towards me. He even asked me to implement an algorithm for a string manipulation question in [firepad](https://firepad.io/). Well, I wasn't prepared to be asked directly about coding and finding working algorithms for specific problems and, unfortunately, my mind went completely blank. I thought an interview would include conceptual technical questions like tell us about your ideas in our field of research or tell us about your master's thesis or at least I'd expected to be asked some programming questions like what is the difference between this and that in Java or tell us about collections in Java. My question is now: Does a typical Ph.D. interview in computer science really include such detailed questions? or I was a very unlucky person that my first ever interview went this way?<issue_comment>username_1: There really is no "typical" interview protocol for CS PhD positions. The kinds of questions asked will mostly depend on the qualities and skills that the PI deems relevant for the position. If the work requires specialized technical knowledge, it's possible that the PI will try to test this knowledge, and programming tasks are a valid way of doing that. In your case, one could argue that the PI slightly miscommunicated the contents of the interview, since a programming task is arguably not a programming question. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As mentioned in the [answer of username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/163700/75368), there is no typical protocol for such interviews. But I'd like to add that the questions in interviews not only depend on the requirements of a position, but also the past experiences of the PI. Doing a PhD in CS typically means to come up with some new ideas to solve problems of interest to the academic community and to then validate that these ideas are good. In fields with an applied component, this often means to implement the ideas in one form or the other. In program analysis, this often means to implement the ideas in research prototype program analysis tools. This means that a successful PhD student should be able to * come up with new ideas to a field of research (normally the one in which the PI works) * being able to implement them. It is good for both student and PI if only applicants are accepted for which it is reasonably certain that they can do both. This is because doing a PhD in an acceptable time frame is tough. Even skilled candidates pretty much never finish their PhDs in three years (which is the norm on paper in Germany but not in practice). If the work in the "coming up with ideas" or "implementation" categories takes longer because of a lack of skills acquired in the past, then this can easily mean that this part takes two-fold to ten-fold as much time. And then there is no way to finish the PhD on time and depending on where the funding for the position comes from, the PI may also run into trouble with the funding source (they want to see results!). While the ten-fold figure is surely drastic, I believe it to be realistic for the implementation part, though. Programming is hard initially and then later one becomes more proficient. Implementing a scientific idea means that you implement something whose implications you haven't fully understood. You want to keep your mind open and constantly think during every step of the implementation whether what you are doing is really what solves the problem. Often, during the implementation, you found out that you forgot an aspect during the conceptualization of the new idea. But you only find that out when you are able to focus on what you are doing. If you lack programming skills, then your mind will be busy with fighting the programming language and basic algorithms concepts while you are at the same time doing something quite difficult. This is like learning to drive during a race. Now obviously you acquire new skills during your PhD, which will help you speed up your work over time. But the basic programming and problem solving skills are normally learned quite early on during a CS course of study (normally in the B.Sc.), and catching on later will take a lot of time - time that makes you unproductive in the first couple of years, as there is also a lot of research that other people did in the field to catch up with. And this is incompatible with an academic system in which you are expected to work on research from day 1 during your PhD studies (as it is the case in Germany). There are no courses (except in some structured programs)! Note that it is possible that the PI had a student in the past who had to drop out because of implementation work not going well. Then it's not surprising that such questions are included in an interview. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/11	2,257	9,085	<issue_start>username_0: I am a postdoc researcher in mathematics and finished my Ph.D. some month ago. I wrote three papers during my Ph.D., and I am the only author for two of them. The day when I started my postdoc position, my mentor asked me "let's work", but I was not ready, so I made a lot of mistakes. My mentor works some area that is not close to me. We tried to work together, but I couldn't follow what they were working on it. Monday, we had a meeting with her college about a project that I was working on. I gave a conjecture that I wanted to reach it, and then he gave a contradiction example for it and then left the meeting. I felt so bad. Moreover, they don't treat me as same as when I came here. I feel they think I cheated them or I am weak or stupid because sometimes I feel they ignore me and they don't answer my emails as either. I asked them to write a recommendation letter for some job, but they didn't do it. These problems made me think about whether I am a mathematician or a lucky guy that I wrote some papers. You can look at my previous questions and see that I had this problem in my Ph.D., but surprisingly I finished it. I have had several meetings here, also some online meetings, that all were terrible. Now, I lost my self-confidence and am scared that I am losing my reputation due to the above problems and it will spread in the club soon or later that I am a stupid mathematician. I wanted to quit academia for industry because of the above problems, but as you know, finding a job is very difficult now due to COVID-19, so I'm just looking for a postdoc position, which is very difficult. To be honest, I don't have anyone to talk to about my problem (my Ph.D. supervisor doesn't listen to me) which is why I wrote here almost everything. What should I do to break all the failing and walk in the right direction?<issue_comment>username_1: Also from reading your question history here, it sounds as if you should talk to the mental health support on your campus as soon as you can. There may or may not be deficiencies in your ability as a mathematician that you also have been asking about, but just from reading what you share on academia SE you appear isolated, socially and otherwise, and troubled. I’m sure those around you want you to succeed (they just hired you!), but you could benefit from a professional trained to support people in your situation, helping you to put what you see and experience into perspective. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Postdoc hosts can sometimes be a bit insensitive to their new hires. I've seen it before - they tend to expect more of them than they do of their own grad students, and expect someone who's fully on board with their research agenda. What I tell my postdocs is that I don't expect any progress for at least 4 months from the day they start the job. This is the minimum it takes to read up on literature and be up to speed on how I work on problems. Small comments can also have a really big impact, more than the advisor thinks. I would imagine that your host is not out to humiliate or demoralize you - what's the point of hiring you to begin with if that's the case? They probably made an offhand remark that rubbed you the wrong way. I remember that I suggested to my postdoc advisor that I start exploring a new topic X, and they just gave me this look like I was daft; I haven't touched that topic to this day. Following the other answer given here, your postdoc host might not be aware of the issues you had during your PhD, so they're not being as sensitive as they can be. What should you do: 1. Communicate with your postdoc host to set goals, expectations (so - study topic X, advise a grad student and publish one paper) and a work dynamic (weekly meetings? biweekly meetings?). 2. Don't be hard on yourself - you did successfully graduate, there's no reason to believe that you'll do badly in your postdoc. 3. If you feel that this is affecting you in a deeper way, talk to friends or loved ones, consult a professional on how to better handle your emotional state. There's absolutely no reason for you to suffer through things alone. Good luck! Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: First of all, OP, take a deep breath. There are two well-used tropes on SE, one is 'get mental health support' and 'impostor syndrome'. Both have their place. And if you really feel it is a mental health issue, go for it. However: I do not think your case is either. You have an objective (I do not say real, you will soon see why) reason to feel down. You have been just shoved to the side by an insensitive PI. Of course your question is, were you just lucky in your PhD? Yes, you may have been lucky that you had a good PhD topic. You may have been lucky that you just needed to scratch its surface and results would gush out. Yes. That's luck. That's researcher's luck, it's the luck of the one who can harvest it; the expert in the field. It may be luck or not, but it's still yours and deservedly so. Others, say, equally talented to you, may have spent their whole PhD on some miserly results to be scraped together in some work paper, who knows? They were less lucky. Was it their fault? Not necessarily. They were good researchers, just picked the wrong topic. Almost unavoidably, you will run into bad luck periods, but, on the long run, good research comes from honing your instinct on where good luck can be more regularly found to loiter around. Let's move to the second one. Collaboration. Comes this guy spewing stuff at you and you are lost. You do not get them. Note: "them", not the "math". They confuse these two. They think you don't get the math, but that's not what happened - they simply didn't explain it properly. Sometimes, you find people, where conversation flows naturally, as if you always had worked together. There is a natural intersection of ideas, even where you do not understand them, you fill it with insights and interpolations from your own experience, quite naturally. It is exhilarating to work in such conditions, and rare. But it happens. And it's the most fun science can be. You got the opposite. You got some - perhaps famous - guy as mentor that you simply couldn't tango with. It's not your fault. Or perhaps it is? Your PhD supervisor does not listen to you - well, perhaps your choice of mentors is what needs to be improved? So, your mentor found a counterexample to your conjecture and left the room. What does he want to prove? That's simple to see one? That if you have not such superior vision into the field, you are not worth to discuss with? How did you get to this guy? Ask yourself this question. Whether the counterexample may have been obvious, it may be not, I cannot judge. A famous chess master made once a complete beginner's blunder in the opening moves of a game. It happens. It's not nice, but it's not an excuse for a put-down. If he is that dismissive of your work, cut your losses, and get a different mentor. Find colleagues, mentors etc. who you have a common language of mathematics, where you understand what they say when they say it (I do not say that you need to understand their math fully, only you understand what they communicate). Find a place where you intertwine into the scientific discussion. You do not have to be a Gauss, Galois or Grothendieck to be a good mathematician. Having luck is fair game if you put in your part of the effort (note: I say effort not talent - if you can do a PhD in math, that's a given). TL;DR 1. You feel down for an objective reason, not for some mental health problem. You have been treated badly. 2. You are entitled to luck in the choice of your research topics. You were lucky in your PhD thesis. Expect also some bad luck in your career, but develop the scent for the good places. 3. Collaboration requires effort from both sides, not dropping packages and expecting someone to pick them up, which is what your mentor did. Perhaps that's the way to test you, but it's not a way to treat people. Get a different mentor. 4. As with luck, the right collaboration partner can make results come out easy. It will feel effortless and not because the partner does everything. Like luck, find where these people loiter around. 5. So, perhaps the one thing where you are really not yet good at is finding the right people to work with. Your supervisor, as well as your mentor are both not exactly the most ideal of colleagues. Maybe, however, you are just in a difficult location. Clearly that's something you should work on changing. It's not your fault. You are entitled to researcher's luck. You are entitled to a proper explanation of fresh concepts, or else direction where to read them up before "wasting" the precious mentor's time. First and Foremost, you are entitled to be treated as a human. Get out of there and either a mentor or position or even just visit to a group who are interested in your stuff and who you can communicate with. Good luck. If it comes, it's yours. Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]
2021/03/12	5,103	19,688	<issue_start>username_0: So I was recently offered a math postdoc position in China for 2 years. A bit of additional background: * I am a US citizen and have never left the US; I've hardly left my home state (except for grad school). * I intend to go into industry. It's been a good several months since I graduated with my PhD and I am getting wary that my resume is becoming more and more stale as time passes. I had a few questions for those who know better than me: * Given that I've never left the US, how big of a culture shock with this be? The postdoc is in Shenzhen, so I'm told that it's a pretty international city. I am just concerned with coming home for Christmas and having enough time to visit my family during vacations (as I did when I was a grad student). How different would this be from working at a US university? * Given that I'm planning to spend at least part of my time on buffing up my resume for industry (particularly data science and software engineering), what does a PhD from a top US school and a postdoc at a Chinese university look like to employers (I know this is the academia stackexchange, but I just wanted to fish for some advice on this). * Lastly, do you think my plan is doable? Do you think that I will have enough free time to work on industry skills, conduct small math research projects and fulfill my postdoc responsibilities? Some clarifications: * I have not been successful in finding an industry job; hence, my plan to pursue the post-doc so I can pay the bills while I gain some industry-relevant skills * There are no other international post-docs at this school, hence I cannot ask them about their experiences<issue_comment>username_1: A math postdoc typically has no formal responsibilities (except teaching if the postdoc is also a teaching position). That makes it a bad idea for anyone who isn’t at least seriously considering an academic career to do such a postdoc: the problem for such a person is that the incentives for doing research are not aligned with their personal career goals. Any postdoc I know who decided to leave academia, essentially stopped doing research the moment they made that decision, as from that moment on they had every reason to spend all their time on other things. So, it seems to me that the question you need to answer first is why you want to do a postdoc, since if it’s just a temporary slot to fall into while you work on learning to code for two years and prepare for the move to industry, that’d probably be cheating your employer, and largely a waste of time for you. Once you answer that question, there’s still the China issue to consider, but I don’t know what to say about that. For some people living abroad for two years in a country with a vastly different culture from where they’re from is their idea of a good time, for others it isn’t. If you don’t know which of those groups you belong to since you’ve never experienced that, I don’t see how you can realistically expect strangers on the internet to know any better than you. Anyway, it’s certainly an interesting opportunity - good luck! Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: As someone from England who did postdocs in Thailand (for 4 years) and then taught in high schools in Shanghai (for 3 years), not so recent, but within the last ten years: Working conditions depend a lot on the people you happen to be around, and Shenzhen is not Shanghai (although in terms of "internationalisation", they are similar), but based on my experience (the following was all TRUE for me, although everyone's experience is different): Another factor which is sadly crucial but you haven't mentioned, is your ethnicity. If you are white then people will stare at you and you will be a target for rip off/con artists/people trying to sell you junk everywhere you go. The violent crime rate is zero (although, there are pickpockets; and the official train ticket seller in a railway station tried to overcharge me once), but you will have to have your guard up at all times. If you have darker skin then you might have a hard time. I have heard Chinese friends say things about Africans and non-Chinese Asians which would be unbelievably racist in most western countries. However, I don't know what practical differences in behaviour/treatment might arise from this. If you look Chinese then people will assume that you are, which means you will get pushed around more on crowded public transport, etc. (I myself am white, but my Korean-American friend was always complaining about being shoved around on the trains, even more than me - this is just how people behave towards each other in China, and queuing is nonexistent). Culture shock: You will find it hard to buy certain basic things you are used to in the US (although you will not know which until you are there). You will find that many products are of much lower quality than in the US, that you cannot obtain higher quality products at all. You will also find a lot of people hawking up phlegm and spitting on the street, dropping litter, and smoking indoors (even in restaurants, even where there are non smoking signs). Food: someone on the street tried to sell a live hedgehog to me to eat. Even in large supermarkets you will find live frogs and very strange animal meat on sale. If you do not eat such things, you will find it surprisingly hard to find restaurants which sell edible food (I don't regard KFC or McDonald's as edible either). Some people in the comments think this is an exaggeration. I have seen dog carcasses hanging outside restaurants in Shenzhen. OK, I suppose you are not likely to get served something like this accidentally, but that doesn't mean it's not there and cooked in the same kitchen, with questionable hygiene standards (food inspectors are routinely bribed). China is notoriously bad for animal rights. Remember also the poisoned baby milk powder scandal ten years ago. Language barrier: Very few signs will be in English (let alone people who speak English). For getting on buses etc., you really should have your address or road name written down IN CHINESE CHARACTERS to check. (By English I really mean "Roman script" - if something is written in Polish or Swedish, or some other European language I don't know, at least I can read, copy and memorise things. This is also a problem in Thailand of course, although at least Thai is alphabetic). Working conditions: make sure EVERYTHING is written down and agreed in GREAT detail. You should expect your employers to lie and cheat about everything. Do not expect any reasonable behaviour or holidays from them. Maybe you will be pleasantly surprised, but plan for the worst. "We missed Monday due to a public holiday, so therefore we will all work on Saturday". One time, both Monday AND Tuesday were Chinese public holidays, so we had to work over Saturday and Sunday (and still work the following Monday - Friday as normal). So, we were forced to work 10 days in a row! Prices: China is nowhere near as cheap as Thailand, say, nowadays. A good meal in a restaurant will cost you >10 US dollars, easily, unless you are willing to eat strange and/or low quality food. China is fine for buying cheap, low quality junk, but even expensive products will still be low quality, you just cannot escape it. (E.g., I have had DVD players, washing machines, etc. break down within a few months). "International" cities: absolute nonsense. People say the same about Shanghai, and it is not international at all. All the ways in which it is "international" are very superficial. Nowhere in mainland China is "international" in the proper sense of the word. Only Hong Kong is international (although I don't know about Macau). Money/exchange: you will find it very easy to change US dollars to yuan, but very hard (within China) to go the other way when you finally leave (and international bank transfers will be very hard). China discourages you from taking foreign currency out of the country. (Yes, even staff in the Bank of China will blatantly lie and pretend not to have foreign money). For cash exchange, by far the best option is to go to Hong Kong. You will have to pay for almost everything in cash. Freedom/internet: yes, China really does spy on you, block websites, block Hong Kong TV news broadcasts, etc. etc. You need to show your ID at internet cafes, to buy petrol for cars/motorbikes, to buy long distance bus/train tickets, etc. etc. When you first arrive, someone from your apartment building will speak to you and be very friendly. That is the communist party representative who lives in your neighbourhood (EVERY neighbourhood has at least one, who reports back everything they see, especially regarding foreigners). There really are undercover spies everywhere watching you and reporting back to the Communist party. General evilness/legal problems: if relations go bad between you and your employer, do not expect any kind of fair treatment. They might, e.g., collude with your apartment owner to have you thrown out or overcharged; they might forge documents and try to charge you money for false compensation/refuse to pay salaries owed, etc. etc. Even though the law theoretically protects you, in practice very few people will help you (and even if you take them on and win, you will not be compensated the amount you deserve). Always have your passport handy and be prepared to run if things start to go badly downhill. At least you are not actually at risk of imprisonment unless you do something really bad. Shenzhen does have one advantage, that you can easily go to Hong Kong for brief escapes (unless the border is closed due to Covid etc.); if you are working in Shenzhen then you will get a multientry Chinese visa, and Hong Kong I believe allows US passport holders to enter frequently for short tourist visits without fuss. Shenzhen is newer and less polluted than Shanghai, although it still seems about the same as London to me, which I think of as quite polluted. To be fair, I think Shenzhen is the nicest large Chinese city I've been to (and I have been to quite a few), although there is no history (unlike Guangzhou, Shanghai, Beijing and even Hong Kong). Make sure you are not the only foreigner who works there! At least they will have dedicated staff members who will help you to find an apartment, get visas/work permits/etc. etc., because they know that most of these are basically impossible if you don't speak Chinese. Health: they WILL test for diseases like HIV, Hepatitis, Tuberculosis, etc. etc. I don't know where to find the full list of diseases, but if you have anything like this, you might find yourself stuck in China abandoned by your employer (with hefty medical bills) if you fail the medical test. Also, doctors in China are NOT TRUSTWORTHY; some WILL overcharge, recommend dubious or unnecessary treatment, etc. (Of course this may also be true in other countries). Also, what actually will happen if you catch Covid-19 or some other disease? Make sure you ask in advance and have it written into the contract what they will do in this case. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Maybe you should be aware there is a new coldish war between five eyes (US, UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand - see <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes>) and China. [Plus Japan, India, and the EU]. If your area of expertise is in any area of strategic interest to any of the above six nations you may run into future security problems. EG. Two days ago the boss of ASIO (like FBI counter intelligence) made this warning - > > Australian security agencies will give universities an expanded list of emerging technologies that should be protected from foreign interference as concern grows about local academics giving China access to their critical research. > > > > > The list will go beyond the military or “dual-use” technologies that Australian universities have traditionally been told to protect from foreign governments. > > > From <https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/asio-boss-says-foreign-governments-using-deceptive-means-to-obtain-australian-research-20210311-p579qq.html> This is a list of some technologies as defined by China - * Information Technology - AI, IoT, smart appliances * Robotics - AI, machine learning * Green energy and green vehicles energy efficiency, electric vehicles * Aerospace equipment * Ocean engineering and high tech ships * Railway equipment * Power equipment * New materials * Medicine and medical devices * Agriculture machinery From Made in China 2025 - <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Made_in_China_2025> China also engages in hostage diplomacy, maybe you'll be the next one - > > Australia has joined an international coalition of 57 countries condemning hostage diplomacy, in a move designed to ramp up diplomatic pressure on China and other nations which have arbitrarily detained foreigners. > > > > > Signatories include Japan, the UK, US and the vast majority of members in the European Union > > > > > The declaration does not specifically mention any nation > > > > > It is reportedly sparked by concern over arrests of foreigners by China, Iran, Russia and North Korea > > > > > The declaration has been led by Canada,(external link) which has been caught in a protracted diplomatic battle with China over the jailing of two Canadian citizens, former diplomat Michael Kovrig and consultant <NAME>. > > > > > China has made it clear the move is in retaliation for the arrest of Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou in Vancouver in 2018. > > > <https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-02-16/australia-joins-canada-end-arrest-foreigners-hostage-diplomacy/13158578> Also war is expected by some US military commanders within 6 years - you don't want to be there when/if that happens. See - > > China could invade Taiwan within the next six years as Beijing accelerates its moves to supplant American military power in Asia, a top US commander has warned. > > > > > Democratic and self-ruled Taiwan lives under constant threat of invasion by China, whose leaders view the island as part of their territory and which they have vowed to one day take back. > > > > > “I worry that they’re [China] accelerating their ambitions to supplant the United States and our leadership role in the rules-based international order... by 2050,” said Washington’s top military officer in Asia-Pacific, Admiral <NAME>, on Tuesday. > > > > > “Taiwan is clearly one of their ambitions before that. And I think the threat is manifest during this decade, in fact, in the next six years,” he told a US Senate armed services committee hearing. > > > <https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/10/china-could-invade-taiwan-in-next-six-years-top-us-admiral-warns> Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I’m English, and I lived and worked in Shanghai for 9 years. I had some contact with Chinese universities, but not a lot. I would have two concerns about your plan: (1) Some Chinese academics treat grad students and post docs as indentured servants, to be used for their personal profit. Don’t be surprised if you end up doing work for which some senior prof gets paid. This might be less prevalent in mathematics, but it’s common in computer science and engineering. Maybe this is not unique to China, but that’s where I have observed it most. (2) The culture shock will be considerable. The answer from @english\_mathematician has some examples, but that’s the tip of the iceberg. EVERYTHING is going to be a frustrating confrontational battle, and you will almost always lose. It’s utterly exhausting. I’d suggest you go spend a few weeks in Shenzhen before you commit. And don’t stay in a fancy international hotel. Go try to rent an apartment, get a mobile phone, open a bank account, or visit a doctor. You might well find that this experience alone is sufficient to discourage you. The major Chinese cities have large ex-pat communities. Within these, you will find people who speak English and are happy to provide you with certain services. The reason they’re happy is that they get to charge exorbitant rates. The foreigner often doesn’t care because the bills are being paid by some big corporation back home. On a Chinese post-doc salary, you won’t be able to afford any of this. So, as mentioned above, you can forget the “international city” idea. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: > > what does a PhD from a top US school and a postdoc at a Chinese university look like to employers > > > It looks like a PhD. This is very dependent on the countries (I can speak for France, Germany and Italy - and overall EU) but a PhD (not a postdoc) is a nice to have, but not much more. Germany is a bit special as PhDs are very much recognized as a social position (broadly speaking). My PhD helped me in my jobs because it is a mark of seriousness but the actual topic is not really relevant (provided it is more or less science). I work in IT and have a PhD in physics, as an example. If you intend to work in Data Science and you have a PhD in Data Science then fine, but you will be only a notch above someone with a Masters in that subject. An employer wants someone who will be able to work on a problem, from a practical aspect. If your PhD is about an esoteric part of DS, then it does not count at all. Even if it is applicable to the job do not expect someone to really realize that. So a PhD is nice. Now the postdoc. (putting myself in the shoes of an interviewer) As someone working in industry, I do not know what a postdoc is. Or I have a faint idea that it is an extra PhD. Or maybe som extra work in research you had to do after your PhD? Some kind of internship? Anyway, it does not matter because I have questions about how to address a problem of classifying something based on something. Pouf! the postdoc part is gone from my mind, and the PhD is slowly drifting away as well. Of course YMMV. You may get into an industrial research job, your interviewer may have aa PhD and understand what a postdoc is (but still, it does not make much difference), etc. If you want to go to China to get some international experience - great. This may count as an international experience, not a postdoc. What you did there is irrelevant if you did not work in industry. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: In terms of culture shock it goes something like this for you: US < Canada < Other English-native-countries (UK, Australia) < Western Europe < Eastern Europe, South America < Middle East/Asia/Africa. So you are going right in at the deep end moving to China. Why don't you try out travelling to a closer country first to see if you like it? Try Mexico, say Mexico City or a smaller town where people are less likely to speak English. Try to eat in local restaurants etc, buy a train ticket etc. You'll either love the experience of being somewhere very different, or hate it. If you hate it, forget China, which will be as different again as Mexico is from the US, and you just saved yourself a lot of time and money. I am from the UK but spent quite a bit of my childhood in Africa and holidaying in Europe, so I'm familiar with non-home-countries. More recently I lived in Malaysia for several years, quite a big culture shock compared to Europe but relatively painless because my wife is from there. We visited China for a few weeks - it was much harder than being in Malaysia because (for a start) almost all the signs are in Chinese script and you can't pronounce them in your head, unlike a country where they use Roman script. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/12	882	3,773	<issue_start>username_0: why some author not provide free pdf of his/her book on internet ? I see [<NAME>](http://pi.math.cornell.edu/%7Ehatcher/) Books are available on his website with free of cost and no need to charge for download the pdf There many good book with red( Wiley) and yellow (springer) cover .But that book price is very high and not available on internet .Poor student can not afford it<issue_comment>username_1: Publishers pay authors for exclusive distribution rights, forbidding the provision of books for free. Some authors better negotiate terms, allowing for free distribution. E.g., terms may allow distribution of preprints. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Because they want to make money from it. If you are interested in spending hours of your time working for free in the name of dissemination of knowledge, I got [lots of copyediting work](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:All_articles_needing_copy_edit) you might be interested in. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: People write textbooks for a variety of reasons. Money is only one and for most authors the monetary rewards are modest (very modest). There are exceptions. I once (more than 35 years ago) had a colleague who was a millionaire based on publishing math books. Economics texts can earn astronomical amounts of money for an author. But these are mostly elementary texts, because such things have a wide potential audience. The first Calculus course is taught to millions of students every year. But advanced material, such as Hatcher's books, have a much smaller potential audience. They are therefore much more expensive (per copy) to produce since the returns are small. Moreover textbooks seem to have a limited lifetime, though some old classic math books are, IMO, priceless. But there are other reasons to publish books. One is that a person wants to teach a course in a certain way and doesn't find a suitable book for their students. Another reason is reputation. One way to earn tenure and advance in rank is to publish books. Another reason is just that a person is interested in a topic and wants to bring their ideas together and share them. In the case of Hatcher, it is a combination of all these things. I suspect that money was the smaller part of his equation, since he was paid pretty well and is now retired. His books have been harder to find in print, due to financial calculations from the publisher, so he decided to share them. He feels good about what he has done and it is reward enough. Especially for someone who has had a successful career and is retired. He probably has a substantial pension, making book revenues immaterial. That is also my own experience, though I use a different model that keeps the price per copy very modest, but not zero. But, publishing printed materials is an expensive operation if you want quality. The few books I've done with established publishers, such as Springer, have taken a long time to produce with many people involved, just to get to the point where it makes sense to actually cut the trees to produce the paper and print the book, never mind the distribution costs of getting it into your hands. Everyone along the way has a right to be compensated fairly for their efforts. Some people are willing and able to make the results of their efforts a gift. I celebrate that and wish it were possible for more people to do so as well. But, if you think of it as [paying it forward](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pay_it_forward), then taking the gift puts an obligation on you to pay it back in the future. But pay it back not to the authors themselves, and not necessarily in money, but with contributions of some form to the community at large. Upvotes: 3
