date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2021/04/06
| 1,239
| 5,277
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is it possible that I do undergraduation and post graduation from a university and Ph.D from other university?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, you can study for different degrees at different universities.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In the US, at least, it is very common to study at two or three universities on the way to a doctorate. Two is more common than three. Many undergraduate institutions in US don't have graduate programs or have only limited offerings. Some universities encourage their undergraduates to move on to another university just to get a variety of experience.
Again, in the US, one normally moves from undergraduate to doctoral study immediately. A masters degree might be earned along the way, but isn't always necessary. In other parts of the world a masters may be required to apply for doctoral studies. But changing institutions after each major milestone is permitted and common, though not universal.
If a student has worked very hard in a subfield and has worked with most of the faculty in that specialty, then the ability to learn from others, with different ideas, can be a plus. It can also be a plus to keep contact with the professors as you move on.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Speaking from the perspective of an American, it is certainly possible to obtain a bachelors degree at one institution, a masters at another, and a phd at a third, with all degrees being in the same field (or not). Changing institutions between undergraduate and graduate work is quite common in the US. I would even go so far as to say that it is preferable to complete one's graduate work at an institution different from one's bachelors institution.
* *Many* colleges in the US do not offer any graduate degrees, and many of those institutions offer only masters degrees and not doctorates. For example, most small, private liberal arts colleges in the US don't have any kind of graduate programs, and one of the largest public university systems in the country (the California State University system) does not offer doctoral programs (or, at least, there are only a very small number of doctorates available through the CSU system). A student who completes work at any of these kinds of institutions would be *required* to go somewhere else for a phd.
* Doctoral programs are extremely specialized. To embark on a doctorate is to devote 5–10 years of your life exploring a tiny niche of human knowledge (this is very nicely illustrated [here](http://matt.might.net/articles/phd-school-in-pictures/)). You want to make sure that you and your intended program are a good fit. Do your research interests align with the institution? Is there some faculty with whom you can get along? How's the climate? and so on. While students might find a faculty member at their undergraduate institution who is both a good mentor and studying something of interest to the student, it is more likely that you will find a good match if you cast a wider net. Thus it makes sense for most people to go somewhere else after finishing a bachelors (or masters).
* Admissions and funding can also play a role. Any given phd program is only going to have a limited number of slots. If you are close with a particular faculty member who *wants* to be your advisor, that faculty may lobby the admissions committee on your behalf, but even this is no guarantee of admission. And even if you are admitted, there is no guarantee that the department will be able to support you—it is very hard to go to an institution where you are not admitted, or cannot afford a roof and three squares.
* From a pragmatic point of view, moving from one institution to another exposes the student to a larger number of instructors, mentors, and colleagues. This broadens the social network of the student, and makes it more likely that they will be able to find work in the future. Faculty can both help a student locate promising positions, and provide recommendations for that student. Fellow students may be able to open doors in the long run (e.g. a buddy from your undergraduate institution might end up in a position to offer you a job several years later, or to collaborate on a project). The more connections you have, the easier it is to find work and research collaborators. Thus it is beneficial (in my opinion) for students to leave their undergraduate institutions in order to pursue graduate work.
* Finally, many institutions are understandably reticent to accept their own students into doctoral programs (or to offer post-doc positions to their own doctoral graduates, or to offer tenure track positions to their own graduates). One of the major goals of the academy is to broaden the scope of human knowledge. To do this, it is important to communicate widely with other scholars from other places. Forcing students out of the nest is a way of spreading institutional knowledge to other places, whereas offering positions to one's own graduates can seem a little incestuous. It is hard to explore the fringes of knowledge from an echo chamber.
So, again, it is not only *possible* to attend different undergraduate and graduate institutions, it is quite *common* in the US, and even (I would argue) *advisable* to do so.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/06
| 426
| 1,697
|
<issue_start>username_0: **Background:** CS Undergrad applying to CS PhD (USA)
My CV is 2 pages long. The second page is only half filled.
**Question:** Should I add two short sentences regarding my research interests? (at the end)
\*Note: I already have an online website which has the same explained in more detail.<issue_comment>username_1: A research statement is usually a longer document describing what research you did, why you did it, why it's important, and what you want to do in the future. While your CV should just be about stating the facts about your career, your education, achievements etc. So, no, I would not put a research statement in a CV
However you should add a section listing your research projects (completed and ongoing). Example:
>
> (2019-2020) 3rd year Bsc project: Designing a new algorithm to do X.
>
> (2019) Summer project: Built a web app to do Y.