2021/03/12	1,303	5,249	<issue_start>username_0: A teacher of teachers in a field I'm involved in frequently says: > > the best teachers are often those who only recently learned the material themselves > > > The rationale for the statement is that someone who has recently learned the material is more intimately aware of the stumbling blocks someone goes through when learning it, and can therefore be cognisant of those when teaching it to other beginners, thus making them a better teacher. By contrast, someone who has known the subject matter for many decades may have completely forgotten what it was like when first learning the material, and could be therefore prone to impatience, or underestimating complexity or learning time. ### Question Does this concept have a name? Or is there any study that backs up the idea that more experienced instructors can sometimes be blind to the most basic concepts in their discipline (since they take them for granted), and therefore (paradoxically) make worse teachers than those with less subject matter expertise?<issue_comment>username_1: Good teachers are good teachers. Experts are experts. Good teachers aren't always experts and experts aren't always good teachers. Some of the smartest people I know couldn't teach you how to tie your shoes, and some of the best teachers I know are dumber than a big bag of hammers. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: This is called the [curse of knowledge](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_knowledge). From Wikipedia: > > The curse of knowledge is a cognitive bias that occurs when an individual, communicating with other individuals, unknowingly assumes that the others have the background to understand. [...] > > > For example, in a classroom setting, teachers have difficulty teaching novices because they cannot put themselves in the position of the student. A brilliant professor might no longer remember the difficulties that a young student encounters when learning a new subject. > > > Writer and organizational psychologist <NAME> nicely illustrates the concept in this [article](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/25/opinion/sunday/college-professors-experts-advice.html): > > Two decades ago, I arrived at Harvard as an undergraduate excited to soak up the brilliance of professors who had won Nobels and Pulitzers. But by the end of the first month of my freshman year, it was clear that these world-class experts were my worst teachers. My distinguished art history professor raved about Michelangelo’s pietra serena molding but didn’t articulate why it was significant. My renowned astrophysics professor taught us how the universe seemed to be expanding, but never bothered to explain what it was expanding into (still waiting for someone to demystify that one). > It wasn’t that they didn’t care about teaching. It was that they knew too much about their subject, and had mastered it too long ago, to relate to my ignorance about it. Social scientists call it the curse of knowledge. As the psychologist <NAME>, now the president of Barnard College, writes, “As you get better and better at what you do, your ability to communicate your understanding or to help others learn that skill often gets worse and worse.” > > > Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: It is often said but I have never seen firm evidence of it to be true. (I have seen bad teachers hide behind the equally false pretence that "therefore" they must surely be brilliant scientists!) The biggest confounders are the [Dr Fox effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Fox_effect#Experiment) and the Dunning-Kruger effect, which lead students to make erroneous assessments as to how well they have been taught. Teachers who have themselves not mastered the material often fall back on the same coping strategies as poor students: "Do not try to understand this. Just, whenever you see an equation like this, follow these three steps..." Clearly the poor student believes that this teacher speaks their language, but it is far less clear if anyone is learning anything in such an exchange. This happens mostly with TAs. It is nice to get positive feedback on the module because the TA follows this pattern, but not so nice to see what the students' heads have been filled with, come exam marking time. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: It is not a "paradox" unless one assumes - incorrectly - that an expert in a field must ipso facto be an excellent teacher as well. As has been mentioned, teaching is a skill and requires experience and training that a substantive expert in the field may not have. Similarly, an expert in a field (scientific, humanities or otherwise) may not be a good writer. Those are simply different skills. It is commonly - and correctly - stated that lawyers (my field) are often poor writers. I am not aware of any specific name for this misconception. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Another related model is [Dreyfus model of skill acquisition](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreyfus_model_of_skill_acquisition). The premise being that someone at the Expert level might struggle teaching someone at Novice level since they way they perceive the domain and problems are very different. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/12	630	2,723	<issue_start>username_0: I wanted to know if there are (potentially unofficial) limits about biological age in order to get permanent positions. For instance let's say that you started your 3 years PhD about 27 (where people usually start it on their 23-24), for a comparable post-doc experience (quality of research, years of research), will the person that started "later on" its academic carrier be disadvantaged for permanent position recruitment? For my example, I started 4 years "late" because I was a bit hesitatant about what to do for the future so that I completely switched of fields during my graduate studies. Possibly in an unofficial manner?<issue_comment>username_1: In my experience the short answer is it shouldn't. This could be considered anecdotal evidence but in my experience with companies in Western Europe and the UK age is typically not even considered unofficially when screening for permanent positions, unless it is of serious concern, for example if they are due to retire very soon and the position requires a candidate to stay for much longer. Not to mention that it is illegal to favour someone for a position based on age in many countries. I will say that 4 years extra experience is something that could be considered even if not entirely relevant, though. The longer answer is that this is very different across the world. I know for a fact that in certain countries starting 4 years later may have an impact in your likelyhood to be hired. From my understanding this is partly due to cultural influence where working for a boss who is younger than you is considered unfavourable. I'm not entirely clear on how much of an impact this has in 2021 and what the laws in those countries stipulate, but it is something to consider when looking for information on this. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Four years isn't very long, actually, so I doubt that there would be much of any effect. However, you can't rule out implicit bias of individuals independent of policies (or the lack) concerning age. However, you will be judged on what you have done with your time. Changing fields is perfectly acceptable and people recognize that takes time. But the quality of your work and the recommendations of your professors will far outweigh any issues about age for most people. There is no accounting for jerks, of course. But if people who have worked with you can honestly predict your future success, then you should be fine. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I know professors who got their PhD at 40 or nearly 40. Not only they are great professors, but you can’t even tell the difference - in terms of publications/citations - as compared to their peers. Upvotes: 0
2021/03/12	730	3,278	<issue_start>username_0: Long story short, I am writing this on behalf of friend of mine for a different perspective. His supervisor is tracking them in each step, e.g. track the time on a Google Sheets when my friend worked or not, even on social media, his supervisor always gives non-constructive feedback and attacks him in front of everyone for nonsense. My friend is a scientific blogger and sometimes the supervisor asks him not to work on blogging in a humiliating way and should instead spend all the day on research. Is this normal behavior that should be expected from a supervisor in academia?<issue_comment>username_1: The way you formulate the question means that the answer has to be that that is not OK. But that answer says more about your question than about the actual situation your friend is in. You have formulated your question such that we could not have come to a different answer. So the real question is, is that what is actually happening? I don't doubt that you are genuinely concerned about your friend, and that your friend feels that this is what is happening to him. In some countries you are employed as a PhD student, and your employer has the right, within certain limits, to ensure that their employees work during working hours. For most PhD students this is their first experience as a serious full time employee, and some handle it better than others. Add to that that professors are hired not for their management skills, so there is some variance in how skilled they are in handling personal issues. This can lead to lots of ugly misunderstandings. Now, the student not just an employee, but also there to learn, and the professor not just there to supervise but also to teach. So a big part of the responsibility to fix the situation lies with the professor. But (s)he cannot do that alone. If your friend approaches this problem as "you're a bad person, now fix the situation", then that is not going to work. So if your friend wants the situation to get better, then he also has to get proactive. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It is not easy to answer such questions, as they offer a very one-sided perspective of what is really happening. But note a couple of things: 1. Your "friend" may be a scientific blogger, but he is also a PhD students with this supervisor. The blogging activity does not (fully) substitute the research / investigation / writing activities that are expected from a PhD student. 2. A little bit of activity on social media during the work hours can be tolerated, but extensive engagement with blogging at the expense of research is not cool. To achieve PhD, your friend will need to develop some work ethics and discipline, which also includes a skill of keeping dedicated hours for specific tasks. 3. Micro-managing and stalking on social media are not cool either. However, if your friend blogs a lot, their supervisor probably did not have to search very much to find evidence that the student spends their work hours on something else that is expected from them. Most supervisors won't really care when their students do research and when they blog, as long as research is going well. Perhaps, supervisor is frustrated that your friend has neglected their main research duties? Upvotes: 2
2021/03/13	969	3,975	<issue_start>username_0: I am currently an undergraduate at a university whose PhD Physics program is ranked 25. I plan to go into PhD for physics in condensed matter physics; I have applied to PhD programs this year but have been rejected by all of them, including my home university. I thus applied to masters programs for condensed matter physics. I have heard back from one university with acceptance. The school is not a well known university for physics (it only has a masters, no PhD program) and is ranked in the 200s. I plan to get more research experience during my masters. If I accept the offer and complete my masters there and apply to my home university (and similarly ranked schools) for my PhD will these programs frown upon the fact that I went from 25 to 200s? I have done well in my undergrad but will future universities just look at my masters program? It's already difficult to get into good schools and I am not sure if going to masters in this new place will make it more diffucult. \\\PS: I have nothing against universities with lower rank. It's been a rough semester in terms of grad school applications (I never thought I would be rejected from my home university and it's making me worried)<issue_comment>username_1: If you did well at a college ranked 25 in your subject matter, applied broadly for a Ph.D. (did you?) only to be rejected everywhere*, then I’d start by looking into your application package and strategy first because that is a bit odd: are you sure your letters are good and from the right people, is your statement of purpose well-written and as tailored to where and for what you apply as it should be (have someone read it), etc, etc. If your Ph.D. application was rejected because of a lack of relevant undergraduate research experience, then going for a masters first might help. Going to a lower-ranked place is not going to hurt you I think, but it’s not clear how much it is going to help you either. However, as M.Sc. programs tend to be less selective than Ph.D. ones (because they usually help finance a university), to see you rejected again almost everywhere despite what you say are good credentials, there might be something off or at least sub-optimal with your application package (or you simply didn’t apply at enough colleges). You should go over it with someone experienced, like a mentor at your alma mater if you have one. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I can answer only for the US and only tentatively, since I don't know the basis of any rejection. But I think restricting your search to the top 40 schools for a doctorate vs top 200 for an MS is an apples and oranges comparison. I'd suggest that you first (or jointly) broaden your search for a doctoral program, say to all of the R1 universities in the US. Don't try to apply to every one, but cover the range. Also, for a doctoral program, ignore the cost. You will almost certainly be offered a TA or RA position, which makes the cost 0 and gives you a modest stipend on which it is possible to live. A MS program is likely to come with no tuition forgiveness and no TA. It leaves you still vulnerable for entry to a doctorate later. If you would be satisfied to end with an MS then it should be fine, but otherwise (again, US) I suggest the doctoral program is probably better. You might even consider broadening the field options a bit. Not history or philosophy, of course, but there are a lot of options in physics that might be "close enough" to get you started on a career. But, since you were rejected by your home university, you have an opportunity to learn more about exactly why that happened. Depending on that information you might also consider how you would fill any gaps that there might be. Maybe even a "fifth year" project with a professor. I doubt that the ranking of the school you are considering would have more than a minor effect. Much more would depend on what you do there. Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
2021/03/13	434	1,825	<issue_start>username_0: I am a master degree student. I am keen to join a PhD program under a mathematician in a university in France or Luxembourg. I found that in the webpage it is written that I should send an email with my research interests to the faculty. I have some questions regarding those. My questions are as follows: 1. Do I need to read research papers of the faculty before sending the email and in the email should I include that I have read his/her paper (or some parts of it)? 2. How should I write the email?<issue_comment>username_1: You should look at some of the professor's recent papers so that you can get a sense of what they're currently working on, and whether it is of interest to you. However, I do not think it is necessary to refer to specific papers when you first email the professor. Far too often when people do this, they end up giving a negative impression: it rapidly becomes clear that they haven't actually read the paper in detail, or have misunderstood its content. Keep it brief: a sentence or two on who you are (what/where you've studied), a sentence or two on what you're asking for (Their suggestions for a project? Funding? Are you hoping to start immediately, or at some point in the future?), and a sentence or two on the general research area(s) that interest you. If you have already written a masters thesis or similar, put it online somewhere and include a link. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It is essential that * Your email shows you know the professor's name * Your email shows you know the professor's area of research because professors get a lot of emails asking for supervision that don't do those two things. Include your CV. Make sure you explain how your record is related to your research interests. Otherwise follow Avid's advice. Upvotes: 1
2021/03/13	1,691	7,354	<issue_start>username_0: I am a college instructor at a university in the United States. I am giving an exam to my students in a few days, and I am aware that some of them are having conversations about making a Zoom meeting to take the exam together. I take cheating seriously, trying to both dissuade and catch. Nevertheless, if I end up having access to this Zoom meeting, I am not quite sure about what I should do. The exam can be submitted any time during a 24h period, and it is not proctored. I am aware that those conditions could be different, but they are not going to change for this exam. 1. If I decide not to do anything, I am giving unfair advantage to students not following the academic integrity policy at the school. There is a chance I could present a strong case for the cheating if they are not careful and their answers look identical, but that's not guaranteed. 2. If I decided to join the meeting using my real Zoom/email address, my guess is that they would get scared right away and leave. If I want to get any information in this scenario, I would have to capture my screen to see who was connected to that meeting. Even if they are using their real names, I would just have a list of the students who were on the call at that moment, and would have zero evidence of what they were talking about. 3. If I wanted to avoid that, I would have to use a fake Zoom account, which already feels like not the right thing to do. That might give me the chance to stay on the call, and see evidence that it is being used for cheating. But this evidence would just be for me unless I capture my screen/audio, which seems like another thing that might not be right to do. I am sending them a letter offering my views on academic integrity, in the dissuasion front, but I don't think that would dissuade the proponents of this Zoom call. What do you think would be the best course of action?<issue_comment>username_1: I've spent some time thinking about the problem. Disclaimer: I believe exams are a way to push students to learn something from the course, grades being an incentive. The solution below may be very unorthodox, so brace yourselves. It's also based on my experiences at an European university, where an instructor has a lot of power in defining an exam and grading it. I see two ways the Zoom meeting can work: 1. They solve exams individually, then meet-up for a review session, correct the exams and send them. Which is a good strategy. They will mostly work on the exams alone and during the review session they will gain additional knowledge. 2. They meet up just after the exams are given and spend time solving them together. It's a bad strategy. Brain storm sessions are usually ineffective, some of the students won't be pulling their weight and, I guess, in the end they will have to spend more time on the exam to turn in the same quality answers as working alone. That being said, recognising your own weaknesses and turning to someone for help is also a very important skill in life, so I wouldn't mitigate it. I also like very much Buffy's idea to make them cite the sources. So this is what I'd do: 1. I'd ask them to cite the sources. When working individually, the sources should differ. If they work together it will be a lot of trouble to not only change the answers, but also the sources. 2. I'd allow them, however, to work together and ask them to send a contribution report. I'd expect that it would encourage them to divide the workload more equally. 3. I'd set a different grading standard for individual vs. collaboration work. E.g. the points you lose on a mistake is weighted by a number of people that work on the exam. 4. I'd allow them to mark one reviewer (whose help doesn't affect a score) and their contribution. I'd encourage the reviewers to also report on their reviews. If the contribution was helpful, it would improve the score of the reviewer. If possible I'd also make myself available as an reviewer. I believe these solution would change possible ways to cheat into available strategies, making the exam also an interesting experience of collaborative work. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The short answer is that as long as exams are online there’s absolutely no way for you to enforce academic integrity. Any penalty you impose would require you to prove that students collaborated, which is really easy to hide. If I really wanted to work with someone, I’d just go and do the exam in the same room with them. Even if you’re going to impose very strict rules (a webcam showing them and their workspace, with sound on or something similar) it’s easy to get around such restrictions if the stakes are high enough. In your case students seem to have been foolish enough to at least make you aware that they intend to cheat. I don’t think my university allows me to penalize intent, but it’s definitely a good idea to send them a stern warning (nicely phrased) about the university policies and your expectations of them. My solution so far has been to place less weight on big exams. This way I have a lot more opportunities to check whether someone has been cheating, and students have less incentive to cheat since the stakes are low on every assessment. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: This answer is largely based off the comment that it is an introductory course and the students know already what 'kind' of questions are expected. You also feel that the students in concern can't be dissuaded, so the only option is to make the process of collaboration/cheating more difficult. It is standard practice in many places to have different questions for different students. Not necessarily individual, rather 3 or 4 sets. The order of questions could be different, the numbers could be different, the language used could be different. If you are permitted to do so, you could alternatively obscure the weightage of each question. An instructor I knew used to give variables as the weightage, so nobody knew how much each question was worth. Different students would gravitate towards different questions (based on their individual preparedness/preference), thereby reducing the possibility of cheating. If they did still cheat, the length/detail of answers would be similar across answersheets, and the instructor would easily detect who copied. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: > > I take cheating seriously, trying to both dissuade and catch. > > > The options you have given are all "punish" and not "dissuade." You should tell the students explicitly that communicating during the exam is forbidden. You might even tell them that you know certain students plan to break the rules and you are already prepared to gather evidence. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: ### Follow the policy on academic dishonesty set out by your university. You're working at an American university; it should have a policy on how breaches of its policy governing academic honesty are to be handled (potentially called something like the "honor code"). As a staff member, I would encourage you to look up those policies and procedures, and then proceed to follow them. This might involve you simply being given the power to fail the students, having to refer the case to an Academic Dishonesty Tribunal, or something similar. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/14	3,889	16,972	<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student in the US and teaching a lab this semester. The labs have become online and students are provided with data and submit their reports. All communications take place through email. There is also online office hours but relatively few students attend. Recently I found two groups submitting the exact same drawing in one of their lab reports (this was a significant part of their work for the report). So I emailed them separately and asked whether this report was completely their own work. Or was it created by one of them and shared for others, and if not, where was it taken from. One of them did not reply at all. The other did, offering apologies but saying that we did not plagiarize. But they also didn't reply to my next email in which I told them exactly which part has been found in another group's work. Basically, they didn't say anything in the face of clear evidence. I should mention that I did have email communications with the same students before and I'm sure they have read my emails. If it was an in-person class I could just talk to them in the next session to clarify things. But now, they're just ignoring my emails. This has left me with my own speculations. The most probable scenario is that both have used material from the previous semester, and since they neither denied, clarified, or apologized for this, I have lost confidence in their other reports too. This is making it difficult for me to make an appropriate (proportionate) decision and honestly, I don't know what to make out of this. Are they too stressed/ashamed to reply or are they so relaxed about this that don't even bother to do so? How should I proceed from here? Is it OK for students to ignore the instructor's emails on such an important issue? And should I continue grading their reports? As I said, I can't trust their works anymore even though I don't have evidence of further plagiarism elsewhere. Would it be appropriate or too much to give a failing grade because of a single verified incidence of plagiarism?<issue_comment>username_1: First, some important caveats: * It is certainly worth checking their other work to see if you find any further evidence of plagiarism. In the absence of such evidence, you must proceed under the assumption that the only case of plagiarism is the one you have evidence for. * You should check your university's regulations; you may be required to proceed in a certain way (e.g., to advise the students of their rights, or to turn this over to a committee rather than handling it yourself). * Since you are a PhD student, speaking with a more experienced professor is probably also a very good idea. In particular, if you are not listed as the "instructor of record," you should speak with the instructor of record before proceeding (different universities will have different policies about whether the grad student who does the "actual work" will be formally listed as the instructor of record). Still, let us assume for the sake of this question that you can and must handle this yourself. In this case, my advice would be to send an e-mail along the following lines: > > Dear Student: it has been over a week, and I have received no response to my below inquiry. If I do not receive a response by Friday, I will assume that your report was indeed plagiarized and will accordingly assign [some appropriate but relatively harsh penalty]. If you believe you are not guilty, or if you have mitigating factors you would like me to consider, please let me know, either by e-mail or by scheduling a virtual meeting. Regards, > > > As for what penalty would be appropriate, I reiterate my advice to discuss this with someone locally; campus cultures vary, and your department probably faces issues like this with some regularity. Still, my experience is that for something like this, a proportionate response would be to (1) give a zero on the lab report in question, which should cost them about a letter grade overall, and (2) file a report with the college so that they cannot have a new "first offense" in a different class. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: In the case of suspected plagiarism you have to follow your institution's formal rules. I'm sure your university has those. This might not seem a helpful answer but it is the only correct one. For example, the course of action outlined in [another answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/163802/75368) (while perfectly sensible) would violate university policy at my institution and get me in real trouble if I were to follow it. In any case, given that you're unfamiliar with the process and your institution's policies it is strongly encouraged for you to contact the professor in charge of the course. That's a good idea whenever you're unsure about how to proceed with grading, but many institutional policies on plagiarised student work involve the professor. So this is probably a necessary step in any case. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: I dealt with this exact issue in the last fall semester. The best practice likely depends on your institution's rules. At my institution, we have a distinction between academic sanctions and disciplinary sanctions. Academic sanctions are those applied purely by the instructor, with the effect of lowering grades on a particular assignment or course. The instructor has more authority in this case. If I have strong evidence of plagiarism, then I immediately fail the student on the assignment and inform them of that, without advance conferencing. If they think they have evidence to the contrary, then they can argue it, but it's hardly ever correct (I think maybe once in ten years there was a legitimate defense, barely). Disciplinary sanctions involve probation or possibly expulsion from the institution; this is not something the instructor can effect, but happens at the Dean level. Here the formal process does require instructor to "review with the student the facts and circumstances of the suspected violation whenever feasible", before filing a report and triggering a further protocol. In my experience from the fall: I had 7 students who clearly plagiarized their online final exams. Only 1 responded to the interview request (and they denied any cheating with me). So after a day or two I assessed the "whenever feasible" clause as negative, turned over all 7 cases with evidence to the academic integrity officer, and within a month she had convinced all of them to confess to cheating and accept academic probation (in lieu of more elaborate proceedings with an investigatory committee). So my recommendations would be: (a) become very familiar with the details of your school's academic integrity policy, and (b) contact the academic integrity officer or equivalent if you need further guidance. For time purposes, I would not engage in an inquiry or interview unless it's absolutely required by the formal college policy; and I would advise against spending a lot of time cycling with students who have reason to be evasive. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: The correct course of action is strongly institution-dependent. The most important things are to remain polite and not indicate you have reached a conclusion when communicating with the students, to keep a paper trail of all communications with the students, and immediately advise to the appropriate authorities. Where I work there is an official form to fill advising students of any allegation of academic misconduct, and sending this form forces the student to speak with the instructor within a set timeframe (usually 5 working days) to clarify the situation. If you are not satisfied with the answers, it escalates to the Dean. I would be very much surprised if a graduate student would bear the burden of dealing with a penalty: it is for one unfair to the graduate student to have this responsibility, and also to have a reasonably uniform policy such sanctions are better handled by someone with a more holistic view of the situation and history of such sanctions. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: > > How should I proceed from here? > > > The other answers address this. > > Is it OK for students to ignore the instructor's emails on such an important issue? > > > Yes, unless your university has a policy saying otherwise. Normally there is no obligation to defend one's self against accusations. If the accused is either obviously guilty or obviously innocent, staying silent is often a good strategy. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: > > How should I proceed from here? > > > As all the other answers have stated, you should contact an academic to learn what are the appropriate steps in your institution. While no University I know of is really lenient towards plagiarims, the steps (and your freedom to decide them) vary a lot. Like, where I studied, academic plagiarism was technically a felony - which meant that any teacher/tutor/TA who messed up their part in the process of assessing and punishing plagiarism risked sanctions outside the academical world. I don't know a single case where it happened, but the law was there and everybody who had a say in students' grading was throughly lectured (and scared) on how to behave in order to avoid this. > > Is it OK for students to ignore the instructor's emails on such an important issue? And should I continue grading their reports? As I said, I can't trust their works anymore even though I don't have evidence of further plagiarism elsewhere. > > > Technically, they are under no obligation to answer your emails on any subject but, as you stated in your own question, this can undermine the trust relationship you need with your students in order to grade their work. I think you should raise this issue with your academic superior, even if it's not part of the process for plagiarism. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: First, all the other responses explaining that you need to check your institution's formal policies about plagiarism apply. It is possible, if unlikely, that one of the two teams submitted original work and the other team copied that work. In this case, only one of the two teams has plagiarized. (The team who did the work probably should not have let the other team see their documents, but that is a different problem.) This is really the only reason to delay following your institution's process (which may include giving both teams a zero for the assignment and/or other punishment by the institution). The team claiming that they submitted original work should be able to provide process documents, emails in which they discussed the work, etc. They need to understand that because two teams have submitted the same work, they must respond within a fixed period of time or they will be subject to whatever the policy is. Since neither team is responding to your emails, most likely they have both plagiarized work done during a previous term. I will offer a few suggestions about how to avoid this in the future. The most important thing is to make expectations clear from the beginning, e.g. in the syllabus and in first-session communications with students (whether online or in the classroom). When I teach statistics online, I assign projects rather than quizzes, and I allow students to communicate about their projects, and even work together on shared topics. (The students choose their own topic and data source-- I define the statistical operation they need to demonstrate.) However, I warn them all in advance that I will compare their answers and I expect them all to be unique. The numbers could be the same, but the text they write to explain their work has to be their own. This has worked well to prevent plagiarism. Letting students choose their own topics helps, too. I try to make the projects interesting and practical so students will find them worthwhile. This isn't always an option. I have found that many students are shockingly unaware of what plagiarism is and how serious it is. They also seem unaware of how likely they are to get caught. When I am reading text submitted by a student, it is easy to spot the places where they have copied and pasted from some other source by changes in writing style. There are also tools like TurnItIn that check text against large databases of documents and report similarities. I have found that it is helpful to let students use these tools to check their own work before submitting it to me. I have also found it helpful to require students to submit early drafts of their work before turning in the final assignment. It makes extra work for me to check these, but it improves the quality of the final result, and most "paper mills" that distribute assignments don't include multiple drafts. I've also found that it helps to improve the student's sense of ownership of the work, so they are somewhat less likely to cheat. We shouldn't have to start every undergraduate course with an explanation of what "original work" means and the penalties for plagiarism, but I've found it saves a lot of trouble if I do. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: I would proceed with the following in mind (paraphrasing the Berkeley Course on Physics): Ideally, every part of a course, including exams (and in your case for sure homework), should provide an opportunity for the student to learn something. In your case, they should learn about the subject matter and about plagiarism: They should do their bloody own research, for both reasons. For first time offenders, I don't see a need or obligation to pull out the big guns, inform the department, start an investigation because of an ethics breach etc. These kids have simply done what they did in high school all along, where it was accepted: Siphon stuff off of the internet and hand it in as homework, or copy from your neighbor. Handle this yourself in a sovereign manner: Set a deadline, insist on a video talk with them. Insist that they respond. (A reliable communication channel is a requirement for the course anyway; could be google groups or whatever you and they agree upon — kids these days may not read email daily.) Make clear that if they don't respond, they won't get a grade. But if and when they respond, make clear that they are expected to do their own work so that they learn something, that plagiarism in other situations would be an academic death sentence, and then grade the work they hand in later. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_9: In general (not related to plagiarism specifically, focusing on the "not answering" part), my suggestion is to decide yourself, inform them on the decision, and follow through with it. As an example: I work in IT, and often I need clarification from some stakeholder about some requirement for a software we are developing. I know from experience that they often don't answer for whatever reasons. So my strategy is to not ask them at all, but succinctly present the problem together with my preferred solution; and a very clear statement that I will proceed with my solution unless I hear otherwise before some deadline. The same works excellently for superiors when asking for approvals (if allowed by the "process") - acceptance by silence. It is nice for them, because they don't even need to waste the 3 seconds it takes to reply "yes", and they see that I have thought it through, and know what I'm doing. In this particular case, I agree with the other answers that you must go by the rules of your institution, as plagiarism is a quite sensitive subject in the world of academia, and simply for the reason that there probably are regulations which it never is a good idea to ignore. For the sake of argument, let's assume that the policy is that if both works are obviously identical, and it is not possible for either party to prove that theirs was not the copy, both are discarded. In this case, you would write them both the same mail roughly along the line of "I have no way to discern which of the two works is the original. If by the time of XYZ nobody can bring light into the issue, I will treat both as not submitted." If you follow through with this approach, it is of utmost importance that your statement is short, concise and has zero need for interpretation (which is obviously a good guideline in all communication); also without emotions, accusations or anything superfluous. A classic "I" message works best. No accusations or assumptions. The deadline should be long enough, but not too long. Especially if you have an "upstream" deadline - assume that you get a response minutes before the deadline from your mail runs out; there should be enough time to then follow up with the issue before you have to close the case due to external factors. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_10: Turn it over to the "module convener" "course leader" or whatever it is called at your institution. Upvotes: -1
2021/03/14	1,986	8,632	<issue_start>username_0: I finished my master's degree several years ago, where I was responsible for developing/programming algorithms for a biochemistry lab. I have since successfully transitioned into industry and have been working ever since. I also have a very good relationship with my former PI. Some time ago, my former PI contacted me and I did some work for him, pro-bono, and he was interested in publishing the results. I personally had no interest in the actual publication, but I did this work more so because it allowed me to explore an area of mathematics in which I had limited experience. Lo and behold, I receive the manuscript for edits, and a student completely unrelated to this work was listed as the first author! Under normal circumstances, I wouldn't care. Academia was only a stepping stone in my life and a publication doesn't benefit me in any way. However, something feels "wrong" about just listing someone who has not contributed to this work in any way as the first author. I would like to be listed as the first author. At the same time, I want to keep a good relationship with my former PI. What are my next steps? How do I go about this? Edit: Based on the feedback so far, I think the next best step would be to follow up with the PI and determine what the student's contribution was. Perhaps the student did indeed use the results I obtained to actually write the manuscript, in which case I would have no problem letting the student take first authorship. Again, as of right now, I only see work that my former PI has done, so I want to clarify. Edit 2: I think there is some confusion about how many authors there are in this paper. There is me, who wrote the algorithm and there is my PI, who wrote the paper based on my results. Would I deserve first authorship if this a multi-author publication? Absolutely not. But by default, since myself and my PI are the only persons who have worked on this, either one of us can take first author role. I received an update from the PI. The student was placed on the paper because the student was "supposed to contribute" but they did not want to learn how to use `git` (which is how I initially decided to version any manuscripts I worked on). The PI has made a promise to make sure the student takes the lead in terms of writing the paper and learning how to use `git`.<issue_comment>username_1: This answer will be hard to accept, I know. And I sympathize. But I think your best choice is to just let it go. This is based on your statement that you want to keep good relations with your old PI, which can be important in anyone's career. The comment stream suggests this may well be a case of "gift authorship" which is generally treated as unethical in such cases. I can't say for sure, not having seen the paper and what contributions the third party might have made, but it has that sense. But, even second authorship is worth something and keeping good relations with the PI is worth more, even if they are willing to do such things. But making a formal ethical complaint or a complaint to the journal could well give you a headache dealing with the fallout and lacking a possible career advocate in future. Worse, if they have poor ethical standards, who can predict they won't retaliate for any pushback. Sad to have to advise it, but let it go. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I get the sense that you are more discontent with the specific student being made the first author, rather than about yourself not getting adequate credit. I infer this because your initial objective was curiosity, which was (presumably) met. If this is the case, then I would urge you to focus on what you gained from this exercise and consider that the student just benefitted collaterally. You could, of course, ask the former PI about the situation, although that is likely to cause some awkwardness and friction (it would amount to questioning their decision). On the other hand, if your objection is not to the student but to your own placement on the author list, you should immediately convey your justification to the PI and seek redressal. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Before you get upset, I think it would be important to learn more about the actual circumstances of the publication. I say this because, based on your description of the situation in your post you haven't been acting like a first author. You may indeed have done all of the initial work on which the manuscript was based, but based on what you have written, you don't seem to have been particularly involved in interpreting the results or writing them up (beyond the methods section). The first author of a paper, in typical usage for the field, should be involved in every stage of the project and the production of the manuscript. From what you have written, it appears that you haven't been, and so you may not even be properly aware of what the other student may or may not have done for the project. Maybe your speculation is correct; maybe it is not. Ultimately, however, authorship order isn't really your call, because you have chosen not to lead work on the paper. If you want to be first author on a paper, you need to involve yourself more deeply with the project, including the actual scientific interpretation of the results. Now, if you are concerned that your former PI may be acting unethically, you can ask for a description of the work that the other student has done. Do this from a perspective of curiosity and surprise, rather than accusation. Once their work has been described, if you disagree with your former PI's judgement, then voice your concerns. If your PI doesn't make a change after that, you can withdraw yourself from the paper --- you should not lend your name to something that you consider unethical. But based on what you described, it's not really your paper, and in the end your choice is primarily about whether or not to be associated with it. Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: I think we have all been in this situation at some point in our academic careers and I think it's best to just let it go. For example, let's say someone I know published a paper with two co-authors at the beginning of their career. The third author contributed decisively and deserved co-authorship on the work whereas the second author is well-known and has been around a while but contributed nothing at all to the paper apart from occasional confused email messages. For a while, the person was annoyed about this and felt that it was very unfair, and it is somewhat unfair, but in the end it was better for their career to just accept it and move on as there would be nothing achieved by arguing about it. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: I think the answer from @username_3 is great and should be accepted, but I just wanted to add some more explicit thoughts as to why I think @username_3 is right. "Some time ago, my former PI contacted me and I did some work for him..." -This suggests that the ideas behind the work were conceived ahead of time, without you, and by others on the author list. This is an important step in the process and is work too before whatever work you did for him. "Lo and behold, I receive the manuscript for edits..." -This suggests (as previous answers point out) that much interpretation and writing (including reading other papers and weaving that literature into this paper for context) were done without you. This is a huge amount of work, and isn't to be ignored in deciding authorship. Often in my field, if you pick up an old data set / analysis and write it up, you are pretty much guaranteed first authorship. "Edit: Based on the feedback so far, I think the next best step would be to follow up with the PI and determine what the student's contribution was. Perhaps the student did indeed use the results I obtained to actually write the manuscript, in which case I would have no problem letting the student take first authorship." -This sounds like a very sensible solution. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Some of us are extremely nice in putting our PhD students in prime position by default, even when we ourselves (or as in your case, a former associate) did almost all the work. Some students, like private Ryan, realise they must now pull their weight to "earn it." Other students abuse our generosity by endlessly playing silly buggers. (There could be other factors. It happens that a PI takes a shine to a protegee that completely baffles everybody else in the department. You know, people is people.) Upvotes: 0
2021/03/14	571	2,360	<issue_start>username_0: I am keen to apply for Doctoral program in Europe. But I have some questions. All my mathematical interests are centred about Hyperbolic Geometry. And I am keen to apply for PhD position (or join a research group) in the particular field. I have never done the course in my masters, because my university does not offer such course. Also, My master thesis is not in that field (in not hyperbolic geometry). Also, I can not join a internship program or summer school, and reading project on the field under some professors, because this current (Covid 19) situations. Therefore, I am planning to read the topics on my own. To apply for a PhD program I need to write my interests to that particular professor. Since I am learning the topics on my own, and I have no document for that, then how I would convince him/her that I have read the topics and well prepared to work his/her research group. Please help me. Thanking in advance.<issue_comment>username_1: It's fairly easy for people to identify other people in the field. You need to demonstrate you know the topic during the conversation. The easiest way is to read the professor's papers and offer intelligent comments when you first write to them: what is interesting about the paper and why, what you want to work on, etc. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: A few thoughts -- * Don't put all your eggs in one basket. It sounds as if you've staked all your plans around working with a single professor. In general it is better to apply to multiple Ph.D. programs. * Go to conferences! While the pandemic is ongoing, you should be able to attend multiple conferences for free via Zoom, in your field of interest. Take advantage of this opportunity! Listen to the talks, get a sense of what people are interested in working on, and ask questions if you have a good opportunity. See [here](https://www.conference-service.com/conferences/geometry-and-topology.html) for a list; any "summer schools" or similar are even better (but might cost money). * Don't expect professors to read a lot of material. Unfortunately you can't send (for example) a copy of all the exercises in Hatcher and expect anyone to take a careful look. You could, however, make this material available on a website and let professors know about it. Good luck. Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
2021/03/14	847	3,388	<issue_start>username_0: I would like to write engaging summaries/discussions of research papers in my field for non-specialists. These summaries/discussions would be posted on my personal website. The original article, authors, and journal would be transparently and prominently cited. The objectives are two-fold: (1) To improve my communication skills, specifically the effective communication of complex ideas. (2) To develop more traction for my own work in specific and my area of work in general [I am an early career researcher]. Is this an acceptable and encouraged practice? Specifically, are there any cautions I should take to avoid copyright violations or ruffling feathers?<issue_comment>username_1: This is certainly acceptable. It is probably a good way to practice your communication skills. Unless it is really well done and turns out to be useful for others I think it unlikely that it will develop much traction for your own work. The only downside might be using too much of your time on this instead of that work. If you carefully cite all the sources you use and don't cut and paste large chunks of words you are unlikely to ruffle feathers or encounter copyright problems. You should ask before reproducing images. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: One person who is very well known for communicating difficult technical subjects is <NAME>. He wrote a book on [QED](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/0691164096) that was intended for non-physics folks. It's a classic. But note, he wrote it after he did the Nobel-earning work on the subject. He wrote several books on various aspects of physics from a personal point of view, semi-biographical, to detailed technical stuff. He did lots of other teaching material for non-specialists. He wrote a book called [Six Easy Pieces](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/0465025277) about (Surprise!) six ideas from physics. And another [Six Not-So-Easy Pieces](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/0465025269). And nearly ever undergrad in physics is pushed to read [The Feynman Lectures on Physics](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/0465023827). His remarks on these books included the idea that they were some of the hardest work he ever did. And, that he was never satisfied with the job he did, especially for the students who read his lecture series. Maybe it's because he was very far out on the curve of expert knowledge and capability. He may have been feeling frustrated that he could not get everybody up to his level. But they did get him a huge following and popularity. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Along with the good advice in other answers here, cautioning about spending too much valuable time on this, let me suggest: > > Know your audience. > > > If you want to write for a particular audience, spend some time trying to understand what they already know and are interested in. There has been some discussion here recently on the [Curse of Knowledge](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_knowledge) in which one person fails to take account of the knowledge of another in some conversation and "speaks past them". It may take a while to find that level of discourse that satisfies both you and your readers, but it may also be a valuable thing to do if you want to eventually teach at the university level. Upvotes: 1
2021/03/14	2,325	9,639	<issue_start>username_0: This post is inspired by [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/163747/40589) discussing what is known as [the curse of knowledge](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_knowledge) - the ostensible effect where having knowledge about something makes it hard to put yourself in the mental shoes of someone who doesn’t have it, and the corollary effect (which is of clear relevance to the academia setting) that teachers tend to become less good at explaining a subject the more their expertise on the subject grows. Question: is this effect real? Please cite actual research that supports your claims.<issue_comment>username_1: If you take the meaning literally, then yes, it is real. The wikipedia article you point to itself has pointers to some of the research. But it is a "cognitive bias" not an absolute block. In most situations people speaking to other people have a tendency to suppose that the other person shares their context. If we didn't, then we would find communication impossible, needing to give background and context for nearly everything. If the conversation is two-way, with someone from a similar background, then it is relatively easy to fill in the blanks in most cases. Generally it works. But Americans traveling around the world often make too many assumptions, leading to the [Ugly American effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ugly_American_(pejorative)) when the visitor doesn't understand and refuses to learn. Imagine being the first human on a newly discovered planet of intelligent beings and trying to communicate with no shared context at all. Everything we know is wrong. But I don't extrapolate this bias to assume that teachers become "less good", unless they ignore pedagogy and make unwarranted assumptions about students. A few of us do that, of course, but many of us are conscious of the fact that our students are not like us unless they are in doctoral programs and share our context. In fact, recognizing that the tendency exists can make you a better teacher if you try to remember what you were like when starting out. When I started teaching Tai Chi, as a non-science example, I was very careful to explicitly capture the learning difficulties and misconceptions that I started out with as a practitioner. It made me more sensitive to the issues students had and more patient when they repeated mistakes. That focus made me a better teacher. I've also written here in a few places about teaching students in CS how to learn. How to take notes. How to summarize. How to make learning deep and real. But first I had to recognize (a) my students are beginners at this, (b) they are all different from one another, and (c) they aren't like me. So, no research to share, but a lifetime of getting better as a teacher by recognizing a few things and especially, how to be patient while still being insistent with students. Well, that, and being less didactic, too. And note that for a teacher of some complex subject (not just STEM), the instructor and the student don't share important context. Otherwise there is no point to teaching. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: It is worth considering at the outset, that both the extent of knowledge possessed and the ability to teach are subjective and difficult to directly quantify. Therefore, when examining research on the subject, we shouldn't forget that quantification is usually based on indicators loosely correlated to these qualities. For instance, gauging the extent of knowledge possessed would require some sort of a test (I doubt many academics would subject themselves to the indignity!). Luckily, subject matter knowledge has been tested amongst school teachers, so we have something to go by. Unfortunately, there appears to be a weakly positive correlation, or none at all, between knowledge and ability to teach [1]. Of course, ability to teach is measured by student outcomes, which is also indirect and subject to other factors. A bunch of other markers for knowledge have been examined in the past, with most exhibiting weak correlations [2]. It is interesting that none of these convey the negative correlation that the 'curse of knowledge' suggests. Conversely, more recent studies show stronger positive correlations between teaching experience and teacher effectiveness [3,4]. It would then be a fair assumption that the more knowledgeable academics would in general be more senior and therefore have more experience, and thereby be more effective teachers. Certainly, many of us have personally encountered counter-examples. These encounters probably reinforce the idea of the supposed negative correlation, but are quite clearly a case of confirmation bias. Since the question is about actual research, I think we should just treat the 'curse' as a bit of amusing anectodal folklore. [1] <NAME>. (1983). Teacher knowledge and teacher effectiveness: A literature review, theoretical analysis and discussion of research strategy. Paper presented at the meeting of the Northwestern Educational Research Association, Ellenville, NY. [2] <NAME> (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: a review of state policy evidence. Volume 8 Number 1, Education Policy Analysis Archives. [3] <https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/does-teaching-experience-increase-teacher-effectiveness-review-research> [4] <https://www.edweek.org/leadership/new-studies-find-that-for-teachers-experience-really-does-matter/2015/03> Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes, it is real. Disclaimer: I’m not a psychologist or an expert on this subject. Nonetheless I’ll provide evidence of several different types that overall strikes me as convincing enough. 1. Scientific research The curse of knowledge has been demonstrated in experiments in human psychology. The main one I’ve seen cited is <NAME>’s “[tappers and listeners](https://marshillmedia.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/The-Stanford-Tappers-and-Listeners-Experiement.pdf)” experiment from 1990, where subjects were told to tap out a song, and expressed wildly unrealistic beliefs about the ability of a listener to discern which song was being tapped. This neatly illustrates the effect that we generally overestimate the extent to which other people know what we are thinking and understand our attempts to communicate ideas with them. Of course, one can criticize these experiments as too specific and not generalizable to other situations. But that criticism will apply to pretty much any widely believed concept or experiment in psychology. 2. Popular science <NAME>, renowned author, cognitive psychologist and linguist, wrote a book called The Sense of Style: the Thinking Person’s Guide to Writing, where he specifically cites the curse of knowledge as a cause for much bad writing and communication of ideas, and analyzes the phenomenon in depth. See [this article](https://stevenpinker.com/files/pinker/files/the_source_of_bad_writing_-_wsj_0.pdf) excerpted from his book. 3. Connection to standard practices in teaching and writing Some of the advice that people [seem to associate](https://www.cis.upenn.edu/%7Ebcpierce/papers/plmw2017-curse-of-knowledge.pdf) with combating the curse of knowledge are common bits of wisdom that are offered all the time and not considered controversial in any way: e.g., people preparing to give a talk are advised to rehearse the talk in front of a live audience (I’ve seen this advice on academia.as many times). Writers are told to have a group of beta readers to read and give feedback on their work (this is standard advice in any creative writing blog or book). All of this shows the general belief in the need for people to get help “getting outside their heads” and viewing their own thoughts from the context of someone else’s point of view. The difficulty we all have of doing that on our own is very closely related to the curse. 4. Personal experience Anecdotally, I see evidence for the curse of knowledge almost every time I attend a seminar or conference talk, and often when reading papers or textbooks. The general pattern I notice is that people who are immersed in a subject and spend all their time thinking about it generally don’t do a very good job when it comes to explaining the basics of the subject to non-experts. By contrast, people who are newer to the subject seem better able to explain things in a way that’s relatable to a non-expert audience. There are exceptions of course, and occasionally you see an expert speaker who clearly has spent a good deal of effort thinking about bridging that gap between experts and non-experts and does a very good job. But those are the exceptions that prove the rule. Conclusion. It is easy to dismiss everything I wrote above as insufficiently scientific and/or not specifically relevant to teaching in academia. Those of us who work in technical areas have high standards for accepting something as true, and it’s natural to be skeptical. So, if you are expecting proof for the claim that “the effect is real” at a standard that we are used to in, say, the physical sciences, I’ll acknowledge that it’s going to be impossible to convince you. However, at the very least the evidence suggests that the curse of knowledge is a widely recognized effect in human psychology, and that related bits of advice about communication are frequently offered by experts and thinkers who have given thought to these sorts of issues. In that sense, I feel completely comfortable in standing behind the claim that yes, the effect is real. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/14	464	2,026	<issue_start>username_0: I am a postdoctoral researcher at a German university and aim to apply for a visiting lecturer program to be a visiting professor at a foreign university. For this, I am required to provide two reference letters from two professors working at German universities but not at my university. As most of my collaborators are either from my university or from international institutions, the options are pretty limited for me. Isn't it silly to request such a letter from a professor without prior direct contact? If yes, how am I supposed to fulfil this condition?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, it is silly. Boneheaded, actually. I assume that they don't want many applicants and I wouldn't put a lot of hopes on this position. But you might ask some of your current colleagues for advice. It might be that your work has been shared with other German scholars who might be able to provide a (mild) recommendation based on your published work. You could also ask for an exception, explaining your situation. Some other arrangement might be made to happen if you, otherwise, seem like a good candidate. Good luck and keep looking. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Silly or not, these are the written requirements. The issue of course is that you don't have two people who can write with actual knowledge of your work. Write to the chair of the search committee and ask them for an exception and that you can provide references from researchers abroad. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Letters from faculty at universities who the candidate has not worked with is often part of a tenure promotion package. Requesting such letters is usually an attempt to obtain an external opinion of your research. The idea is that people you have collaborated with are likely to write positive letters about you, so someone who is detached from your work can only represent their views of the merits of your research. The search committee here may have that same goal in mind. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/14	1,338	5,762	<issue_start>username_0: I'm midway through a PhD in Physics in the United States. In my short time in academia so far, I've had several distinct kinds of collaborations. I've collaborated with peers who are working on understanding a new area together, with folks in other department who are doing applied work, and of course with my advisor. Each collaboration has had its own unique structure. For example, in some of the applied work, my collaborators were interested in learning more about the details of my area, and in others my collaborators were just interested in getting results from me to plug in to their work. In some of the work with peers, each of us handled a distinct aspect of the work (and we understood little of the each other's aspect); in others, we worked together on the same problems and batted ideas back and forth. Many of the collaborations have had the same kind of issue for me, though. Sometimes I feel like my collaborators owe me a certain amount of attention. (For simplicity, please consider that the collaborator is at the same level of seniority as me.) For example, once I was on the verge of a "breakthrough" and talking through it with someone would have made a big difference, but my collaborator didn't want to engage. For another example, once I was very confused about a particular question in an applied collaborator's area that was relevant to our project and they brushed me off when I asked for help. Almost every collaboration I've had would have been improved in my eyes if my collaborators were more generous with each other. However, I know that there must be a line. The famous [Hardy-Littlewood rules](https://moleseyhill.com/2010-03-22-hardy-littlewood-rules.html) have an Axiom 2 which states that "There was no obligation to reply, or even to read, any letter one sent to the other". Clearly, other established researchers could feel differently than me. My question is intended to elicit responses which flesh out the role of a collaborator, with a particular eye towards interactions with others on the team. When a researcher (student or established) agrees to be a collaborator with someone, what responsibilities are implicit in that?<issue_comment>username_1: Your sense of things seems to be correct, but you can't control others. It would be "nice" if they shared more, but it may not happen. So, you need to assure that you aren't exploited, but, beyond that, your example might even serve, over time, to change things. However, as you build a career and build a circle of collaborators, you can, then, have discussions among yourselves about sharing. Being the sponsor/leader of a research group, for example, gives you some "standing" to influence the rules. Those rules should revolve around authorship among other things. Generosity is a good thing, but not everyone will contribute. This is especially true in high risk high reward situations, which can, unfortunately be the case in academia. You are responsible for your own behavior. You have some, but limited, influence over that of others. Setting a good example helps as long as you don't get exploited. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I think your collaboration experiences are quite typical: some turn out a success, some not, and sometimes one has to deal with "free riders" who want to take credit without working for it. I will address your emphasized question and also another question that I find relevant in this context. > > When a researcher (student or established) agrees to be a collaborator with someone, what responsibilities are implicit in that? > > > There are no implicit responsibilities. Therefore, it's a good idea to have a conversation in the early phases in a collaboration to figure out the responsibilities and make them explicit. If that doesn't happen, there's still a chance that responsibilities will emerge naturally. That especially applies if one person acts as the "driver" of the collaboration and has a good idea of what they need from everybody, and everybody acts in a cooperative way. > > How do you avoid free riders? > > > Free riders are collaborators who want credit without doing anything, even when prompted to do so. Two ideas for avoiding them: 1. Work with collaborators who already have been collaborators of people from your "trusted circle". That way, you can ask your friends about the collaboration behavior of your potential collaborator. 2. When working for the first time with someone new, don't immediately start with a big project that will take a huge effort. Instead, either choose a project with a limited scope, or become part of a bigger collaboration where your own responsibility will be small. That way, you can get a first-hand impression of everyone's collaboration behavior. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: PhDs are expendable: only official advisors have somehow some kind of responsibilities towards them, other collaborators are usually in the mood "let's see what this PhD can bring me". Even the very generous collaborators will be able to help you only in a maieutic way, by making you posing yourself the right questions so you can find yourself the answers. If you are discussing about practical issues, then it is even simpler, it boils down to "do something, spend x time, who pays for the manhour?". It is the academia, but these aspects are nowadays very close to the for-profit world were every working minute must be accounted (and paid somehow). PhDs is a solitary endeavour, and it requires patience. I understand that with financial and time constrains imposed by the modern PhD's programs that it is very difficult to give (take, to say it better) yourself the time to sail to the final goal. Upvotes: 1
2021/03/14	3,861	16,422	<issue_start>username_0: I am an undergrad who was recruited to join a lab by this PhD student and help her with her thesis, but since working with her I have come to the conclusion that she is incompetent and probably not going to finish her PhD. I often question her judgment especially related to safety and her research. This is my first research job, so sometimes I am unsure if this is normal, but at the same time I don't want to pick up bad habits. Some of the highlights include: * Lack of safety awareness. No gloves/splash goggles when working with (hot) concentrated acids and bases. Some of these experiments are run outside the fume hood, and sometimes on the floor when there is no space on the lab bench. Lab bench is a mess and when I mention cleaning up she says it'll take too much time. * When I ask her about her research proposal, she seems confused and is unable to answer basic questions about previous results. Previous experiments all seem inconclusive, need to be rerun, or she can't remember. One of the major part of her proposal is to investigate a particular mechanism, but when I ask what tests she plans on running, she has no idea. * I will talk to her about papers that I found, sometimes exactly matching the experiments we want to run, and she seems surprised. I will mention things from papers we've both read or thesis of previous students and she has no clue so most conversations about research is unproductive or she offers very superficial, obvious observations. Conversations with other group members are much more productive. * She (and I) have very little to share during group meetings because experiments are sometimes poorly designed and she does not plan them out. She will have a rough idea of what she wants to do, but no procedures or plan so lab time is spent planning the experiments out. She seems to have a very bizarre attention to some details but not others. For example, when running some high purity experiments she doesn't want us to wash the beakers with soap due to fear of contamination, but then she'll proceed to run these experiments on the dirty lab floor. * She has poor organization and samples are sometimes lost or results are not written down. * She has very rudimentary technical skills. I have watched her use the computer multiple times and instructions on how to use simple programs need to be written down step-by-step with very specific instructions on which button to press... etc. Sometimes she wants me to write a program from a paper, but she is so inept that she is unable to offer any assistance/advice, and after I'm finished writing the program she will have no clue how it works. At times, it seems like I'm doing all the literature search, running the experiments, writing the programs, and coming up with new ideas while she grades homework. She says she is going to graduate this year. Our PI is a very hands off person. I spend a lot of time reading literature and have ideas of other experiments we can run related to this research area in general. I would like to run these experiments myself. Since we're working in the same research area, however, sometimes when I discuss these ideas the grad student will mention wanting to include it in her thesis (even though it wasn't in her proposal). And because of how unproductive she is, I would prefer not to work with her anyways. I'm also concerned that the PI will think that these are good ideas and that I should work with this student to test them, particularly because I am an undergrad. How can I politely distance myself with her and start doing some independent research?<issue_comment>username_1: > > No gloves/splash goggles when working with (hot) concentrated acids and bases. Some of these experiments are run outside the fume hood, and sometimes on the floor when there is no space on the lab bench. > > > Do not work in this lab. Do not even go in. It could kill you. Obvious safety problems are often accompanied by even worse, hidden problems. Consult your university's safety policy to determine if you can/should/must report this situation. The other problems are insignificant by comparison. Find a new PI. Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_2: A person that disregard safety so much must, even after receiving warnings, must be fired and it is almost your duty to promote such consequence. She may became homeless, she may lose her student visa, her magnificent career's prospects will crash, whatever, at least she will be alive (and she would not put in danger the lives of others). [disclaimer: I say this even not knowing the other side of the story, I do not care, this is much more serious than sexual harassment, which is an issue that get people fired with one-sided stories, at least in theory] Regarding you: you are undergrad, you now have enough experience, change immmediately PI/lab/project. Do not worry about the ideas you had now, you already demonstrate critical thinking and, when exposed to literature and state-of-art science, I can assure you will have other sparkling ideas to follow. Plus, an idea is not a good idea if developed by only one person. If your actual PI will "steal" your ideas, much better, 1-2 years down the road you can apply for fundings to develop the ideas with the backup of reference and citations (maybe even a reference letter) from PI's publications, providing you solid ground to further the work in the field: science is not about who is first having the idea, it's about the first that publish the idea (or the last, since science is an incremental business ;), you know, standing on the shoulder of giants and all that motivational crap that you can find in Linkedin&aphorisms from <NAME> [1]). New research topics/ideas are 10% intuition and 90% implementation, if you had these novel ideas just by reading literature and by being exposed to that toxic (in the real meaning of the word) lab, for sure these ideas are circulating and coming to the mind of the professional of R&D (i.e. other PhDs and PostDoc working in other labs and preparing their proposals to get funded ...). Each person is unique, but ideas are *not. We often celebrate the faster person having some ideas and developing them (and we are deeply wrong in this), do not neglect that person was not the only one and his/her ideas would have nil-value if he/she was the only one working on those ideas. [1] > > not everythin' ya read in the Internet is true > (Lincoln, 1884) > > > Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: This person's incompetence is endangering the safety of themselves and others, as well as the laboratory environment and integrity of experiments being conducted there. Report these safety violations to the appropriate authority immediately, and refuse to work with this person any further out of regard for your safety.* As an academic, you have a right to be safe and an obligation to keep yourself and others safe, even from themselves, and even if doing so is liable to have negative repercussions. Someone this slapdash is unlikely to find commercial work anyway due to their lack of adherence to basic procedures, so you are actually doing them (and the world) a favour by preventing them from getting any further before their disregard for safety is addressed. Do not feel guilty about doing the right, safe thing. Feel good about preventing harm to others. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: I am sorry, but I find it very hard to believe the above. Getting payed as a PhD candidate involves grants, and thus great effort by PIs or postdocs to get funding etc. If your candidates do not graduate, you can not get grants easily, your reputation as professor is a bit damaged, so it is not something to be taken lightly. I find it hard to believe someone so incompetent is hired, let alone continue 3 years without anyone noticing or doing something about it, and all of a sudden an undergrad reveals this. If that was the case, statistically some accident/ other catastrophe would have happened. Does she have any results under her belt already or something? PIs have great experience on this (literally decades), you can address to them for this. Well if the situation and chaos is that bad all across this lab, you made a poor choice. Either continue for a bit together with the shenanigans and graduate and never look back, or get the big decision and restart all over. However, again, rethink on the whole situation a bit. It reminds me of when I see a footballer on tv and comment that I would do better. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: > > How can I politely distance myself with her ... (emphasis added) > > > You can be fully honest without using judgmental terms such as "incompetent". You can also approach the situation as though having a PI who is "hands-off" does not mean that you have a PI who is unwilling to fix safety violations. The safety concerns, as noted, can be grounds for you to leave immediately. Certainly, with any indication of an immediate, dire threat to your safety, leave the lab with no hesitation. In those cases where you feel inclined to report such violations to higher authorities, keep in mind that you have an obligation to inform the PI as the first responsible authority in the chain. By example, an emergency phone call to your campus equivalent 911 number must be followed directly by a call, text, or email to the PI. In the US, academic laboratories are now required to have those contact points visibly posted on the outside of the laboratory doors. Should you wish otherwise to continue with the current PI, a potentially workable alternative would be to ask that you have your own workspace physically separated from the student in question. When you would want to do this, you have to address the PI in an opening request. By example: * Since I have been working in the laboratory with (student's name), I have been confronted with situations that I feel are violations of safety protocols. I no longer feel comfortable working in the same physical laboratory space as (student's name). I would like to meet with you to discuss my concerns and to understand how they should be properly addressed. Independent of the immediate, dire safety violations, you can also decide how far you really want to get involved in the longer game to make changes to the underlying violations that you see. When you decide that you must/will report such violations, do so in writing. Email the student. By example: * I came to the laboratory today at 9am. An open container of what appeared to be concentrated acid was sitting on the bench top. I had to leave the laboratory out of safety concerns and could not do my work. Let me know when you have cleaned up so that I can get back to my research work. * I had arranged with you yesterday that I would need to have the fume hood clear for my research work. I came to the laboratory today at 9am. The fume hood was not cleared. I had to leave the laboratory and could not do my work. Let me know when you have cleared the fume hood so that I can get back to my research work. You can consider the balance of copying the PI or not on these emails. If the graduate student seems receptive to email as "polite" reminders, you may do better to avoid essentially spamming every complaint that you have to the PI. Alternatively, you may want to copy the PI for good reason, for example if the violation that you are reporting is extremely serious or is something that was raised in a previous group meeting and yet still remains unresolved by some agreed upon time at that meeting. If you must report violations to the department head/chair or to the safety officers, you should do so without going around the PI as your first step. Collect your message with date stamps. Send them in bulk to the PI. * I can no longer work in the laboratory because (student's name) is not providing me with a safe, effective work space. I am enclosing a record of messages to (student's name). They show that, over the past weeks, I have been able to complete any research activities because (student's name) is not doing her job. I would like to meet with you to determine how best to proceed. At some point, a growing collection of non-critical safety violations can become dire and immediate in their own right, especially when they go unattended despite due notices. When you would wish to raise such a case to an even higher authority beyond the PI, it helps to have the written records (emails) in order. Do the respect to give due notice also to the PI, for example * We have discussed a range of safety violations at our group meetings. Because the violations continue to happen, I can no longer continue working in the laboratory. As I leave, I am also sending the attached list of my records of reporting the numerous safety violations to the (chair / safety office) because, unless corrected, these violations can pose an inadvertent danger to anyone who might enter the laboratory without advanced notice. > > ... and start doing some independent research? > > > From the rest of your report, it sounds as though you already have a good grasp of how to start. Your obligation going forward is not to the student. It is to the PI who has given you permission to work in the laboratory with the student. Perhaps you should re-orient your research goals accordingly. To this end, your next step might be to ask for a meeting in an email to the PI. By example: * I have been working with (student's name) for the past few months. At this point, I believe that I have a strong grasp of the research goals and a good set of workable ideas in order to achieve them. I would like to present a proposal for a research project that I can undertake independently of (student's name). Are you available for this meeting? Before you do, create what I might call a "Proposal for Independent Undergraduate Research". Outline how you will work on a topic that can be done entirely separate from the goals of the PhD student. Address how your results are truly able to be done separate from those being studied by the PhD student. Basically, structure your proposal such that, if your work is never done, the PhD student is not harmed and, if your proposed work is completed, the PhD student can REFERENCE the results but not include them as though they are also her own work. The "polite" return on this investment is likely that you may correspondingly have to REFERENCE results obtained by the PhD student to the degree that they support or enable your research to proceed. Finally, you are not responsible for whether the PhD student does or does not complete her dissertation successfully. Your observations of her work habits, skills, aptitude, and motivation are part of lessons in life-long learning on how to cope with others who are not as organized or as able to perform in the same ways as you can. Disengage from the emotional responses these observations bring and make sound, non-judgmental, professional decisions on where you want to go next for your own success. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: I am afraid to say that this "hands-off" PI of yours is a common type in academia. They tend to be charismatic and great at pulling in money for what is often spruced-up boilerplate research which industry has decided to outsource. They are "busily important" and smile a lot. They have droves of bushy eyed youngsters working from them. They have a lot of time available for those who deliver, and those who cannot swim are left to sink. Your unfortunate PhD student is just one of them. If you are one of those rare ones who can swim all by themselves, and deliver the goods that will make you golden in the eyes of this PI (who, I warn you, will cop the credit), then by all means proceed. But you are low in the food chain. Any conflict with the PhD student (despite your best intentions) will play out badly for you. All in all, I have to second what someone else said here: get out of there, get away from that PI. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: Simply change labs so you don't have to deal with the politics of working in a lab where you have changed mentors. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_8: Be cool. It is not the end of the world. Explain your concerns. If things don't improve, escalate it. Upvotes: -1
2021/03/15	485	2,135	<issue_start>username_0: Some years ago, I published an article in a Springer journal. However, when I accessed its online version today, I found out that the publisher has swapped my residential address for my correspondence address. Since I am the corresponding author and this information is public, I am concerned about my security. I have already tried contacting Springer to no avail. How should I proceed in order to get this issue fixed?<issue_comment>username_1: Springer has a [privacy policy](https://www.springer.com/gp/privacy-policy). It seems to be largely based on the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). According to XIV, point 2, you can request a removal of your personal data on specific grounds, e.g. because the data are not needed, or because you withdraw your consent. This seems to be the case with you. You can contact their Data Protection Officer about that (<EMAIL>). Explain your situation and ask for the data to be removed. The Data Protection Officer should react swiftly, as there might be grave legal consequences if they violate your data rights ([at least if the EU's GDPR applies to your case](https://gdpr.eu/fines/)). Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I have the same situation with my email address being published on SpringerLink, and they agreed to remove it. I simply mailed the same person that I had contact with during the proof reading. The usual process for Springer is to publish an additional paper titled "Correction to ..." (with the same authors) that explains what has changed about the original paper, and mark the latter with "A correction to this article is available". As in your case the original paper was not wrong and did not need to be corrected (in fact, it should not even be changed at all), I would insist on this not happening. Otherwise, the additional article would for example appear on your Google Scholar profile. In my case, Springer agreed to just remove my email address without an additional article after clarifying internally (but the change has not yet been made). Upvotes: 4
2021/03/15	821	3,405	<issue_start>username_0: I would have a question: Is it okay to use one's private email address to reply to all the university-related emails after having set up a forwarding to one's private email address - be it as a Professor, PostDoc, PhD-, graduate or undergraduate student, and use one's university/work email only for the most important emails that one wants to send?<issue_comment>username_1: There might be internal regulations about e-mail use at your institution; if there are none, then I would say: It is your own personal choice. Even in academia, many people do use their non-institutional accounts because - to cite some reasons from [this source](https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2018/06/21/institutional-versus-commercial-email-addresses-which-one-to-use-in-your-publications/) - they provide more functionalities, are sometimes more reliable, enable greater storage space, support larger attachments, last longer over career trajectories, and may have a less rigorous spam filter. There are some interesting studies in this regard: * The provision of public e-mail accounts (e.g. gmail) for correspondence in published research articles will not affect a publication's impact (in terms of citation counts). [See here](https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2691-0). * Within the research community, there is an increasing trend towards using public e-mail accounts rather than institutional ones. [See here](https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23401). * Someone who conducted one of the studies cited above nevertheless recommends the use of institutional e-mail addresses. [See the last paragraph here](https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2018/06/21/institutional-versus-commercial-email-addresses-which-one-to-use-in-your-publications/). Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If you do not have a permanent job, I recommend using a private address. As a researcher, using your private, branded email address makes you easier to find when you change jobs. Some IT departments do not understand that when researchers change jobs, the research continues. They will turn off your email when you leave. Expect to get an occasional complaint. A few universities forbid use of private email addresses. All the ones I have experience with made it easy to automatically forward official emails to a private address. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In addition to the question of university regulations, I see two aspects of this practice: 1. I think it is fine to use the personal email address for correspondence concerning your research. Some people use this to have a more "permanent" email address. Of course the situation is more complicated if you want to use it to send data from studies which might contain personal data - then the next point applies. 2. For the communication with students, I would not use the private email address. In the European Union, you might run into problems concerning the GDPR, i.e. the data protection regulations. This applies in particular if you are using services operating outside the European Union or free services which scan your email. Similar regulations might apply in other places. So for everything containing personal data about other people than yourself, I would only use the email address provided by the university, since they should take care of the data protection requirements. Upvotes: 1
2021/03/15	636	2,619	<issue_start>username_0: This is very closely related to [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/163840/how-to-deal-with-incompetent-phd-student-as-an-undergrad) question. However in that question on top of the academic problems there are also major safety issues and the answers correctly focus on that. But this still leaves an interesting question unanswered: What should you do if you perceive your direct supervisor to be academically incompetent? Suppose you start in a new lab as a masters or PhD student. The PI is great but very hands off. You are assigned a PhD student or a postdoc for your every day supervision. You get the impression that this person is failing academically. The linked question has a good list of clues. They have no plan for their own research, seem to have trouble understanding the surrounding literature or even the prerequisites, don't come up with new ideas to look into and maybe on top are technically inept and very bad at handling the lab equipment. Essentially you feel like you already are academically ahead of your supervisor and this person doesn't have anything to teach you. What do you do? And in what time frame, having this impression after two weeks might be different than having it after 6 months but maybe waiting six months before doing anything is too much already.<issue_comment>username_1: To quote another answer, [stop whining and start kicking ass](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/9041/). Work hard, do awesome research, approach the PI if the direct supervisor can't help. If your assessment really is correct, it won't be long before the PI lets you forge your own research path. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: They are supervising you. You will be 100% sure they are wrong and you are right only after external independent confirmation, which you can obtain by attending conferences/workshops, and publishing a paper or two would be the definitive seal. However, by that time, you may realize why your directly supervising PhD/PostDoc is working that (inefficent) way ... So, it is better to show some independence and get -intensively- in touch with the PI after a couple of weeks. With the PI, it should be possible to have an honest discussion, even regarding the point "the supervisor you assigned me cannot help me because of lack of time/needing some time to freshen up his/her knowledge on the Stat-of-Art of Science and Technology on my specific topic". If it's not possible to be so open and clear with the PI, well, the issues are way larger than the supervision from said PhD/PD ... Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2021/03/15	710	3,044	<issue_start>username_0: I've been accepted in a research internship. However, after I sent an email to my supervisor asking about some details, he told me that he has no idea about who I am, and that maybe I've been exchanging with someone else. But the confirmation letter was signed by him. I'm so confused, I'm afraid if I send more emails it would look like I'm forcing things. I'm really confused because I refused many offers to work in this lab. Any suggestions please?<issue_comment>username_1: I would send him the signed documents in e-mail, asking him if it was signed by him. His answer would shed light on things (he forgot he signed, he didn't read before signing, etc.) But don't think that you're pushing things. An internship is important, and you already got a signed document and you need to know things to plan forward... Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Don't read too much in to this. There are a variety of possible explanations, including a miscommunication between the PI and the person with whom you had the interview. It is also possible that the PI is very busy and a bit distracted and someone who delegates a lot of such things to others, such as the person you interviewed with. I would suggest just reminding both of the state of affairs as you see them and ask again (both people) for the details you need. Hopefully everyone will get "on the same page" soon. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: You do not indicate whether you have exchanged emails or calls in person with this supervisor. (At the very least, my email program will remember who I've interacted with even if I don't, and I confess that this has at times been my first checkpoint.) However, I suspect that your dealings thus far have been with a different person and that you and the supervisor have simply been assigned to one another. However, s/he did sign the letter. It is quite possible that they may not remember this as their PA gives them a pile of letters to sign everyday (but then it would be unprofessional for them to plead complete ignorance, if they have a PA with whom they can check what happened!). There could also be a bog standard mix-up. In any case, be forewarned that this mess is a sign of things to come. You will be supervised by an overworked junior staff member or postdoc, your supervisor will rarely if ever see you and most likely still not have the slightest clue who you are when the internship is done, unless you deliver them a high-impact manuscript they can put their name to. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Send him an email with a copy of the acceptance letter. Don't phrase the email as "you were wrong", but rather express that you are confused, that maybe there is a misunderstanding. If the prof is a reasonable person things will improve from there. Otherwise, you could contact the admissions office that sent you the letter, explaning the situation. That said, if you get to this second stage, it is not clear if it is to your advantage to work with this person. Upvotes: 4
2021/03/15	2,003	8,435	<issue_start>username_0: When someone writes to me while I am online during the weekend (a student or a colleague), is it impolite to not reply back, especially when they can see that I am online (on Mattermost for example or on any other app ...), although I reply back first thing Monday morning? Edit: First of all, thank you all for your answers! :) I would like to clarify something: Even if I am working on the weekend, would you still say that it's not impolite to not reply back? Edit edit: Since it was pointed out in a recent answer that this might depend on the location of the university, for me it's in France, but I guess (?) it would be more or less the same around Europe, though outside Europe, there seem to be other etiquettes..<issue_comment>username_1: No. If people complain to you, explain that it's not personal: you simply have a policy not to work on weekends. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: No it’s not rude, it’s called boundaries and you are allowed to have them. Simply because you are online and doing something else does not entitle anyone else to your response. There’s some nuance to this though, depending on your relationship to the person emailing, but boundaries can and should be established. Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: When I work at the weekends, its because either: 1. I have a thing that I absolutely have to do and can't wait till Monday 2. I'm doing something more or less because I want to. Replying to some student is neither of these things. I will make an exception for this if it is a student/colleague I have a particular investment in, and I specifically want to help them out (even if I don't want to do the thing they are asking). But if its just a random email, then they can wait until Monday, and its none of their business if I'm online. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Not at all. The whole benefit of asynchronous communications is that you and the people with whom you are communicating can do your ends of the conversation whenever is convenient for you, and there's no particular reason why the times when it is convenient for you to look at it should coincide with the times when it is convenient for you to reply to it (though there is presumably an inclusion in one direction, unless your memory is much better than mine). I'd advise you to not look at it in the first place, honestly, but if you do end up doing so, you're under no obligation to reply. I'd also advise you to just turn off whatever allows other people to see that you are online by automated means except when you do want to have a real-time conversation. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Whether in academia or in the real world, no one should expect a reply to a non-personal account email outside of working hours. On my team, if I see someone answering an email at 10:30pm on a weekday or at 4:00 pm on a Saturday, I'll ask why, pointing out that they really aren't expected to do that. The only exception is if you are in a pre-arranged "on call" situation (like I was at my job this past weekend). In academic equivalent might occur if your department arranged an undergrad panic help system where TAs take turns answering student questions on the weekend or two before exams. If you ever do that, I suggest that you do it through a email group alias. This way the students don't have to remember who to email (and are less likely to email the non-on-call folks). Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: The question and answers need to specify a country tag. For many companies and nearly all universities in China, if you miss a few online or in person meeting requests for Sunday morning, sent by your superior on Saturday 11pm, you will likely be marginalised and you can forget about renewing your contract. So it's probably best to check with your colleagues or superiors. It might actually be a common practice in your university. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Yes, it is impolite to intentionally not respond to someone when you can easily do so. It's not immoral or unprofessional. You have no obligation to do work outside of work hours. Nonetheless, that is not the standard of "polite", which is behaving in such a way as to make life the most pleasant it can be for those who interact with you. If you wish to aspire to this higher standard, you must consider the feelings of others and whether your refusal to respond is causing them distress that you could easily avert. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_8: A point that is not addressed in previous answers is how to set such boundaries. Particular in university teaching cultures where students are (at least implicitly) expected to be working on assignments over weekends or during evenings (which certainly obtains in the United States), it is typical for students to have queries at these times, and they can get pretty anxious if they don't hear back, because to a large extent university is not seen as a job in such cultures, but as a more all-embracing lifestyle. If you have coursework and labs all day (as a student) it may not even be realistic to ask homework questions until Friday evening, for example. And, conversely, many university professionals are indeed working at night or weekends, and it's so easy to just toss off a couple of responses so you won't have to deal with them on Monday. (I often do this myself.) In such a setting (including the education part, not labs or the like), I strongly encourage clear communication as to when you will (and won't) reply to emails. A syllabus is a good start, but you may wish to put it in an email signature, on a learning management system, or in some other venue. And you may have to repeat it many, many times as you socialize students to this. Yes, doing all that is annoying. Yes, it is inconvenient. But it's also providing a role model for young people in how to set their own boundaries, and that is very important for them to see. Additionally, it can help make it clear for the students (again, in my context in US undergrad education, many of them) who are used to immediate responses and are always on their own email via smartphones. Similarly, doing so in a polite and kind fashion is critical. If you hate emails that say, "Hi did i miss anything in class i dont know why i got a c", imagine how intimidating it would be for someone who can flunk you to send an email saying, "How many times do I have to tell you not to expect an answer on Tuesday night!" Unfortunately, probably it will have to be communicated many times. But it's teaching professionalism as well as content, and if people sending emails at weird times becomes a problem (for instance if the queue becomes too long), it's important to communicate that to students. Finally, another option would be to manage all such communication via a learning management system. That may have builtin tools to manage communication and even send auto-replies. I don't do that, because it is beyond annoying for me. But for some folks that may prove very helpful, especially if the LMS has an app that makes such responses convenient. And then you can compartmentalize a bit more. Good luck. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: Since you explicitly mentioned students, I'd like to ( as a Master's student in switzerland ) point out that I usually do not expect any reply during the weekend. Not from the teaching assistants and even less from the professors who seemingly tend to ignore every email that is not very important and then forget about it. Even during the week, I'm not surprised if I have to wait two days for a reply. A suggestion specifically regarding E-Mails from your students: One thing we usually have that I appreciate is a forum where all the students have access. When there is a question during a time when the teachers are not able or willing to reply, there still might be a useful answer from a fellow student who had the same problem. And even if the students never write answers, you will at least not have to keep answering the same questions over and over again. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: No, It is not rude because the weekend is a time to relax. I recommend you check your inbox in the beginning, middle, and end of the day. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_11: Only reply within working hours, if they attempt to ask for more - ask for over-time. Upvotes: 0
2021/03/15	1,960	8,285	<issue_start>username_0: Consider this scenario: I enroll in a graduate program at X university. Then I withdraw and enroll in an equivalent program at Y university instead. A few semesters later I get dismissed from Y university due to low GPA, but can apply for readmission to the X university's program after being dropped due to non-attendance. What are my issues here? I would be continuing my education without skipping a beat, transferring over credits from the old program, even getting a clean transcript out of the whole ordeal. This all sounds like there is something unfair with what I am doing.<issue_comment>username_1: No. If people complain to you, explain that it's not personal: you simply have a policy not to work on weekends. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: No it’s not rude, it’s called boundaries and you are allowed to have them. Simply because you are online and doing something else does not entitle anyone else to your response. There’s some nuance to this though, depending on your relationship to the person emailing, but boundaries can and should be established. Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: When I work at the weekends, its because either: 1. I have a thing that I absolutely have to do and can't wait till Monday 2. I'm doing something more or less because I want to. Replying to some student is neither of these things. I will make an exception for this if it is a student/colleague I have a particular investment in, and I specifically want to help them out (even if I don't want to do the thing they are asking). But if its just a random email, then they can wait until Monday, and its none of their business if I'm online. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Not at all. The whole benefit of asynchronous communications is that you and the people with whom you are communicating can do your ends of the conversation whenever is convenient for you, and there's no particular reason why the times when it is convenient for you to look at it should coincide with the times when it is convenient for you to reply to it (though there is presumably an inclusion in one direction, unless your memory is much better than mine). I'd advise you to not look at it in the first place, honestly, but if you do end up doing so, you're under no obligation to reply. I'd also advise you to just turn off whatever allows other people to see that you are online by automated means except when you do want to have a real-time conversation. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Whether in academia or in the real world, no one should expect a reply to a non-personal account email outside of working hours. On my team, if I see someone answering an email at 10:30pm on a weekday or at 4:00 pm on a Saturday, I'll ask why, pointing out that they really aren't expected to do that. The only exception is if you are in a pre-arranged "on call" situation (like I was at my job this past weekend). In academic equivalent might occur if your department arranged an undergrad panic help system where TAs take turns answering student questions on the weekend or two before exams. If you ever do that, I suggest that you do it through a email group alias. This way the students don't have to remember who to email (and are less likely to email the non-on-call folks). Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: The question and answers need to specify a country tag. For many companies and nearly all universities in China, if you miss a few online or in person meeting requests for Sunday morning, sent by your superior on Saturday 11pm, you will likely be marginalised and you can forget about renewing your contract. So it's probably best to check with your colleagues or superiors. It might actually be a common practice in your university. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Yes, it is impolite to intentionally not respond to someone when you can easily do so. It's not immoral or unprofessional. You have no obligation to do work outside of work hours. Nonetheless, that is not the standard of "polite", which is behaving in such a way as to make life the most pleasant it can be for those who interact with you. If you wish to aspire to this higher standard, you must consider the feelings of others and whether your refusal to respond is causing them distress that you could easily avert. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_8: A point that is not addressed in previous answers is how to set such boundaries. Particular in university teaching cultures where students are (at least implicitly) expected to be working on assignments over weekends or during evenings (which certainly obtains in the United States), it is typical for students to have queries at these times, and they can get pretty anxious if they don't hear back, because to a large extent university is not seen as a job in such cultures, but as a more all-embracing lifestyle. If you have coursework and labs all day (as a student) it may not even be realistic to ask homework questions until Friday evening, for example. And, conversely, many university professionals are indeed working at night or weekends, and it's so easy to just toss off a couple of responses so you won't have to deal with them on Monday. (I often do this myself.) In such a setting (including the education part, not labs or the like), I strongly encourage clear communication as to when you will (and won't) reply to emails. A syllabus is a good start, but you may wish to put it in an email signature, on a learning management system, or in some other venue. And you may have to repeat it many, many times as you socialize students to this. Yes, doing all that is annoying. Yes, it is inconvenient. But it's also providing a role model for young people in how to set their own boundaries, and that is very important for them to see. Additionally, it can help make it clear for the students (again, in my context in US undergrad education, many of them) who are used to immediate responses and are always on their own email via smartphones. Similarly, doing so in a polite and kind fashion is critical. If you hate emails that say, "Hi did i miss anything in class i dont know why i got a c", imagine how intimidating it would be for someone who can flunk you to send an email saying, "How many times do I have to tell you not to expect an answer on Tuesday night!" Unfortunately, probably it will have to be communicated many times. But it's teaching professionalism as well as content, and if people sending emails at weird times becomes a problem (for instance if the queue becomes too long), it's important to communicate that to students. Finally, another option would be to manage all such communication via a learning management system. That may have builtin tools to manage communication and even send auto-replies. I don't do that, because it is beyond annoying for me. But for some folks that may prove very helpful, especially if the LMS has an app that makes such responses convenient. And then you can compartmentalize a bit more. Good luck. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: Since you explicitly mentioned students, I'd like to ( as a Master's student in switzerland ) point out that I usually do not expect any reply during the weekend. Not from the teaching assistants and even less from the professors who seemingly tend to ignore every email that is not very important and then forget about it. Even during the week, I'm not surprised if I have to wait two days for a reply. A suggestion specifically regarding E-Mails from your students: One thing we usually have that I appreciate is a forum where all the students have access. When there is a question during a time when the teachers are not able or willing to reply, there still might be a useful answer from a fellow student who had the same problem. And even if the students never write answers, you will at least not have to keep answering the same questions over and over again. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: No, It is not rude because the weekend is a time to relax. I recommend you check your inbox in the beginning, middle, and end of the day. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_11: Only reply within working hours, if they attempt to ask for more - ask for over-time. Upvotes: 0
2021/03/15	1,207	4,911	<issue_start>username_0: I work at a unversity in the physics department. Since quite some time, I have a very specific question regarding some equations and how they were rearranged into some result. I have asked my Professor regarding this several times, but I have never been able to get a clear answer and at this point I am "too afraid to ask once more". Of course, I am not really afraid but I have asked this so often that at some point it becomes somehow weird, especially since this is only some detail. Now I have been assigned with supervising an undergraduate, who will write his Master's thesis about a topic which is very similar to the one I am working on. I can already see that he will come across the same question in the near future and there are several possible things I could do to answer the question if it arises. 1. I could simply tell him that I don't know the answer. This would of course be OK but does not actually solve the problem. Especially since for his work a better answer to the question I am trying to get an answer to might be required. 2. I could tell him that I asked this several times to the professor, but he either did not understand or was unable to provide an answer. This is the more factually correct answer but it sounds a bit accusatory and could put me in the position that the student tells the professor about this since I would be the first one whom he would ask and who should be able to provide an answer. 3. I could ask the co-authors. In this case, the question would be whether I inform my professor about this. If I do so, he will ask me why and I probably end up in a position where I will have to ask the same question all over again, not to mention that he did not answer the question in a way I understand.<issue_comment>username_1: This is somewhat of a frame challenge, but I suggest you try asking the question on Physics.SE (or Math.SE, or even MathOverflow, depending on where it fits best) so that you can become the person who can answer the question. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I can see a number of ways that your situation might occur. First, it may be that there is no known answer. Possibly an error in the result itself. Second, it may be that the answer probably exists but that the supervisor doesn't want to take the time and effort to work out the details, being busy and believing that to be your job. Third, the answer may exist, but, again, the supervisor believes that it is yours to find and thinks it is important that you do so. You suggest that it is important to your work and they want you to work that out yourself. As to how to obtain the answer, other than through your own efforts and how to answer the other student, I think any of your suggestions might work. I don't think that 2 sounds as bad as you fear, however. The suggestion of Dawn in a comment to ask around in your research group might also be fruitful if people are interested in the answer. But, I think that, overall, you would come out ahead by coming up with the answer yourself. You may be lacking some insight that you can only obtain by developing the answer rather than hearing it. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Ask the professor's co-authors. Maybe they did that bit of the work. > > I could ask the co-authors. In this case, the question would be whether I inform my professor about this. If I do so, he will ask me why and I probably end up in a position where I will have to ask the same question all over again, not to mention that he did not answer the question in a way I understand. > > > You could cc your professor, e.g., Dear X & Y, I'm Prof Y's student and I've been studying your joint work (entitled ABC). Prof Y and I have discussed blah-blah on several occasions and I still don't follow. Perhaps you can help me understand. Depending on specifics, you may like to propose a video call or (post-pandemic) visiting X & Y, or perhaps email will suffice. I don't understand why you're concerned about informing your professor. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: When this happened to me in the past, I eventually realized that it's because the professor doesn't know the answer. It's common to assume they do, because [to students professors seem like omniscient Gods with the answers to life, the universe, and everything](https://me.me/i/how-people-in-science-see-each-other-undergraduate-phd-student-00870312bc1e42a3b29f74744ab1ecd0), but there are certainly things they don't know. In fact one could argue that at the end of a PhD, the student is expected to become more expert at their thesis subject than their professor. I suggest figuring it out yourself, either by thinking about it yourself or by asking someone else (Physics/Math.SE, the co-authors, or anyone). You can then explain the solution to the professor afterwards if it comes up again. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/15	369	1,100	<issue_start>username_0: I was asked to turn a set of references into the following citation format: > > [Qin2014] <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME> and N. > Venkatasubramanian, “A software defined networking architecture for > the internet-of-things,” 2014 IEEE network operations and management > symposium (NOMS), 2014, pp. 1-9, doi: 10.1109/NOMS.2014.6838365 > > > However, no information was given as to what the name of this style is. Already tried looking in this website: <https://editor.citationstyles.org/searchByExample/>, but with no success. Does anyone know if this style has a specific name? Thanks in advance!<issue_comment>username_1: That looks to me like a `bibtex` style, probably `alpha`. So it's not a formal style (e.g. APA, MLA), it's just a setting for the `bibtex` package. Overleaf has a [full list of the styles](https://www.overleaf.com/learn/latex/bibtex_bibliography_styles). Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Could be the [alphadin](https://www.bibtex.com/s/bibliography-style-din1505-alphadin/) style, which uses the old DIN 1505 Upvotes: 1
2021/03/15	647	2,808	<issue_start>username_0: During the various sub-projects of my PhD (physics) we encountered several difficulties (as it is common, I assume) both in technical and in physical nature which we had to solve. Moreover, some experiments resulted in bad results or no results at all. Nevertheless, we identified the issues and noted how to avoid those problems (or how to fix them) in the future. After we spent considerable time investigating and fixing those problems I would like to mention those issues (and the solutions) if not in papers, but at least in my thesis to avoid future readers the same problems, but my supervisor is completely against reporting any negative results. His stance is that any negative result or technical issue would paint me in a bad light (even though we could solve them), and therefore I only should report good results without mentioning problems. This confused me (why would anyone view me in a negative way if I report problems in my thesis, and how we could circumvent or fix them), and my local colleagues could not give a conclusive answer either. Therefore, are such stances common, and if yes, why?<issue_comment>username_1: I agree with you but suggest that you follow your advisor's advice about your dissertation. To a fairly large extent you are limited by the standards of your advisor until you finish your degree. Even when their advice isn't optimal. Research is a search for truth, not for results. Negative results can be just as important as positive ones in the search for truth and should, in principle, be reported so that, just as you say, others don't follow blind alleys. But too many people, I think have the opposite view that a negative result is a failure in some sense, even when it contributes to knowledge. Your advisor may be one of these. But the purpose of the dissertation is to get it approved and get the degree. After that, the standards you follow can be (more or less) your own. So, a tactical retreat here may lead to a strategic victory. Your dissertation won't be your last, nor, hopefully, your best work. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Assuming the difficulties are nontrivial, you are right and your supervisor is wrong. Here's my suggested approach to the situation. You want to say: We did X using parameter A and found that Q did not work because of theory M. Then we did X using parameter B and found that Q worked. Your advisor wants to say: We did X using parameter B and found that Q worked. What you could say: Theory M says that parameter A will cause Q to fail and parameter B will cause Q to succeed. We did X using parameter B and found that Q worked. This paints your work in a positive light as your advisor wishes. It also informs your reader about what does not work. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/16	724	2,934	<issue_start>username_0: What terms should be better to set when creating a Startup with your PhD supervisor? I had the PhD project idea before starting the PhD and working on it for some years. Now my PhD research looks promising for commercial use and I am thinking to create a startup. I recognize the prestige of my PhD supervisor and he is willing to participate in the startup. Which are considered fair terms for both me and the professor for our new startup, based on the fact that i have done all the development (spending countless hours of work the past years) and came up with the project idea, but the professor has the prestigious name to make the startup more credible (and maybe better funded)? Share equal equity? Have equity based on hours spent on the startup? Something else?<issue_comment>username_1: I strongly suggest that you hire a lawyer to get this advice. Failing to do so could lead to a huge amount of conflict later. It is likely that your interests don't completely align with those of your advisor. I'm not a lawyer so can't help much, but it might be possible to set up a joint meeting with a lawyer and the advisor to work out an equitable arrangement. Your joint venture will need legal advice in any case. But you also need to consider what a conflict would mean for finishing your degree. Don't put that in jeopardy. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: There's a lot to think about if you're considering spinning up a startup. The skill set you're going to need and the skill set you currently have do not overlap. There are things you can do to fix this - if you're at a school with an established tech transfer pipeline they'll likely have seminars on a regular basis. Start going to them. All of them. Intellectual property is very important. If you don't know how patents work and have never read one, now's the time to start learning. I'm going to give you some links to a panel series that's very good as a primer, but you need to find the resources and people to help you learn this stuff. A lawyer is useless for you because you have no idea what you're doing or what you want yet. The lawyer makes sure you're doing it correctly and legally - what *it* is you're doing is your problem. <https://techventures.columbia.edu/entrepreneur-and-vc-perspectives-intellectual-property> <https://techventures.columbia.edu/term-sheet-recommendations-for-launching-university-startups> <https://techventures.columbia.edu/recommended-process-improvements-for-launching-university-startups> Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I was curious about this, universities like to attempt to take IP if it's related to your formal thesis/project/what-ever. You need to be careful that nothing you do that you want to sell is developed on university property. The advantage of course is that the university may "help" you but the problem is they basically completely own it. Upvotes: -1
2021/03/16	735	3,091	<issue_start>username_0: After finishing my PhD in the US, I am now working in a university in an Asian country where I studied for my master. All of my colleagues are 20 years senior than me and are full professors except one. I am wondering what I should call my colleagues. Should I address them as "Teacher" if I've ever taken a class from them? (One of them is my master advisor which is especially awkward for me to call his name.) Or should I address them by their "First Name" to emphasise that our current relationship is not teacher and student anymore? (They usually call each other by First name since they are all in similar age group, seniority, and male?) By the way, I've been in this position for 1.5 years but I never call them by their first name, it's usually ‘Teacher’ if they previously taught me; or "Teacher xx(Last name)" if they never taught me. Would that be awkward if I just change how I call them now?<issue_comment>username_1: [ My updated answer after the OP updated his location and more info. ] --- First, congratulations on your Ph.D. That is wonderful. :-) --- In Asia, in generally, you probably should always call people, who once were your professors, with the title "Professor/Teacher/Doctor" at colleges, at commercial companies, or even in general social settings. Note: Even if they are no longer your professors now, and they are working either at the same colleges or in the business environment with you as co-workers, perhaps, it is still a good idea to call them "Professor". Generally speaking, that shows the respect and gratitude toward your former teachers/professors in Asian culture. In my country in Asia, I have seen one University professor calls his former college instructor "Professor/Doctor" all the time. They are both teaching at the same college now, and getting along very well as both co-workers and former teacher/student. --- Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Perhaps the best method would be to start with the most formal phrasing that makes sense, and keep using that unless or until someone suggests less formal phrasing. I imagine different people feel differently, so you may end up addressing different people differently. You could also just ask, if you feel comfortable in doing so. I assume that a former supervisor would be happy to help you by explaining the best choice. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: This seems extremely culturally dependent. I don't think that "Asia" is a tight enough classification to make a general statement. It is also, within the standards of the culture, dependent on the desires of individuals. If you aren't familiar with the local culture then ask those who are. You will get better answers. I think the general level of expected formality differs greatly over a region as vast as Asia. It might possibly even differ between regions of a single country. In the US, informality is generally expected among colleagues. Sometimes even between doctoral students and the faculty. But, even here, some individuals want an exception to the general rule. Upvotes: 1
2021/03/16	658	2,582	<issue_start>username_0: Follow-up question to discussion in comments of [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/163627/how-to-handle-reviewer-who-is-unhappy-their-recommendation-wasnt-followed). Summary is that in 2015, there was a MDPI reviewer who was unhappy because their recommendation wasn't followed. The reviewer complained in the blogosphere claiming that the paper was published in spite of his serious objections, and that MDPI refused to let him see the other reviewers' reports or their contact information. It's normal to [not provide contact information of the other reviewers](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/8012/are-reviewers-supposed-to-know-each-others-identity-after-the-reviewing-proces) (since it breaks anonymity), but providing the other reviewer reports seems fine. I asked an MDPI employee about this last week and they claimed that it's already possible as a matter of course - their editorial management system allows each reviewer to see the other reviewer reports. Something is contradictory here. I can think of many possible explanations, e.g. the reviewer didn't know how to operate the editorial management system, MDPI changed their review process between 2015 and 2021, or even the MDPI employee is lying/mistaken. I don't have any firsthand experience of MDPI's review process, hence I'm asking if anyone who has reviewed for (or has experience operating their editorial management system) can confirm if MDPI reviewers can see each other's reports.<issue_comment>username_1: I confirm that you can see all the reviewers’ comments. I review for them since January 2020. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This is an excerpt from an email I received in mid 2020 after reviewing a manuscript for the MDPI journal Atmosphere: > > Dear Dr. , > > > We are writing to inform you that the following paper which you kindly > reviewed has been published: > > > Thank you for your participation in the review process. The paper was > accepted by the academic editor after peer review by 3 reviewers and > author revision. You can now see the comments of other reviewers by > creating an account on our submission system at <https://susy.mdpi.com> > with your review email and visiting the reviews > section. > > > Going back further in the search results, the oldest such emails are from 2018 (from the same and from another MDPI journal). To check if maybe access is removed after some time, I just logged in and I still see other reviewers' comments for these papers. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
2021/03/16	925	3,777	<issue_start>username_0: I'm writing a Design Report. This is about 12k words long. Because it's about research I've done and certain choices I've made, I'm using a lot of "I". Personally I don't think this is a problem, but my mentors have told me my papers are annoying to read, because they contain a lot of "I". Example: > > For the health belief model I had to discover four specific points. > Perceived susceptibility, perceived severity, perceived benefits and > perceived barriers. Because I noticed people aren’t very open when > talking about covid, I had to be careful how I asked questions. First > I let them rate the severity of each point from 1 to 5. Then after > they answered all the questions I’m asking them to justify their > answers. Doing it this way gives me answers that are more truthful. > > > I'm curious how I can make my writing more academic in general. Right now it's a bit like I'm writing a diary.<issue_comment>username_1: It's generally accepted to use passive voice in scientific papers. This would turn the cited paragraph into: > > For the health belief model, four specific points were discovered > (taken into consideration?): perceived susceptibility, perceived severity, perceived benefits and perceived barriers. It was noticed > people aren’t very open when talking about covid, so the questions > were asked in the following manner. First, they were requested to rate the > severity of each point from 1 to 5. After they answered all the > questions, they were asked for justification of their replies. This > way ensures that respondents are more truthful. > > > Additionally, to avoid repetitive use of the same words, I highly recommend to look for synonyms in a thesaurus. There are also programmes that check English grammar in a text, perhaps it's also a good option for you. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Indeed, your current text reads like a diary, which might actually not be a very bad thing, since it is a report of your actions. Still, in general, it's good to remember that we are writing for our readers, and your choice of words actually conveys some message to them. In particular, the use of "I" indicates that we are dealing with your personal observation / opinion / design, and for some reason you feel important to emphasize it. The following is my rough revision of your fragment. "For the health belief model I had to discover four specific points1: perceived susceptibility, perceived severity, perceived benefits and perceived barriers. Since people are not very open when talking about covid2, questions should be asked carefully3. I used the following procedure4: First, the respondents rate the severity of each point from 1 to 5. After answering all the questions, the respondents have to justify their answers. This approach results in more truthful answers4." 1. Or "...it is necessary to discover" -- depending on whether you had to do it due to some specific design of your experiment, or it is a general statement, valid for any health belief model. 2. This is a general statement, so it is probably not imprortant for the reader whether you personally noticed that or somebody else (but in the latter case it would be good to provide a reference to literature). 3. Same as above: you are actually making a general statement: it's not just you have to be careful, it applies to anyone trying to do it. 4. If you want to get rid of "I" in such cases, use passive voice: "the following procedure was used". Personally I don't like passive voice, but it's okay if used sparingly. 5. Same as above: your method is supposed to work better for everyone, not just you; so it isn't giving you more truthful answers, it would work for others as well. Upvotes: 0
2021/03/16	1,957	8,596	<issue_start>username_0: When I was in my bachelor's program, I applied to three universities in Europe for masters. My two first choices accepted me and offered me funding for my masters studies which is competitive (2 students in my field got it). The third university which is not as well known as the others in my field, but still very good, accepted me but did not offer me funding. They interviewed me in this university and then rejected me. For the other two universities, I also had interviews and they both accepted me. Now I am applying to PhD programs again in Europe. I did my masters in one of those universities in which I was accepted. Again, I have applied to three universities. This morning, the one that was not my first choice and again is not as well-known as the other two, after an interview, rejected me. This position had 5-6 vacancies. I am confused about this, to be honest. Because I do not know if I should interpret it as that I will be rejected in the other two as well, or just assume it depends on my match with their programs. If the latter is the case, why did they even interview me? The thing that confuses me is this: if they shortlisted me, it means they were considering me. After the interview, they rejected me. I did not have the impression that I could not answer their technical questions. My question is this: should I interpret that the same thing will happen with those well-known universities? Why do you think that they rejected me while I feel I am qualified enough to the other two as well?<issue_comment>username_1: Don't try to infer anything from such a rejection. The possibilities are too vast. It may be that many good students used this university as their backup plan in case they weren't accepted elsewhere and one of them was chosen instead of you. There can be a lot of competition. It could also be a case of "poor fit" with the faculty that wasn't recognized before the interview. But, applying to only three schools seems like a mistake. If you want to get into a program then a broad search is recommended (with a backup school or two). Don't make the search narrow in terms of school rankings, geography, and such. There are a lot of possibilities but if you pass them up voluntarily you might suffer for it. But, relax for now. The outcome at one place has no real effect on the others. Nor does your "worry" change the game. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Now that interviews are free cause of zoom, more people are getting interviews. Classes are smaller this year cause everyone's got financial pressure. More people are getting rejected after an interview now. Don't read too much more into it than that. This is a difficult year for admissions. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: In late 2019, I had funding to employ a single PhD student at my European university. So I opened up a vacancy, and I received about 140 applications. By sheer necessity, I had to reject 139 candidates, and that included several very good ones indeed. The main difference you're experiencing is that European Master programmes can accept scores\* of students every year, but many European PhD positions are job vacancies that can only be awarded to a single person. So you're suddenly dealing with significantly more serious competition for the available positions. Rejection merely means that at least one candidate was even stronger than you. \exact numbers depend on country, university, programme, but it's typically much much more than one student per programme. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: PhDs position in Europe are usually unique: you are not in competition with other candidates, you are in competition with the ideal profile the PI has in mind for that position. If may be even the case that when none of the candidates fits the profile, the position is advertised again in a couple of months (hint: do not apply again ;) ). If you feel confident, and you liked the project, you may contact the PI and ask if you can apply for external funding, writing your own proposal. You may ask the PI where to look for calls. Ps: external funding may or may not be connected to the project, you have freedom in defining the scope of the project (well, then there is a board/panel/comitee having the freedom of funding your project) Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Don't take it too personally - try looking at it from the other side. They have some number of positions to fill with some number of applicants and they need to go through a process to find the applicants that best fit the positions. Typically that process involves eliminating those that don't meet the essential criteria and short-listing and interviewing those who look most promising for the role. If they interview 4 people for 1 position, 3 (at least) are going to be 'rejected'. If someone is appointed, that does not necessarily mean the selectors thought the others could not have done the role or been successful in it, just that someone else was a better fit with what they were looking for. (There are also many reasons why they might not appoint anyone, but again not necessarily a reflection on the candidates.) Certainly it is possible to perform badly in an interview, but even if all 4 performed brilliantly, 3 are not going to be offered the post. Most of life (PhD positions, jobs, partners, elections etc) is not like a driving test where you pass or fail based on reaching a specific standard, but a matter of 'fit' and preference. The language of 'rejection' and 'acceptance' although common is probably not good for your mental health ... you're looking for something that is a mutually good fit both for you and the role/them. Just because someone thought you were not a good fit with one role has no bearing on whether you are good fit with a different role. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I studied in Europe until my master Degree and had my Phd in the USA in computer science program. I realized that the level of US students are pretty weak in Math, Science and engineering overall. The math that I did in a bachelor degree in France is what we are doing in a Master or Phd program in the USA. No offense but it's a reality. In some German or French University, american student would be lost in science programs. Here in a phd computer science program, most of my collegue were unable to solve a simple differential equations. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: Nobody here can truly answer your question: we weren't in the interview, and haven't seen your application materials. However, some points for you to consider: Typically, MSc admissions are based heavily on academic achievement: transcripts, references from course tutors, etc. Applicants have come from a variety of backgrounds and may not have had opportunities to undertake significant independent research. In contrast, PhD applicants can be expected to have completed some form of independent research. This makes it easier to assess other skills relevant to success in a PhD: creativity, tenacity, communication, collaboration. * Often admissions decisions are not as simple as identifying the strongest N applicants. A variety of political and practical factors can come into play. For example, departments may try to ensure that PhD positions are distributed 'fairly' across their various research areas, or use them to support newly-hired members of staff. At the uglier end of the spectrum, some departments may base their decisions on the whims of one or two powerful individuals. There can also be additional rules and constraints imposed by whoever is ultimately supplying the cash that supports the positions. * The way your question is phrased, one gets the impression that you went into this interview feeling that success was guaranteed, and that you are 'too good' for this school. If candidates come across this way in interview, it leaves a bad impression, even if it is objectively true. * Schools know that they are competing with each other for the best candidates. A second-tier school may recognise that the very best candidates are going to go elsewhere. If so, it can be counterproductive to make offers to those people: by the time they get around to declining, the second-choice candidates have already taken positions elsewhere. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_7: I would not read anything into it. Look at your MS applications and how they went. Many things can cause rejection from too many candidates, funding issues, personal whim of the interviewer, yada yada. Upvotes: 0
2021/03/16	2,021	8,762	<issue_start>username_0: I’d just like to know your opinion on this issue (whether you think it is ethical or not). The point is, for three years, I was a straight A-student. But towards the final year, I simply started to burn out, but then I didn’t know how to handle the situation and my mental and physical health deteriorated. As a result, I got an F. At our university, if you get an unsatisfactory mark (F) you have to take summer classes. Even though it was the final year, students were still allowed to take them. I didn’t consider taking a leave of absence since the reason is not considered serious enough in my country. Then I thought about taking a year off by withdrawing. But I was recommended to stay since a few years of my studies were financed. This year, the rules were changed and now, as it is the final year, those who got unsatisfactory marks are expelled. So was I. In my country, however, one is allowed to be enrolled in the college again, retake some classes and get a diploma. And this doesn’t prevent you from getting into grad school. So the question is, do I still have a moral right to become a professor at another university? I think that if I’m going to pursue Master’s degree in another university and (on condition that my performance is great) this university is interested in having me as an academic, I should be transparent about this fact. Or do you think that it is better for me not to pursue academic career at all? Would a student like that have a chance in your country? Update: I was eventually given the opportunity to withdraw (since the documents are yet to be signed) and enrol in the same university next year. Thank you everyone for your answers!<issue_comment>username_1: Don't try to infer anything from such a rejection. The possibilities are too vast. It may be that many good students used this university as their backup plan in case they weren't accepted elsewhere and one of them was chosen instead of you. There can be a lot of competition. It could also be a case of "poor fit" with the faculty that wasn't recognized before the interview. But, applying to only three schools seems like a mistake. If you want to get into a program then a broad search is recommended (with a backup school or two). Don't make the search narrow in terms of school rankings, geography, and such. There are a lot of possibilities but if you pass them up voluntarily you might suffer for it. But, relax for now. The outcome at one place has no real effect on the others. Nor does your "worry" change the game. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Now that interviews are free cause of zoom, more people are getting interviews. Classes are smaller this year cause everyone's got financial pressure. More people are getting rejected after an interview now. Don't read too much more into it than that. This is a difficult year for admissions. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: In late 2019, I had funding to employ a single PhD student at my European university. So I opened up a vacancy, and I received about 140 applications. By sheer necessity, I had to reject 139 candidates, and that included several very good ones indeed. The main difference you're experiencing is that European Master programmes can accept scores\* of students every year, but many European PhD positions are job vacancies that can only be awarded to a single person. So you're suddenly dealing with significantly more serious competition for the available positions. Rejection merely means that at least one candidate was even stronger than you. \exact numbers depend on country, university, programme, but it's typically much much more than one student per programme. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: PhDs position in Europe are usually unique: you are not in competition with other candidates, you are in competition with the ideal profile the PI has in mind for that position. If may be even the case that when none of the candidates fits the profile, the position is advertised again in a couple of months (hint: do not apply again ;) ). If you feel confident, and you liked the project, you may contact the PI and ask if you can apply for external funding, writing your own proposal. You may ask the PI where to look for calls. Ps: external funding may or may not be connected to the project, you have freedom in defining the scope of the project (well, then there is a board/panel/comitee having the freedom of funding your project) Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Don't take it too personally - try looking at it from the other side. They have some number of positions to fill with some number of applicants and they need to go through a process to find the applicants that best fit the positions. Typically that process involves eliminating those that don't meet the essential criteria and short-listing and interviewing those who look most promising for the role. If they interview 4 people for 1 position, 3 (at least) are going to be 'rejected'. If someone is appointed, that does not necessarily mean the selectors thought the others could not have done the role or been successful in it, just that someone else was a better fit with what they were looking for. (There are also many reasons why they might not appoint anyone, but again not necessarily a reflection on the candidates.) Certainly it is possible to perform badly in an interview, but even if all 4 performed brilliantly, 3 are not going to be offered the post. Most of life (PhD positions, jobs, partners, elections etc) is not like a driving test where you pass or fail based on reaching a specific standard, but a matter of 'fit' and preference. The language of 'rejection' and 'acceptance' although common is probably not good for your mental health ... you're looking for something that is a mutually good fit both for you and the role/them. Just because someone thought you were not a good fit with one role has no bearing on whether you are good fit with a different role. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I studied in Europe until my master Degree and had my Phd in the USA in computer science program. I realized that the level of US students are pretty weak in Math, Science and engineering overall. The math that I did in a bachelor degree in France is what we are doing in a Master or Phd program in the USA. No offense but it's a reality. In some German or French University, american student would be lost in science programs. Here in a phd computer science program, most of my collegue were unable to solve a simple differential equations. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: Nobody here can truly answer your question: we weren't in the interview, and haven't seen your application materials. However, some points for you to consider: Typically, MSc admissions are based heavily on academic achievement: transcripts, references from course tutors, etc. Applicants have come from a variety of backgrounds and may not have had opportunities to undertake significant independent research. In contrast, PhD applicants can be expected to have completed some form of independent research. This makes it easier to assess other skills relevant to success in a PhD: creativity, tenacity, communication, collaboration. * Often admissions decisions are not as simple as identifying the strongest N applicants. A variety of political and practical factors can come into play. For example, departments may try to ensure that PhD positions are distributed 'fairly' across their various research areas, or use them to support newly-hired members of staff. At the uglier end of the spectrum, some departments may base their decisions on the whims of one or two powerful individuals. There can also be additional rules and constraints imposed by whoever is ultimately supplying the cash that supports the positions. * The way your question is phrased, one gets the impression that you went into this interview feeling that success was guaranteed, and that you are 'too good' for this school. If candidates come across this way in interview, it leaves a bad impression, even if it is objectively true. * Schools know that they are competing with each other for the best candidates. A second-tier school may recognise that the very best candidates are going to go elsewhere. If so, it can be counterproductive to make offers to those people: by the time they get around to declining, the second-choice candidates have already taken positions elsewhere. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_7: I would not read anything into it. Look at your MS applications and how they went. Many things can cause rejection from too many candidates, funding issues, personal whim of the interviewer, yada yada. Upvotes: 0
2021/03/16	838	3,519	<issue_start>username_0: I am a new PhD student. I have been in school for more than a year. But I basically never met my mentor. I can only find a way to post the paper. Now, I am preparing to submit a paper to a conference. But I haven't submitted a paper before. I want to know if I use the `Latex` template given by the conference party to write a paper, how can I confirm that the format is correct. For example, the requirements of the paper are: [![enter image description here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/RXScM.png)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/RXScM.png) This is the requirement of this conference. Its Latex template can be found here. <https://www.microarch.org/micro54/> Initially, I thought that this template should have all the relevant parameters set, but it is not. For example, Space between columns 0.25in. When I compared the pdf file generated by the template with the papers of previous years, I found that this parameter in the template was not set. I didn’t find the font and margin settings in this template. What should I do? > > Reviewing will be double blind (no author list); therefore, please do > not include any author names on any submitted documents except in the > space provided on the submission form. > > > > > Declare all the authors of the paper upfront > > > The above two paragraphs are all requirements given in the template. Does this require the author to be written in front of the paper or is it forbidden to write? Thanks<issue_comment>username_1: The double blind refereeing instructions mean that the text of the paper should have nothing in the `LaTeX` `\author{}` macro. All the authors should be listed only on the web form you fill out when you submit the paper. For help setting the proper margins and other formatting constants, ask at [tex.stackexchange.com](https://tex.stackexchange.com). Although you have never "met" your mentor, they should probably know about this submission and should be able to help you with it. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: As long as your paper more or less follows the guidelines, you should be fine. They most likely won't reject a paper because the distance between some columns is 10% larger or smaller than instructed. Word counts should be followed strictly though. If something isn't specified, just make sure it's readable and consistent. Regarding naming authors: You should not mention the author, institutes or any other connection that gives a clue to who the author(s) are in the main document. However, you should add all names and affiliations in the submission system (you will most likely see it when you start the submission). A good way to get started is to open the submission system and have a look. Usually you can cancel or save your progress, but this gives you an idea of what to expect. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The page you linked implies heavily that conference organisers think the template is set properly. They also provide a sample. Compile the sample, and if it gives better results than the template, use the sample as your template. In any case, don't add additional settings to the template without a consultation with the organisers. It is a lot of work to track and undo such changes if they were uncalled for. If the template was indeed faulty, it's also their responsibility, not yours. Besides, the reason you have different resulting document may arise from different internal settings of your TeX distribution, or a program you use. Upvotes: 0
2021/03/16	461	1,947	<issue_start>username_0: I am 16 years old at the time of writing (so I have no supervisors to seek advice from), and I'm working on a Mathematics paper at the moment, which I plan on submitting to a journal for publication. In the paper I have about 9 lemmas and theorems in total; they are all just formulaic (by formulaic, I mean that they are all just formulae rather than an idea or property about something, eg for argument's sake the quadratic or cubic formula). Is it a good idea for me to include a list/summary of lemmas and theorems in the paper after my introduction, or should I simply include a couple of the main results in the introduction and not bother with a list of formulae I establish? It just seems to me that to see all of the results without a summary near the beginning would be quite hard; you'd have to scroll down many pages. Thank you for your advice.<issue_comment>username_1: If the lemmas and theorems are unrelated (unlikely) then a list might be fine. But if the purpose of the paper is to prove the main theorem(s) then giving that purpose and naming just those in the introduction is probably more standard and easier for a reader to get a sense of purpose. So, my guess is that your second suggestion works better. If there is one main theorem then focus, primarily, on that. But if one or two of the others has some independent use then you could expand a bit. Mathematicians are used to following a train of proof through a fairly long argument, but knowing the goal ahead of time can be helpful. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: What is most appropriate and would give your paper the best chance of being taken seriously by the research community, is if it conforms to the writing conventions of the field. The writing conventions of the field do not include having a list of theorems. Therefore, I’d advise you not to include such a list. Good luck with the paper! Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2021/03/17	482	2,016	<issue_start>username_0: Background: There is an untapped aspect of a domain which I am currently writing a review paper in. The review paper is encompassing the domain in general. I want to add a short one page proposal of that "untapped aspect" so as to carry forward future research. I plan to add this in the review. Options 1. Should I just leave it out of the review and draft that as a separate paper with personal experimentation? 2. Should I add it as a appendix in our paper? (no experimentation). Should I go for option 1 or 2? Note: There is no page limit and appendixes are allowed in the journal.<issue_comment>username_1: If the paper has been refereed and the referee has not suggested adding an appendix, you should not do Option 2 (or at least you need to get a permission from the handling editor/referee). If the paper has not been refereed yet, you can do whatever you and your co-authors want. Option 1 (publishing a 1-page separate paper) is bad. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If you are not afraid of losing your head position, you can add that part - perhaps briefly - to the review. In my field it is normal that a review can ends with a Perspectives section. Depending on details that you are the only one aware of, you can even do so and proceed immediately to the dedicated possible paper you have mentioned. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: A review paper summarises the current state of knowledge. Stating opening problems (untapped aspects) adds value and can be included. I see no reason to include such problems in an appendix; they could appear in the main body. It's a personal preference as to whether they appear in your review paper or a separate paper which states the problem and provides a solution. At least, it is without further details. E.g., if the open problem is unknown, worthy of extended discussion, and/or identification has value, then unveiling in a separate paper focusing on the problem/solution may have benefits. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/17	722	3,131	<issue_start>username_0: I submitted a manuscript to a journal one year ago. The journal is well known and has already published papers on the same subject including one of my previous papers. The paper I submitted went under review after two weeks. After eight months, I contacted the journal to inquire about the status of my manuscript, I got no response. I contacted the journal again after two months, and the managing editor informed me that the handling editor is trying to secure a referee for my paper. I sent another email three months later, the managing editor said that the handling editor is still trying to secure a referee for my paper. I asked them if I could suggest some referees and they agreed. My question is: what should I do after this long waiting period?<issue_comment>username_1: It is all up to you. The situation is not uncommon. Unfortunately, nowadays it is getting harder and harder to find a good referee. This is especially true for smaller fields. Many journals ask for a list of 5-6 potential referees. If many potential referees decline, the journals often reject the paper. The fact that your paper is not rejected yet, is a good sign. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: As you pointed out you have several options: * Do nothing and wait for the editor to find a referee. * Withdraw and submit elsewhere. * Send the editor a list of people who might be able to review your paper. Nobody, including the editor, can predict what will happen if you do any of these things. Doing nothing and waiting is probably the least likely to result in a good outcome quickly, because the editor's already shown they are not able to find reviewers quickly (although there's always the chance a reviewer's time frees up and they can review). Withdrawing and submitting elsewhere would mean starting over, and there's no guarantee the editor of the new journal will be able to find reviewers either. The third option is effectively a better (for you) version of the first option, but it's still not ideal, because you can't guarantee the reviewers you suggest will agree to review either. You can only tell who might be interested in your paper. Because there's no ideal option, you will have to make your own decision. How badly do you want to publish in this journal? If the answer is "very", do #3. Otherwise consider (but not necessarily take) #2. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Anecdote that may help. I submitted a paper to the right journal. It took more than a year to get feedback - I do not know why. Rather than retract and resubmit elsewhere, I nagged. I emailed the editor directly, and her editorial assistant. Included the email history each time. I even telephoned once. The paper was finally accepted. I think that the editor was so frustrated and embarrassed by that point that she skimmed the paper herself, thought it looked correct and appropriate (it was) and accepted it. This was a small low key journal, not run by a big publisher, so I could contact the editor directly. If you can only go through the journal's web portal this route may not be available. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/17	684	3,000	<issue_start>username_0: I need a piece of advice. I found an interesting postdoc position one month ago. I applied all required documents (CV and cover letter) and 4-5 days later I was interviewed by the group (including head). A few days later I was asked to prepare the research highlights and I did that. One week later they asked me to apply for the position via the university website if I am interested in the position, and also requested recommendation letters from possible referees. All letters were provided as I know, and they are positive. Moreover, I know I well match to that position. Of course, I do not exclude other possible existing candidates for the position and I can be not the first among them, of course. So, one month passed from the interview. I haven't experience in the application process for a postdoc position in the US and this is for the first time for me. Thus, the evaluation and hiring process for a postdoc position is a bit unclear for me. I am not sure that a direct request to the lab head for clarifying the situation is a good idea because in this case, I can look like a hysteric or in need person, and I don't want that due to obvious reasons. I do not exclude that they must prepare for the position a justification or something like and this also needs time. In accordance with the above, I need a piece of advice. What should I do? Is the situation normal or I'm screwed? What should I choose as a strategy (wait or write)?<issue_comment>username_1: The academic decision clock can run very slowly. If you don't have other options then I'd suggest some patience. There may be a number of interviews they need to have with others and there may be issues about scheduling decision meetings. Lots of things can slow it down. If you have a specific need to know about the decision then you can be a bit more aggressive in asking, but otherwise, a request for an update after a couple of weeks is probably acceptable. The most information you are likely to get, however, is that you are or are not, still in the running. You can ask whether they can give you an "estimated decision date" and they might answer, but don't expect it to be especially accurate. But don't pass up other opportunities as you wait. I doubt that very many places will tell you that you aren't the first choice and if others are ahead of you they will wait for a decision from one of those before telling others they won't get the position. But don't read too much into a delay, and don't panic. There are too many possibilities. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I had got the offer and signed it two weeks ago. Probably, the delay was due to specific preparations and justifications related to papers and so on. Meanwhile, I hope this question will be helpful for other persons. Just be patient and accurate in your actions. Now, I must resolve the visa question at the time of US embassies are predominantly closed all over the world due to the COVID..... Upvotes: 1
2021/03/17	3,020	12,905	<issue_start>username_0: I am currently a senior high school, and next year I will enroll for my undergraduate studies but I am afraid that my grades would not be good enough to be admitted in good universities like MIT, Princeton etc. So can I study advanced topics like general relativity, quantum mechanics etc., like at university but without getting into it?<issue_comment>username_1: There is nothing to prevent you from self-studying topics in physics (or any field) before you go to university, during your university studies or after you have graduated. As mentioned in the comments, there are many lecture courses freely available online which could help you in such an endeavour. However, as a physicist myself I would caution you against jumping straight into learning general relativity and quantum mechanics on your own. These are advanced topics that would typically be taught towards the end of an undergraduate degree, after at least two years covering things such as classical mechanics, Newtonian gravity, special relativity, optics, electromagnetism etc, and probably a number of mathematics courses too (this is country-dependent but probably at least algebra and calculus at a higher level than you learned at school). Furthermore, there are a huge number of benefits to studying at a university instead of on your own. For starters, the degree programme is structured for you so that you don't have to work out all the different bits of physics and maths you need to understand from one topic before moving to the next. You also have the chance to ask questions during lectures, you will have access to a library, be set assignments that you get feedback on, thus allowing you to gauge your progress and you will be surrounded by people studying the same thing, who you can work with and learn from. Beyond studying for a degree, going to university is an important "coming of age" experience for many people, as you'll probably live independently for the first time, meet many new people, get the opportunity to try out new sports and hobbies, move to a different part of the country etc. So by self-studying you will miss out on all of these important and fun milestones. Finally, as I said in my own comment, going to MIT or Princeton is not the be-all and end-all in life. I had ambitions to study at a top university for my undergraduate degree that never came to fruition. Instead I went to a tiny university that hardly anyone has ever heard of (it's certainly not reputable for physics) but I am certain that I enjoyed my degree far more and got far better results than I would have if I'd have gone to a top university. This is because the atmosphere was more laid back, there was a cooperative rather than competitive atmosphere amongst the students and the physics department was really small, meaning that I got to know all my course-mates and lecturers really well. This was infinitely preferable (to me) than suffering through a tough degree for four years on a course where I knew no one and was just a face in the crowd to the lecturers. In summary: by all means you can study topics in physics without going to university, but I would suggest starting with a less ambitious programme. You don't need to go to a "top" university full stop, but you especially don't need to go to one to learn advanced topics. GR and QM are taught as standard in every reputable physics degree. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Frame-challenging a bit, because the question seems to be originating from fear of not being admitted to a "top" university, rather than a focused interest in self-study. --- There is little direct educational benefit to enrolling in MIT, Princeton, etc as an undergraduate rather than, for example, well-respected state research universities. There are some possible side benefits, like A) You're attending classes with other people admitted to MIT, Princeton, etc, so you may find more competition that drives you, B) You have a chance to network with people who have "connections", including fellow student, alumni of the institution, and various visitors, and C) You get to put a "fancy" name on your resume which might make people more likely to read your resume and maybe even hire you/admit you to graduate school based on the name of the school you attended. There are also possible downsides. Professors at the "top" institutions may have less time for individual undergraduate students (and even grad students) than professors at respected-but-less-prestigious institutions. Importantly, all of these factors are also incredibly individually variable. Self-study is okay, but I don't think it's a good serious learning path for most people (certainly fine to pursue as a hobby, but you'll lack the support and external motivation that being enrolled in official courses provides; you'll also lack connections to research opportunities). It doesn't sound like you are particularly interested in self-study, but rather that you are looking for a backup plan if you aren't admitted to your preferred schools. There are lots of good institutions where you can learn about relativity and quantum mechanics: don't limit your search to MIT and Ivys. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: This is a response that takes various comments of the OP into account rather than an explicit answer to the question asked - but it is too long for a comment, and I really think that the OP should be made aware of the following points. @OP: I do not intend to be rude, but I would strongly advise you to recalibrate your expectations and your perception of how research and academia work. For instance, * you say that you never managed to get good grades in highschool, but your question focusses on "advanced topics like general relativity, quantum mechanics"; * you are worried (in some of your comments) that you won't be admitted by any university, but your question focusses on places like MIT; * in [another question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/162560/135841) you mention research of yours (which I find a bit odd, anyway, since you write you're a highschool student) and don't seem to be particularly convinced of its quality, but in a comment here you claim that you wish to "interact with greatest minds of this world". Now, it is important to note that none of your goals is completely unreasonable in itself: there are, of course, a lot of potential reasons why a smart student might have poor grades in highschool, and might anyway master theoretical physics later on; it is, as mentioned by others, also absolutely possible to do your undergraduate studies at a respected but not-at-all famous university, and then do your graduate studies at a very well-known place; it is also possible to start out with not particularly good research and to improve quickly and considerably, so that the "greatest minds of this world" would like to discuss your research with you. However, the only way to achieve any of this is to keep a realistic perspective and to move forward in small and down-to-earth steps. Currently, your contributions here merely focus on extremes ("bad grades in highschool vs. studying advanced topics in theoretical physics"; "not admitted to any university vs. admitted to MIT"; "research of low quality, produced as a highschool student, vs. interacting with the greatest minds of this world.") Here are a few suggestions of a more realistic approach: * If you had difficulties to earn good grades in highschool, make a thorough (and honest) analysis of the reasons, and try to figure out what you can do to improve this situation when you attend a university. In order to get any degree you will have to pass exams, too, and if you want to have any chance of your dreams coming true, you will have to do very well in most of them. If you had poor grades in highschool, this might also indicate (though it is not sure, of course) that you don't know well some of the material from highschool. No matter whether this might not be your fault or what the precise reasons are - it might still pose a problem when you want to study topics in physics at university level. So please try to find out whether you have, for instance, serious gaps in your highschool knowledge of mathematics or physics (and maybe also some other subjects that could be relevant), and if you find some, try to close these gaps before you're heading towards more advanced topics. (Please note that much more basic physical topics than general relativity and quantum mechanics - for instance, classical Newtonian mechanics - require mathematical knowledge which goes far beyond the mathematics taught in highschool.) * If you intend to become, in a few years, a graduate student in one of these "top-tier" universities, try to make choices right now which can help you get admitted then. For instance, make an effort to find out which kind of undergraduate experience (for instance, research experience, but also other things) are considered advantageous for the admission decision, and then try to choose a university for your undergraduate degree where you have good chances of acquiring this experience. * Getting involved with research early is certainly a good idea of you have ambitious plans - but the most reasonable way to do this is within the setting of a college or university and in collaboration with other people who already have experience in doing research. * Please try to inform yourself about some details of the academic system. For instance, you write in one comment that you are considering self-studying, then to write a few good research papers and to get a PhD in Cosmology. As mentioned by other users, this is a very unrealistic plan: First, being admitted for graduate studies seems to be very unlikely if you do not have an undergraduate degree. So if you want to do a PhD, there is most likely no way around getting admitted for undergraduate studies first. Second, producing good research and getting it published in reputable journals is very, very difficult if you do not have any formal education (= education at a university) in your subject and no senior colleagues that support and advise you. Producing really excellent research and getting it published in top journals (which would fit your, in some respects extremely ambitious, goals) is literally impossible without the aforementioned prerequesits. Now, all these suggestions certainly come across as much less glorious and prestigious than getting admitted to MIT, or studying general relativity as soon as possible, or interacting with great minds. However, please be aware that even the greatest minds spend a considerable amount of their time with completely non-glorious, down-to-earth routine tasks (like advising students, marking exams, writing grant proposals, and so on). Also, even if someone is born as a genius, a degree from a top university, a solid understanding of theoretical physics and the possibility to work with great people do not simply come to them out of the blue - even the smartest people have to work long and very hard for this, and they do it by taking many - maybe amibitious, but most often still small and realistic - steps. So precisely this is my advice for you. Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: There are also many reasons for NOT trying to get into one of those "top" universities. Foremost among them is money: if you don't have either wealthy parents, or the qualities (not all of them academic) needed to get a full-ride scholarship, then how will you pay tuition & living expenses? Going to a state school in your home state (if you're a US resident) is going to be significantly less expensive. Second is quality of life. Admittedly this is subjective, but you do need to consider what your life will be like outside of class & academic work. I suppose MIT deserves its reputation as a great school, but the downside is that it's located in the Boston metro area, which is IMHO the pits. Same is true of most top universities: I did my first year at a fairly high-ranked school in a largish urban area. Academically it was fine, otherwise the place was an invitation to either alcoholism, depression, or suicide. Likewise, if you have a good, supportive family, you may do much better choosing somewhere close to them. Or if your family is of the other kind, a place as far away as feasible may be a better choice. Finally, as others have said, where you do your undergraduate work is not nearly as important as how well you do it. It's quite possible to get into a graduate program at one of those top schools with an undergrad degree from your local state university. It's also possible to participate in interesting research programs and/or remunerative industrial jobs with a grad degree from those state universities. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/17	1,220	5,398	<issue_start>username_0: I have reviewed a paper for a journal, which I rejected. I wrote a 3 page report with major and minor comments. A week later, I received an invitation to review the same paper in another journal. The authors have nicely decided to ignore all of my comments, including correcting typos! Is it OK to state in my new report that I was a referee for another journal, without revealing my identity of course. My report is going to be very similar to the previous one, but I was thinking of making a point about taking my comments more seriously (at least the obvious ones!). I am not planning to reject the paper straightaway, as I think the journal is now more appropriate and the paper has a good, if modest, contribution.<issue_comment>username_1: I would actually suggest not doing that. Send your comments to the editor rather than to the authors. But if you make the same points in your report, then it will be pretty obvious to the authors that they have hit the same reviewer again. And, as you say, the new journal has different standards. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I suggest copy-and-pasting your entire review, after double-checking nothing has changed, i.e., your review is still current. You should make your position clear to the editor and I suggest opening with a statement such as: I reviewed this manuscript a week ago for another journal. The authors have not addressed my comments and my opinion remains unchanged: ... Unlike another answer, I see no problem stating you were the reviewer to both the editor and the authors, since it'll be obvious to the authors anyhow. Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I would be sure nothing was changed and then send my same comments to the editor. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: I would state plainly the fact that you have previously reviewed this paper and your comments still stand. Of course, I don't know what your field of knowledge is, but in [some journals](https://signalprocessingsociety.org/publications-resources/information-authors) it is actually expected from authors to have addressed comments from previous reviews even if they are from a different journal: > > Resubmission of Previously Rejected Manuscripts. Authors of manuscripts rejected from any journal are allowed to resubmit their manuscripts only once. At the time of submission, you will be asked whether your manuscript is a new submission or a resubmission of an earlier rejected manuscript. If it is a resubmission of a manuscript previously rejected by any journal, you are expected to submit supporting documents identifying the previous submission and detailing how your new version addresses all of the reviewers’ comments. Papers that do not disclose connection to a previously rejected paper or that do not provide documentation as to changes made may be immediately rejected. > > > Of course, this rule may not apply to the journal you are currently reviewing for, but you can always check directly with the AE. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: My answer is similar but slightly different that the others here: There is nothing intrinsically wrong with taking a rejected paper to another journal and that the authors are free to ignore your comments from the first review (except for cases as described by [username_4](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/164075/136438)). If you choose to disclose that you are reviewing the paper for a second time, this comment properly is sent to the editor of the journal, not the author(s) of the article under review. While you are certainly free to use a verbatim review on the second instance of the article, consider that (at least in my field), the community is small enough that maybe 10% of the time you can figure out who wrote the review and providing the same review for two different Journals likely increases your chances of being identified by the authors. Whether you consider this a possibility and whether you care about it are up to you. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: There may be a much larger issue at stake. [Simultaneous submissions](https://www.editage.com/insights/duplicate-publications-and-simultaneous-submissions) are considered unethical for a series of reasons, the striking one because they lead to a waste of resources/workforce/brainwork. Imagine the new submission was addressed by a different reviewer than you. Then there will be effectively at least 2 reviewers (you and the new one) plus two editors working on exactly the same paper. Does humanity have infinite resource to address research? no. If this is not a problem to you, there is the more mundane copyright issue. When you submit, you generally have to disclaim if the paper has been submitted in the past to other journals, if it has been rejected, if you are submitting it to other journals at the same time, etcetc ... there you have to help the new editor, mentioning you reviewed the same paper. Do you know if the previous editor already made a decision? If no, then these authors should deserve a reprimend call, they judge themselves above the system and they show a lack of trust in the peers ... but they still want to try some shortcuts to publish a peer-reviewed paper, instead of addressing your points, or politely decline to address them, simply trying their luck with another set of reviewers. Upvotes: 3
2021/03/17	993	4,063	<issue_start>username_0: I'm writing a paper. It has a lot of lemmas that are used to prove a theorem. I put those lemmas first and then my put theorem at the end. In the lemmas, I introduce assumptions (they're displayed equations that I label so I can recall them later) that are needed to prove the lemma. Then at the end of the paper, when I get to my theorem, I say "Let equations (1), (5), (21), (24) and (45) be true. Then this wonderful result is true: blah blah blah". Now a referee for my paper said that it's not nice to do this because he/she has to go back to find (1) and then (5) and then (21) etc. What's a good practice or the best practice for this? I could collect all of the assumptions right at the start and then refer to them separately later in the lemmas, which doesn't look nice, but then the theorem would look nice because I could say "Let equations (1)-(5) be true..." Another reason against doing this is that the assumptions are different in nature so it doesn't seem natural to put them together, especially if there are like 10 of them. Does anyone have any advice or examples?<issue_comment>username_1: If there aren't too many of them, you might consider naming the assumptions, rather than just numbering them. If the names reveal the intention of the assumption it might read better. It might also lead to better insights overall. Even if you could only name the majority of them then the paper might read better. Some assumptions have common names, such as the Axiom of Choice, of course, which is sometimes specifically mentioned. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Possibly you could lessen the problem by also mentioning this in your introductory paragraphs, such as saying something along the lines of "Our main result, Theorem 6, will follow from (1), (5), (21), (24), and (45)." If the following applies, even better would be "... and (45), which have independent interest" (or "which are of", or "which we believe have", etc.). Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: On one hand, if you can explain all the assumptions fairly directly, you might do so at the outset, and state the theorem there, too. On another hand, if explanation of the equations and assumptions is very complicated, you might "recall" all those equations just before the statement and proof of your theorem, "for the convenience of the reader". I do also generally like catch-phrases naming assumptions, both because they're at worst far more meaningful and explanatory than artifactual equation numbers, and therefore more memorable. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Our main theorem requires the following assumptions: * A1: * A2: * ... (and here comments about what they mean and are they necessary etc. if such comments are appropriate. --- In the main theorem itself: If the assumptions A1-A5 hold, we have results. (Please have the main theorem in the introduction so that it can be quickly found when scanning the paper, if this is at all feasible.) --- In the lemmata: Suppose A4 and let us define some entities. Then we have a result. --- The benefits ============ * All the assumptions are written in one place. This makes it easy for someone using your result as a black box or just wanting to see if it can be used as such, and makes it much easier to compare assumptions of different results. A reader knows where to find all the assumptions. * The main theorem follows the assumptions. No or little page-flipping required. * You have an obvious place for discussing if a given assumption is actually required, good or inconvenient for modelling or computational purposes, sharp, could maybe be avoided, has a restatement, has or has not been used before, etc. However, this might not always be possible. Maybe one of the assumptions is very technical or requires notation developed later in the paper. You can still have it in the introduction or together with the other assumptions, but as a reference: A4 is a technical assumption that we state at the beginning of section 3. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2021/03/17	862	3,785	<issue_start>username_0: I left a PhD program in statistics last August after nearly four years in the program. The department graciously allowed me to finish out my Masters, so I graduated in December and have since started a new job in a related but unusual field for my degree. One of my reasons for leaving the program was my relationship with my advisor, which was causing me daily stress that I decided was no longer worth enduring. About a month before I decided to leave the program, I submitted what was to be the first paper of my dissertation to a well-regarded journal in our subfield. I was first author and my advisor was listed as second author. In December (right as I was about to graduate with a Masters), the paper returned as an acceptance with minor revisions. There were only a half dozen or so reviewer comments, mostly minor. I got to work addressing the reviewers' concerns, which didn't take long. My advisor, however, raised a major concern. He insisted that one part of the algorithm described in our paper was incorrect and that I should fix it. I asked him why he thought it was wrong and his reply essentially boiled down to "I'm convinced it is wrong". I stubbornly refused to do the additional work of another proof until he could identify where the original error was. This led to a very contentious Zoom call where my advisor told me that we should re-check essentially every part of the algorithm - because if one part was wrong, then perhaps everything was. I eventually did the proof he had asked for and showed that I had been right all along. I sent the proof to my advisor and asked him to read it so that we could submit the paper. He said he would, but now almost two months have gone by and I have not heard from him. My previous experience with him leads me to believe that this radio silence is intentional and that he has not just forgotten about the whole project. My options are: A) Do nothing and (presumably) let the paper go unpublished. Given my career trajectory, it is not hugely important to me that the paper be published, although it would be nice to see my name as first author. B) Nudge my advisor for a response, potentially provoking a demand for more work that I consider superfluous. Dealing with my advisor any further will almost certainly cause me a great deal of stress (or relationship is very strained). If you think I should take option B, how can I be clear that I do not wish to put much additional work into the project and believe it should be submitted now that I have answered every reviewer comment? Should I make an ultimatum, or try to offer some sort of compromise?<issue_comment>username_1: If you really don't care about the paper then A seems ok as long as the paper isn't published without you. But you could nudge the professor and then decide what you want to do. If you get unreasonable demands then you can back away which should prevent the paper being published (ethically, at least). But it is possible that your worst fears won't be realized and you have a simple way forward. But I would save any ultimatum for a later round after you hear a response to a request to submit. You want to be the "reasonable party" in any conversation. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Ask your supervisor what steps need to occur to get the paper published. Request that a timeframe be established for each step. Clearly state how much time you are able to contribute to the project (total and within the next month). This is not a hostage situation. This is an all-too-common disorganisation or negligence situation. It can be hard to tell the difference, but in this case we can be sure it is not a hostage situation because you do not see any value in the hostage. Upvotes: 1
2021/03/17	1,511	6,384	<issue_start>username_0: I have recently got into a weird situation, that I didn't think I would be in. First of all, I had applied for a paid research internship abroad (at a foreign university) some time ago. Due to covid restrictions, that has been converted into a remote/virtual intership. I have accepted their offer so that's all well and good. However, one of my professors at my own university has now offered me a paid internship for the summer. That will also have to be done remotely I guess, judging by the current state of the world. Now, as I have accepted the offer from the foreign university, I cannot cancel that, and I have to go through it. On the other hand, I don't know how to reject my professor's offer poiltely. I want to stay on good terms with her, because I have to stay in this university for two more years. And she is researching in the field where I want to go, so there is a chance that I will have to apply for her supervision for a PhD in future. I am an undergrad studying chemistry in the UK in case anyone is wondering. What should I do? I can probably accept both internships, but I don't know if I can really work on both of them, even if it's remotely. How common is it for people to do two internships in one summer? What is the perception of such a thing in the academic world?<issue_comment>username_1: It would only seem proper if everyone is informed of the situation. If everyone agrees, and you can do the work, then I see no problem. But I doubt that either of the two institutions would agree. You should probably give up one of them proactively. The offer from your professor is likely the easiest. and then they can offer it to someone else. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Based on my experience in math in the U.S., you should probably give up one of them. The point is not "can you do the work?", but that such internships have a broader point that is not just some task. The people would want you to really engage, more fully than the allocated hours and salary might indicate, with their projects. That is, it's almost surely not just about getting some task completed, but about a mutually beneficial experience, where you'd get more than just salary, and they'd cultivate a future collaborator. "Dividing by two" is not palatable here. (For example, if someone told me they wanted to work on a PhD with me, while also doing something else full time (!?!?!), I'd almost surely refuse, on the grounds that it'd just be a source of infinite frustration for me... And, in particular, a very bad investment of my mental energy.) So, no, don't try to do both. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: The problem with two internships in one summer is that you only have 24 hours a day. If you spend (like you are probably supposed to) 8 hours on one internship, then you have exactly 8 hours left for sleep, leaving you zero time for anything else. You will burn out. So you should do only one internship at a time. If you cannot cancel the offer from the foreign university, then do that internship and tell your professor you already have something lined up for the summer. They will understand - after all, staying on good terms doesn't mean "do whatever she wants". They don't have a monopoly on your time (would they get angry if you were simply taking a holiday over the summer?). Plus, if it comes to another internship / MSc / PhD next summer, your experience at this internship should be helpful. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: A good undergraduate research internship will be interesting enough that you will think about it all the time. You can only think about one interesting thing all the time. As a research beginner, you should stick to one internship. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: While you potentially could do both of them, as long as you could satisfy the agreed requirements of both (so probably not of they are both suppose to be 40 hour weeks), you really probably shouldn't. Since this is research, you will most likely be learning new things that you have only touched on in your undergraduate degree. If you tried to learn both topics at the same time this could lead to confusion and slow your rate of learning. Keep in mind that this is also your break time so you can come back and continue learning in your next semester. So what to say to the local professor, basically just something like: > > Dear XXX, > > > Thank you for the offer but unfortunately I must decline. At the time of offer I had already accepted a different summer research internship at YYY university. However I am very interested in your work and would be interested in doing research in your lab at . > > > Regards, > ZZZ > > > Of course only put that last part if you are seriously interested, which from your original post it sounds like you are. In addition you could look to see if there is an undergrad research course if you are thinking of doing research during the semester so your work counts towards your undergrad. From the professors perspective they may not get you as a research assistant, but they now know they may potentially have a good/interested student who had demonstrated a professional behaviour lined up for the future. And one that will also already have some prior research experience. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: So I was in the position of doing two internships simultaneously a couple of summers ago. I strongly recommend against doing this. You are likely to get burnt out, and not give your all to either project to the frustration of the people hiring you. Also, one of the really beneficial aspects of internships for furthering your career are references. You won't get good references if you spread yourself thin and it impacts your work, which it almost surely will. You might also be in a tricky position in the future if you did not disclose that you were doing two internships two both parties. If you ever want to use professional networking sites like linkedin, or to put your cv online and either side sees this and realises afterwards that you were two-timing it would seriously burn bridges. Plus, this is a bit unethical. You can't make the most of both internships, and are taking the opportunity from someone else. In my case this only hit me after I began the internships, and I felt really really awful about it. Upvotes: 3
2021/03/18	385	1,557	<issue_start>username_0: I'm an undergraduate who is going to be a Ph.D candidate this fall. After reading papers extensively for writing the literature review, I realize details in some papers, though I totally understand them at the moment I read them, are almost forgotten when I try to cite these papers. I wonder what's your habit to keep track of the papers you've read (for long-term retrieval).<issue_comment>username_1: If you want to remember something long term, spaced repetition is a good way to remember it. I interact with hundreds of papers per year. Trying to remember them all is futile. You should prioritize. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: There are various methods to keep track of your readings; a spaced repetition is not necessarily indispensable. My preferred approach is: to annotate, to collect excerpts, and to tag these excerpts so that one can find them again when one searches by keywords. Citation managers such as [Zotero](https://www.zotero.org/) offer these functions. I personally use a digital 'Zettelkasten' ([TiddlyWiki](https://tiddlywiki.com/)) for this purpose. Both Zotero and TiddlyWiki are open-source and free. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Statements that are not excessively technical can be written in the appropriate Wikipedia article, while citing the article as a source. To some extent, Wikipedia can thus be used as a shared guide to the literature. Of course, you need another solution for the technical details and personal annotations: see the other answers. Upvotes: 0
2021/03/18	703	2,759	<issue_start>username_0: On Academia.edu, a user uploaded a [Translation Database of Sun Tzu's Art of War](https://www.academia.edu/32499691/Art_of_War_Translation_Database_pdf), which includes translations as recent as 2020. Alongside it was a [Bibliography Document](https://www.academia.edu/34896443/Sun_Tzu_Art_of_War_Database_Translation_References) that references all works shown in the former. I’d like to upload a similar document that shows Translations of Laozi’s Tao Te Ching, however I don’t know if this would violate any copyright protection held by the Authors/Publishers. This site [here](https://terebess.hu/english/tao/_index.html), presents many translations, some entries consisting of an authors’ text verbatim whereas others either link to a pdf or to a wayback machine page. Seeing as it’s still operating, I’m assuming that TAO hasn’t violated any copyright protection, I’m wondering whether I could include translations appearing in TAO without violating copyright protection. I recognise that for some translations, in the case of [Beck](http://www.san.beck.org/index.html#8) or [Muller](http://www.acmuller.net/index.html), I would need to seek permission in order to include them in the database, however would I need to do this for all translations that are not in public domain?<issue_comment>username_1: Laozi's work is not protected by copyright, you are free to provide translations. You cannot freely distribute translations of others. > > This site here, presents many translations...Seeing as it’s still operating, I’m assuming that [the site] hasn’t violated any copyright protection > > > Your assumption is false: The absence of a take-down or prosecution doesn't imply an absence of copyright violation. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As written [here](https://www.translatorsbase.com/articles/42.aspx), translations of "out of copyright" works likely contain sufficient creative content that they may be copyrighted. Laws differ, of course, but it may be that the translation itself is copyrighted while the original is not. If a work is out of copyright you can create a translation and (probably) copyright the translation. But the translations of others may have copyrights that you should not attempt to infringe and cannot do so ethically. Given that, I'd be hesitant to upload a translation that claims copyright to any repository without the permission of the copyright holder. But the propriety of uploading a "database" depends on what is included. If it is just references to translations (i.e. a bibliography) then it won't infringe, but including the works themselves likely does. However, I also think that US law is stricter on this than in other places. Upvotes: 1
2021/03/18	485	1,932	<issue_start>username_0: I am an undergraduate Physics student at a well-reputed university in my country. My aim is to get a Master's scholarship in Europe (preferably in Germany) or the U.S. Although I have a 3+ GPA and I have heard that it is good but I am really worried and fear that I might not be able to earn a scholarship. I have two questions: 1. Is a GPA of 3+/ 3.3+ but below 3.5 considered good when applying for scholarships? 2. What other factors besides GPA matter?<issue_comment>username_1: Laozi's work is not protected by copyright, you are free to provide translations. You cannot freely distribute translations of others. > > This site here, presents many translations...Seeing as it’s still operating, I’m assuming that [the site] hasn’t violated any copyright protection > > > Your assumption is false: The absence of a take-down or prosecution doesn't imply an absence of copyright violation. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As written [here](https://www.translatorsbase.com/articles/42.aspx), translations of "out of copyright" works likely contain sufficient creative content that they may be copyrighted. Laws differ, of course, but it may be that the translation itself is copyrighted while the original is not. If a work is out of copyright you can create a translation and (probably) copyright the translation. But the translations of others may have copyrights that you should not attempt to infringe and cannot do so ethically. Given that, I'd be hesitant to upload a translation that claims copyright to any repository without the permission of the copyright holder. But the propriety of uploading a "database" depends on what is included. If it is just references to translations (i.e. a bibliography) then it won't infringe, but including the works themselves likely does. However, I also think that US law is stricter on this than in other places. Upvotes: 1
2021/03/18	955	3,818	<issue_start>username_0: I'm Indian and my full name is X Y Z (such as <NAME>). In my passport, Given Name is X and Surname is Y Z. Would that be any issue? Or should I get it corrected to update Given Name to X Y and Surname to Z? Would having Y Z as the surname be any issue in the US?<issue_comment>username_1: I am Latino, and as a result have an even worse version of this issue. My full name is of the form A B C D E, with A and B being given names, and C D and E being surnames. An extra complication is that D is not a name by itself, it's just a preposition. I have given the TOEFL and GRE tests before and that has not been an issue. Minor errors may occur depending on who handles the documentation, but they have never been an actual issue. For example, my names have been agglutinated as CDE, AB (surname, first name). In a visa, I had it once written as B C D E, A. In academic papers, it has been cited as E, A B C D; D E, A B C; C D E, AB; B C D E, A. The preposition itself sometimes vanishes leading to C E, A B. No clerk has ever questioned my authorship, or my documentation in my travels. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: No, it is not going to be a problem. People in Spain usually have names consisting of several parts, for example. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Nope. My last name is 2 words, and it hasn't been a big problem in most places. Sometimes at the pharmacy or something, I have to ask them to check my last name as one word though. But it's rare. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: ### Probably not. In English speaking countries, there is a fairly common practice of giving children three names: a personal name, a middle name, and a surname. The middle name is almost entirely disregarded in common use and official documentation, but people still have them. It's unlikely that any of the staff will find a name of the form "A B C" unusual at all. Most likely, if any error occurs at all, the university staff handling your application will simply assume that, upon receiving an application with a name taking the form A B C, that A is your personal name, B is your middle name, and C is your family name, and enter your name into their systems as such. It's unlikely to result in any difficulties in applying, but it might result in them only entering the first letter of B into their systems under "middle initial" or omitting it altogether. If this occurs, once you've enrolled, I imagine that you would likely be able to just show up at their student administration office and get them to change the name stored in their systems. Students change their names all the time; women in English-speaking names often change their family names when they get married, and transgender individuals often change their personal names when they come out and start transitioning. As a result, it should be a fairly straight-forward process for them to correct any mistakes recording your name in their systems. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: (I used to work for ETS/College Board) As long as all of your records always use 'Y Z' as your surname you shouldn't worry. The stories/rumors you've perhaps heard from colleagues happen when the student or their parent is inconsistent, such as: Sometimes you see a student who has something like a Secondary Diploma 'X Y' Undergraduate Diploma 'X Z' and TOEFL score 'X Y Z'. Generally none of these institutions will alter the name on the record so you're down to trying to convince the school you're applying to that they're all you. (Orthogonally avoid changing what's on your passport at all cost if it's not truly just wrong unless you want to have to fill out the 'also known as' section on every immigration application related to studying outside the country for the rest of your life.) Upvotes: 2
2021/03/18	1,007	3,898	<issue_start>username_0: An 3rd year undergraduate computer science student is doing several months full time internship at a research lab in the university. What is an usual budget for such a student per month?<issue_comment>username_1: Based on my experience in the US, undergraduates working in a university research lab are not paid anything. There are exceptions of course, but they are quite rare. I'm not sure if "PI" is a common term in India. Just clarifying here that "PI" means Principal Investigator i.e. the person in charge of the lab and its research output and is also the one responsible for obtaining funds for it. When it comes to undergraduate research, there is a quid pro quo. The PI helps the student gain valuable research experience and the student in turn helps the PI complete a few small projects or helps another graduate student with theirs. And in most cases, the student is the one that benefits the most as they are nowhere close to the level of competence required to complete a project on their own with minimal supervision from the PI. So to answer your question "What is the budget for such a student?" Most likely zero. You are paid with research experience. You might think it sucks and is unfair but that is a discussion for another day. If you want to get paid, you need to go in with a strategy. You can't just go to the PI and say "I am expecting to get paid for my work." You need to have a few key points where you clarify the value you are bringing to their group and that it would benefit them from having you around. If they can let you go instead of paying you and have zero effect on their output, they're going to let you go as soon as you insist on getting paid. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I am an Indian student as well. The only time I have seen undergrad research students being paid is through fellowships/scholarships. For example, the [Indian Academy of Sciences Summer Research Fellowship Program](https://webjapps.ias.ac.in/fellowship2021/lists/result.jsp) pays research interns of about INR 8000 - 12,500 for 2 months (the last time I checked). Some institutions hold their own summer research programs every year, which also provide a stipend such as [IIT Kanpur's SURGE](http://surge.iitk.ac.in/), which provides a stipend of INR 12,500 for 8 weeks. Some of the foreign summer internships like [Caltech SURF](http://sfp.caltech.edu/programs/surf), [MITACS Globalink Research Internship](https://www.mitacs.ca/en/programs/globalink/globalink-research-internship), [DAAD-WISE](https://www2.daad.de/deutschland/stipendium/datenbank/en/21148-scholarship-database/?detail=50015295) pay much better. But if you are conducting research with a professor directly, i.e. not through a scholarship or a fellowship, it's not common to get paid. This is especially true if you are working as an undergraduate researcher at your own university. Even in the rare situation that you had the opportunity to get a stipend, it should have been discussed upfront before the internship began. As username_1 says in his answer, it is considered that the biggest gain for a student is valuable research experience. So, should you ask your advisor if you can get paid for your internship now? Here's my suggestion: * How would your professor take it if you made the request? Is it possible he might get angry and think you are being entitled? Will it possibly affect your internship in the future? If you think he is understanding and would consider it, then go through with the next steps. If not, do not bring it up. * Make sure you have made sizable contributions to the project so far. * Ask your professor if you can get a stipend, highlighting the work you have done so far and future contributions you plan to make. Make sure you do not come off as arrogant. * Be prepared for a 'No'. Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
2021/03/18	845	3,474	<issue_start>username_0: I received an email from the university saying that the similarity report for my work identified that one of my answers shows a similarity to the answer within the script of a fellow student. They are asking to write a statement and explain what happened. Basically myself and my partner...we are studying the same thing and he copied one of my answers as he came from a night shift and he was very tired and he couldn’t think. Could you please advise what to answer. He received the same email and he has to write a statement as well. What should he write? Thank you for your answers and advice.<issue_comment>username_1: Well, you let him copy. What else can you say? Bear in mind that lecturers hate hunting down plagiarism/collusion. In one course, hunting the offences and collecting proof cost me more time than marking all submissions (and these were a lot). You just created a bunch of pointless extra work for them. Don't increase it, you have already been caught. This is not a court lawyer cat and mouse game. You are not going to get out of it free by technical tricks and it's insulting to your lecturer's intelligence to try, trust me on that. Put the cards on the table and promise with contriteness never to do it again (and, of course, adhere to this). That's your best bet. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I have a slightly different answer from that of [username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/164111/75368): How you should respond to this depends on a few factors: 1. Did you encourage him to copy your answer? 2. Did you know he copied your answer before he did it? 3. If not, when did you find out? Before or after submission? 4. Is he happy to be honest about what occurred? If you actively told him to copy you, the jigs up, fess up, apologise, move on and learn your lesson. If you knew he copied your answer but you didn't give him express permission, then it's a slightly more grey area. Arguably, you should have reported this to the prof but most reasonable academics would consider this a lesser offence than actively encouraging it. So again, make sure you press this home but only if it's true. If you didn't find out he copied until you got the academic misconduct email, then you've done nothing wrong. This actually happened to me a couple of years ago, someone I'd never met had found the code for my coursework on my self-hosted GitLab instance (I've improved the security since then) and copied it wholesale. At this point, make it very clear that you didn't condone the cheating and were unaware of it. You should fight the charge tooth and nail. Given that you say you work together regularly, you're likely of similar academic ability. So the chances of this defence succeeding largely revolve on whether your friend is willing to own up to copying it without permission. Whereas if you were of wildly different abilities, the prof could almost certainly tell whose work it was. Overall, just be honest with your prof. Lay out exactly what happened, any mitigating circumstances you think might apply and promise to make sure it won't happen again. Even if you don't think it's your fault, promise to secure your work better in the future. Take this as a learning experience and try not to get too down over it, stuff happens, we all make mistakes and as long as you're honest this isn't going to follow you forever, once it's been dealt with, that'll be the end of it. Upvotes: 3
2021/03/18	1,243	5,026	<issue_start>username_0: I am 16 years old at the time of writing (so I have no supervisors to seek advice from) and I have written a mathematics research paper, which I plan on submitting to a journal for publication. For a couple of the assertions that I make, I use proofs by induction. Now, in school we're encouraged to write proofs by induction in the following (rigid) format: Base case:... Assumption(s):... Inductive step:... Conclusion:... I have noticed that no research articles that I have seen have written proofs by induction using this sort of format. The authors usually make it flow much more smoothly, eg 'For the base case, the result is trivial. Now assume the result holds for some $n=k$, so that... Now consider the expression for $n=k+1$...and by the inductive hypothesis this equals...hence the result is true by mathematical induction.' So, is it good practice to write proofs by induction in the pretty rigid structure I first outlined or is it ok/better to write the proofs more naturally so that it flows better? Thank you for your help.<issue_comment>username_1: If you are writing for professionals, then the paper, itself, should probably conform to what you have seen in print. That is, a more natural written style. But, for your own work, an outline form may be best in the early stages so that you have more confidence that you don't miss something and that each piece of the puzzle is complete and correct. I think the reasons for your teacher's suggestions is just that. Make sure you get it all and make sure you get it right. Then, the expository form for a paper can be extracted from your outline. --- A note you might consider for the future. Once you write something technical it can be very difficult to proof read it. This is because you mind seems to read what you think you wrote, rather than what you did write. In other words, you "see" what you "expect to see". Thus, a formal, outline version can help you keep everything straight so that you can examine it more carefully, not "reading ahead" and thus missing something important. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: As you probably have observed by now, by reading articles, people generally do not write steps down explicitly when those steps are considered "obvious." This trend is not special to proofs by induction. In fact, this is true at any level, but what is considered "obvious" to an audience of people holding a PhD or with significant progress towards a PhD is different from what is "obvious" to someone taking first year calculus. Think about it this way: people reading research articles know math quite well already. What they are interested in is what is new in your paper; demonstrating "obvious" facts is just a distraction. And, if you are at the stage where you will read several papers in a week, you generally want those papers to get to the point. For people who are learning math, it's entirely different: you're probably only reading 1 textbook at a time, and the whole thing is new to you. So, you want everything explained in lots of detail because you've never seen it before. But again, if you're reading a calculus book, you probably don't need an explanation on solving a quadratic; you already know that. If you're learning induction, you want it spelled out; if you've seen proofs by induction ten thousand times, you don't need it spelled out for you. Since you are a bit new to this, I would like to give some more examples about how proofs by induction are typically structured in upper undergraduate/graduate/research levels. Now, when it comes to proofs by induction, there are generally two categories: proofs where the induction step is "obvious" and proofs where the base-case is "obvious." Sometimes both are easy, but it's very rare in my experience to find a proof by induction where both the base case and the induction step require a lot of work to prove. I suppose on the rare instance where both the base case and the induction step are non-obvious, I might split the proof into two lemmas or possibly I would call these "claims." In every other case, I write statements such as "the base case is trivial" or "the general case (the induction step) follows by induction." I would also point out that there are even times where a proof will "prove" something by induction without the author ever writing that induction is being used. For instance: > > Let f(n + 1) = 2f(n) and f(0) = 1. Then f(n) = 21 f(n - 1) = 22 f(n - 2) = . . . = 2k f(n - k) = . . . = 2n. > > > Induction is being used implicitly within the ellipses, but it hasn't been written explicitly so. I, personally, like to write "by induction" at the end of such a statement, but not everyone does. I think your intuition of generally following how other people write mathematics is appropriate. You can deviate slightly, sure, but it's also good to understand why things are written the way they are and so it is great that you are asking this question. Upvotes: 3
2021/03/19	1,931	8,371	<issue_start>username_0: Are undergraduate research positions typically funded? If yes, why so - given that undergraduates do not have a lot to offer in terms of research outcomes? Also, which type of research positions are funded? I ask this because, one wouldn't expect mathematics research opportunities (other than REUs, I guess) for undergraduates to be funded, right? Undergrads do not put a lot on the table, and more than adding any substantial value to the field via research, it is about gaining useful experience and making connections with professors in order to secure future LoRs. Do I have the right idea here, or am I missing something? If we think specifically about pure mathematics, then quite a bit of the initial process before even trying to do any research is essentially directed reading. I wouldn't expect being paid for that either, just doesn't make sense. For computer science, though, (eg. machine learning), one can ask undergrads to do coding jobs and perhaps pay them for that. To summarize: Which undergraduate research positions are typically funded? How about pure math, applied math, and computer science (theoretical or applied) fields in particular? Why (and also which) should undergraduate research positions be funded in the first place, if at all? Thanks for your valuable insights, in advance! Clarification: By funded, I meant that the student researcher receives a monthly salary or stipend of some sort. Apologies if that wasn't the right term to use, but I hope that it's clearer now.<issue_comment>username_1: All undergraduate research positions should be funded. Most currently aren't. The children of families who can afford to have their kids not work aren't smarter than the children of families who can't. Spending $60 billion a year on government supported research in the US and nickel and dimeing the next generation of scientists so 75% of them have to give up science is a real stupid way to invest in the future. As for mechanisms, the NSF and NIH already have them and they work. I write NIH student supplements every year. Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If by "funded" direct payments (wages) are meant, then my experience at US universities (science/engineering departments) is that they are typically not during the semester. The mindset goes something like this: * The positions are effectively unpaid internships that will provide the students with experience and skills, which are a form of compensation in applying for jobs, grad school, etc. * The positions are "entry level" and there is high turnover, so the students are expected to first demonstrate competence in the lab and long(er)-term interest in working there before payment becomes an option * Alternative to cash payment, many US schools reward students with course credit for research, which, at a private school in the US, works out to better than minimum wage (and an an hourly basis better than the what the doctoral students are getting...) Summer undergraduate research is typically paid, but for my labs, the "interning" during the semester is the gatekeeping - we would never hire a total unknown to work full-time in the lab over the summer and potentially do more harm than good. Such students then are usually elevated to acknowledgements and authorship on published research work, because they're making significant contributions. The system in Germany, where I currently work, is worth considering for contrast: we have extensive formal, paid undergraduate labor ("HiWis"), but the students are formally employees with work contracts. They do contract work - all the repetitive, grunt tasks (lots of cleaning, in particular). This is also often perceived as a kind of gatekeeping to joining a research group as a master's student, but I am unaware of HiWis being considered for real research, like the summer programs in the US or being added to papers as authors or contributors. The preceding all addresses the factual part of the question (even if lacking hard facts), but as for the normative question, I believe student researchers should be compensated and that depending not only on the student's financial situation, but also career goals, compensation in the form of wages, experience, course credits, and research credit (e.g. authorship) all have different kinds of value and should continue to be options. Finally, from the perspective of someone managing research, funding is often tight. Being able to offer non-cash compensation to get students into the lab and started on work has a potential to be a win-win - this is exactly my experience from my doctorate: new lab, not a lot of money, eager student. Two semesters of unpaid assistance in the lab and we wrote a proposal for summer funding (accepted) and then we were able to do it again the next year plus get the student on both conference and peer-reviewed publications as an author. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Mine were. In the late '90s. At UT Austin's Aerospace Engineering department and at the no longer extant Institute for Advanced Technology. They were both jobs that paid hourly. I didn't publish anything related to my work there, but the latter job did lead to a couple of technical reports. The former was open and kind of exploratory work for a professor in fluid dynamics whose class I had just taken, and the latter was some MATLAB programming for a full-time researcher. They were jobs, and US law requires them to be paid. They didn't pay a lot, but I kept them going as long as I could since they covered my rent until I graduated and went to grad school at UT. At the time they had no benefits (health care, retirement, etc.), which I think is wrong, but that's the way it was then. I think that these two positions gave me a good start on applications to grad school and kept me interested in research as well as two good letters from people known to the department I applied to and getting a PhD from (also Aerospace at UT). I don't know how either of them was funded. I think the prof I worked for may have had some departmental money and some NSF money, but he just asked me to do some little projects that seemed to only be of interest to himself and maybe part of his personal experimental interests. At IAT, they had Army and Navy funding that probably had room in the budget for a couple of undergrads, but we weren't required to know that. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: They should but in my experience too many aren’t or aren’t paying enough. With limited exceptions, all work should be paid, and especially student work as students will likely face tuition fees, which are NOT unsubstantial in many cases. Personally, the idea that this is an internship and thus could go unpaid is simply a problem with internships, which should also (with limited exceptions) be paid: I do not hire students or interns unless I can pay them properly. Hiring students for free is IMO an abuse of power, and creates situations where the student is working for favours rather than a wage, and working for favours can definitely take you in the wrong direction. If the researchers is not satisfied with the work (rightly or claims not to), he or she can refuse the favour and then the student will have spent time for nothing. My own time is precious so I don’t see why the time of others isn’t. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: In STEM fields in Canada, UG summer research is paid like a summer job, usually from research grants. Particularly strong students can obtain NSERC USRA awards. The downside to this is that there are far fewer jobs than applicants. This is compounded by the fact that a 3-month summer students costs a researcher nearly as much as a full-year graduate student, since the latter are also funded by the university for TAing and through fellowships. There is always a balance to be found between hiring more productive graduate students, and training the next generation as summer students. Occasionally, students volunteer to work for free during the summer, but I avoid this as they would be working alongside students getting paid to do the same job, and for the reasons other posters have mentioned. Lastly, in my experience, it is not unusual for summer students to qualify for publications. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/19	2,074	8,847	<issue_start>username_0: Long story short I just had two exams - one after the other. One required me to use LockDown Browser and the other one was in CANVAS. The second class is Finances and I asked a friend who already graduated from the same campus on Finances to help me out answer some questions. With that being said, the final question allowed us to attach a file with the procedure and I sent a PDF file of the excel sheet. The excel file has my friend as an author and I completely forgot to change/remove such a basic thing- later on there is a modification done by me. I sent an email right away after noticing the pdf was a mess just to notice the author thingy. I tried recalling the email but hey, 2021 and we still cannot edit tweets nor delete sent emails. I sent like two additional emails explaining that I messed up not adding my name on it and bla bla bla. Additional information. Teacher asked us to join the zoom meeting via phone and record our screen, hands and desk at ALL-TIME. Update: Teacher just replied to the email with the correct file that has name and no friend author. In case, just in case the teacher finds out about the author what could be a good excuse? "Teacher I had an exam before this one that required me to use Lockdown and my friend's laptop already had it so I proceeded to do the exam in the same laptop" "Teacher at that time my friend was at my house- my laptop had a BSOD so I proceeded to use his laptop" "Teacher I visited my friend and had no laptop- proceeded to use his and do the exam" I am so nervous- I am such an idiot because I graduate next semester... way to freaking go and messing up things. Finally, I would also like to add that the teacher said "it is not necessary to upload any file but if you want to overview something then you won't be able to". I simply do not what to think, do or say... I am shocked and worst thing is that they upload grades this weekend but I have classes with her once a week (THU). Also my friend lives like 3 hours away from me.<issue_comment>username_1: All undergraduate research positions should be funded. Most currently aren't. The children of families who can afford to have their kids not work aren't smarter than the children of families who can't. Spending $60 billion a year on government supported research in the US and nickel and dimeing the next generation of scientists so 75% of them have to give up science is a real stupid way to invest in the future. As for mechanisms, the NSF and NIH already have them and they work. I write NIH student supplements every year. Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If by "funded" direct payments (wages) are meant, then my experience at US universities (science/engineering departments) is that they are typically not during the semester. The mindset goes something like this: * The positions are effectively unpaid internships that will provide the students with experience and skills, which are a form of compensation in applying for jobs, grad school, etc. * The positions are "entry level" and there is high turnover, so the students are expected to first demonstrate competence in the lab and long(er)-term interest in working there before payment becomes an option * Alternative to cash payment, many US schools reward students with course credit for research, which, at a private school in the US, works out to better than minimum wage (and an an hourly basis better than the what the doctoral students are getting...) Summer undergraduate research is typically paid, but for my labs, the "interning" during the semester is the gatekeeping - we would never hire a total unknown to work full-time in the lab over the summer and potentially do more harm than good. Such students then are usually elevated to acknowledgements and authorship on published research work, because they're making significant contributions. The system in Germany, where I currently work, is worth considering for contrast: we have extensive formal, paid undergraduate labor ("HiWis"), but the students are formally employees with work contracts. They do contract work - all the repetitive, grunt tasks (lots of cleaning, in particular). This is also often perceived as a kind of gatekeeping to joining a research group as a master's student, but I am unaware of HiWis being considered for real research, like the summer programs in the US or being added to papers as authors or contributors. The preceding all addresses the factual part of the question (even if lacking hard facts), but as for the normative question, I believe student researchers should be compensated and that depending not only on the student's financial situation, but also career goals, compensation in the form of wages, experience, course credits, and research credit (e.g. authorship) all have different kinds of value and should continue to be options. Finally, from the perspective of someone managing research, funding is often tight. Being able to offer non-cash compensation to get students into the lab and started on work has a potential to be a win-win - this is exactly my experience from my doctorate: new lab, not a lot of money, eager student. Two semesters of unpaid assistance in the lab and we wrote a proposal for summer funding (accepted) and then we were able to do it again the next year plus get the student on both conference and peer-reviewed publications as an author. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Mine were. In the late '90s. At UT Austin's Aerospace Engineering department and at the no longer extant Institute for Advanced Technology. They were both jobs that paid hourly. I didn't publish anything related to my work there, but the latter job did lead to a couple of technical reports. The former was open and kind of exploratory work for a professor in fluid dynamics whose class I had just taken, and the latter was some MATLAB programming for a full-time researcher. They were jobs, and US law requires them to be paid. They didn't pay a lot, but I kept them going as long as I could since they covered my rent until I graduated and went to grad school at UT. At the time they had no benefits (health care, retirement, etc.), which I think is wrong, but that's the way it was then. I think that these two positions gave me a good start on applications to grad school and kept me interested in research as well as two good letters from people known to the department I applied to and getting a PhD from (also Aerospace at UT). I don't know how either of them was funded. I think the prof I worked for may have had some departmental money and some NSF money, but he just asked me to do some little projects that seemed to only be of interest to himself and maybe part of his personal experimental interests. At IAT, they had Army and Navy funding that probably had room in the budget for a couple of undergrads, but we weren't required to know that. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: They should but in my experience too many aren’t or aren’t paying enough. With limited exceptions, all work should be paid, and especially student work as students will likely face tuition fees, which are NOT unsubstantial in many cases. Personally, the idea that this is an internship and thus could go unpaid is simply a problem with internships, which should also (with limited exceptions) be paid: I do not hire students or interns unless I can pay them properly. Hiring students for free is IMO an abuse of power, and creates situations where the student is working for favours rather than a wage, and working for favours can definitely take you in the wrong direction. If the researchers is not satisfied with the work (rightly or claims not to), he or she can refuse the favour and then the student will have spent time for nothing. My own time is precious so I don’t see why the time of others isn’t. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: In STEM fields in Canada, UG summer research is paid like a summer job, usually from research grants. Particularly strong students can obtain NSERC USRA awards. The downside to this is that there are far fewer jobs than applicants. This is compounded by the fact that a 3-month summer students costs a researcher nearly as much as a full-year graduate student, since the latter are also funded by the university for TAing and through fellowships. There is always a balance to be found between hiring more productive graduate students, and training the next generation as summer students. Occasionally, students volunteer to work for free during the summer, but I avoid this as they would be working alongside students getting paid to do the same job, and for the reasons other posters have mentioned. Lastly, in my experience, it is not unusual for summer students to qualify for publications. Upvotes: 2
2021/03/19	604	2,629	<issue_start>username_0: I think my MA thesis may not be very good in some areas (e.g., research design, data analysis). However, during the past several years I have not only been working in my field, but I have also managed to make up for this by publishing a couple of world class peer-reviewed articles and have a couple of articles under review in flagship journals. Now, I am applying for a PhD and they want my MA thesis among other documents. It does not reflect my "current" research abilities at all so I think it is not a fair way to assess me now after all this time, effort, and achievement. In any case, how can I confront this situation? I was thinking about adding a cover letter to my thesis which indicates upfront that this thesis is not my best work and may have flaws and then proceeding to more precisely refer to these flaws and how they can be rectified. Is this a good strategy? Do you have any other suggestions?<issue_comment>username_1: In the cover letter, just state that you are happy about how you could progress from writing a Master thesis with very poor supervision and no chance to have it reviewed, since bein written while a student at "university X" of "country Y educational systems plagued with issuesABC" to publishing articles in top journals as first author and that you feel ready to pursue a PhD. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Do not mention anything related to the master thesis being flawed or of poor quality. It is supposed to be a degree rather than a big contribution. The situation would vary depending on the selection procedures. Perhaps nobody will even have a glance at it, especially if you have already two papers. Those would be probably scrutinised in more details, or at least taken into greater consideration. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Since you have been less than perfect in research so far, it is imperative that you only apply to graduate programs where your work will be judged by people with imperfect research histories. Lucky for you, that describes everyone. No need to dwell on or emphasize past work that you can imagine improving on. If you have interviews you can be prepared to talk about ways you would improve if prompted. Be forward-thinking: what have you learned and how would you do different next time? rather than "my past work doesn't meet my standards". Definitely don't dwell on things like the quality of your supervision - it sounds like an excuse. Otherwise, focus on work you are most proud of when applicable, and feel safe in knowing that research is never a flawless process. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
2021/03/19	792	3,414	<issue_start>username_0: I will soon be accepting an offered professorship at a university that is a little further away from where I live. Now I have received the invitation to an audition (lecture + interview) for a professorship at the local university ("Probevorlesung" as it is called here in Germany). Actually, I don't really want that specific professorship at the local university, but I also don't want to mess with the local university because it is a potential employer for me. I would not rule out changing universities in a few years if the opportunity of a more suitable professorship at the local university arises. Problem is: Rumors said that candidates who turn down invitations are never invited again. Is there any way for me to appropriately decline the invitation without burning bridges?<issue_comment>username_1: My perspective is the US, not Germany, but here, at least, it should be completely acceptable to say that I was sorry that I couldn't accept the invitation since I have another position already and wouldn't want to waste the time of the inviting institution. But you could add, supposing that you are willing, that you would be happy to give a lecture, though not as an audition for a position. Among other things, this puts the onus on the university for making a too-late invitation. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You should communicate clearly (and swiftly) that you are declining the invitation because you are accepting the offer of a professorship at another university. In fact you should not just 'decline the invitation', but completely withdraw your application to your hometown university. I would not be worrying too much about burning bridges, most likely the view of the hiring committee at your hometown university will be more like 'Shoot! We have lost an excellent candidate to university X. We have to be more attractive/move more quickly/offer better working conditions next time'. Finally, let me say that this seems like a true luxury problem! Being offered a professorship 'a little further from where you live' and being invited for a Probevorlesung at your hometown university is something that most aspiring researchers would only dream of. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: The best thing you can do is to immediately turn down the invitation, and withdraw your application, especially if you are potentially interested to moving back to that university at a later time. It would be much worse to continue with the application process. Imagine you would end up receiving an offer, and then you would turn it down: If you decline the offer at that point, this would have cost everyone significantly more time and energy, it would have delayed the entire process, it would have taken someone else's spot on the shortlist (potentially risking to end up without a candidate accepting, also due to the delay), and it would probably not even help you to negotiate at your future university. So unless you are 100% sure that you won't receive the offer, withdraw now, otherwise you risk to truly burn bridges. (And even if you are sure you won't get the offer, you should withdraw now - the university will learn that you had accepted an offer somewhere else (unless you manage to delay this until you are out) and people will get the impression you weren't taking the application seriously.) Upvotes: 3
2021/03/19	942	4,059	<issue_start>username_0: I am a senior postdoc. My lab is moving from UK to Austria, the IST specifically. We have been told reimbursement for moving is not possible. There are tax benefits that we need to apply for, which would of course not cover the moving expenses directly, but over time. And even so, we would have to apply for them, and may not qualify. Shouldn't personal relocation expenses (at least partially) be paid for by the lab or receiving institution, at the very least as a sign of good faith?<issue_comment>username_1: It depends greatly on your current and prospective institution’s policies. Mine for example covers relocation, even domestically for new hires living more than 50km away and transfers between campuses (as we have several). The lab is obligated to cover this from our budgets for new hires so we cannot do so if we cannot cover these expenses. In my case (also as a postdoc) this is clearly stipulated in my contract and job listing. I suggest you inquire with HR to fully understand your situation, there may be support you and your supervisor are not aware of. If for example your supervisor ends your current contract and hires you again at the new institution you may be eligible for this. Unfortunately there may not be and your institution may not be legally obligated to have a similar policy. Of course as your advisor they should have made some efforts to understand your options to relocate already. I do not mean to assume that they haven’t but they will be busy and may not have exhausted all options to cover these expenses. You should also make it clear to them that relocation expenses are considerable and are a significant concern for you. --- Note that Japanese law requires relocation to be covered for transfers if your commuting time would be longer than 100 minutes each way. Private companies and Universities both do this. Local laws and regulations vary and may be different in the country you are relocating to. Make sure you understand these before confirming your new position. Applying for expenses retroactively is a bureaucratic nightmare which is best avoided. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I assume you didn’t just walk in to the office one day and got told “pack your things! We’re moving to Austria!” Instead, my guess is you were asked if you were agreeable to the idea of moving, told under what terms, and agreed (well, perhaps with the alternative being that you would become unemployed, but still). If my guess is correct, the time when you were asked would have been the best time to ask the question about relocation expenses. If you have already agreed to the move under terms that do not include covering your relocation expenses, then sure, you could bring it up now, but it’s possible that that ship has sailed; if the PI or receiving institution are stretched for cash, they have little actual incentive to be receptive to your wishes. Bottom line: there is no “should” or “shouldn’t”. In the workplace, you commonly get what you have leverage to ask and can get people to agree to give you. It sounds like you don’t have that kind of leverage in the current situation. Perhaps your PI will be understanding and agree to your request, which is reasonable after all. But there is no rule or ethical principle that says what should happen. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: In my country, Italy, no one would pay the relocation expenses, especially at the postdoc level. I can hardly imagine any university administration in my country approve this kind of expense. Those I know who moved to nearby countries like France and Germany, and also UK, either at university or in industry, had to pay out of their pocket the relocation expenses. Therefore, here around, I would consider the payment of the relocation expenses the exception rather than the rule. On a side note, though, I'd consider the behaviour of your PI rather problematic, for not discussing first the relocation with the whole group, and I'd consider leaving. Upvotes: 3