>
>
>
If you craft the description right, you can explain very succinctly what you did, without it becoming a research statement.
Don't worry about the length of the CV, you are applying for a PhD so it's expected that it won't be very long.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'm not sure I have ever not just skipped straight over any substantial body of writing in a CV. A CV is a data source, not an interpretive document. I go to a CV to answer specific questions (What degree does this person have? do they have any research experience? Have they ever held down a job? etc).
An application for a PhD would normally include a separate cover letter where you can explain what you are applying for this PhD and how it fits perfectly with your previous interests.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/04/06
| 1,841
| 6,549
|
<issue_start>username_0: Sometimes we see some scientific books (for example in the fields of computer science, game theory, ...) start their chapters (mostly the first chapter) with epigraphs from famous people, movies, an important event like famous conferences....
How the writers find these sentences? Since they are more or less related to the subject of the book's (or chapter) discussion, it seems that they can't be found accidentally by watching a movie during the writing process, or just the nice sentences be gathered during the time.
Is it practically possible to search on the internet for a suitable quote just at the time of preparing that specific writing/book/presentation? What should be searched for? Could anyone please give me some practical directions?<issue_comment>username_1: The author knows these quotes; has seen them, or heard them, and collected them over the years. It seems to be "cheating" to have someone else find pithy quotes for you!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> ...conceal all art and make whatever is done or said appear to be without effort and almost without any thought about it.-- [Castiglione](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprezzatura)
>
>
>
I guess people just know these quotes, because they read widely. Maybe I'm a bit cynical, but part of the allure of epigraphs is to show off one's rounded liberal education. So I don't think people actually spend much time searching for them. At least if they did, they wouldn't admit. It would ruin their *sprezzatura*.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read.
> ― <NAME>
>
>
>
Read a lot and remember. Write quotable quotes in a notebook if you feel you might be able to use them in the future.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: One strategy is to identify key words in your topic that are distinctive but can have multiple meanings, and search for uses of these words in sources that are nontechnical or in a different technical area. An approach like this is described in Section 22 of a [terrific document](https://jmlr.csail.mit.edu/reviewing-papers/knuth_mathematical_writing.pdf) and is much easier now than in those pre-WWW days:
>
> Don [Knuth] takes great pleasure in finding a really good aphorism with which to preface a piece of writing...
>
>
> So how are we to find that wonderfully apposite quotation with which to preface our term paper? Serendipity, said Don. Live a full and varied life, read widely...
>
>
> Sometimes one needs to go about the search more systematically... The first secret, he confided, is Bartlett. There are numerous dictionaries of quotations...
>
>
> When Bartlett fails, we can try the OED. This incomparable dictionary lists every word along with contexts in which it has been used; very often it prints a memorable quotation...
>
>
> Some of the best quotations are taken entirely out of context. The economist Leontief had something to say about (economic) output; Don quoted him in his chapter on (computer) output.
>
>
>
The class where this was discussed can be seen on [video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMU16brUDuo)!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> “By necessity, by proclivity, and by delight, we all quote. In fact, it is as difficult to appropriate the thoughts of others as it is to invent.”
>
>
> —<NAME>
>
>
>
>
> “I often quote myself. It adds spice to my conversation.”
>
>
> —<NAME>
>
>
>
>
> “A good quote is like the handle of the bicycle which has the power to take you onto the beautiful path of life.”
>
>
> —<NAME>
>
>
>
>
> “When I need to find a good quote about a topic, I go to [quotes.net](https://www.quotes.net/) and enter the term I’m interested in into the search box.”
>
>
> —username_5
>
>
>
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_6: I remember reading a wonderful book on computer algorithms called *Algorithmics*, in which each chapter was prefixed with a Biblical quote — from a translation by the author’s father. That was a neat way to do it. The quotes were relevant to the chapter, but in a way that was not relevant to the original use. “Let us talk of trees” is one I remember.
Beyond that, quotation dictionaries are a thing that exist. I have six on the shelf behind me. *The Oxford Dictionary of Quotations*, *The Oxford Dictionary of Quotations: New Edition*, and *The Oxford Dictionary of 20th Century Quotations* are all organized by author; while *The Macmillan Dictionary of Relevant Quotations*, *Quotation Finder* (Collins), and *The Penguin Dictionary of Modern Humorous Quotations* are all by topic. I have yet to find a single online source of quotations that I would trust — Wiktionary is probably the best. Most of the others have most quotes in multiple variants of slightly different wording attributed to several different people.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: This probably did mean the person was well read back in the day, but not so much today. Google "quotes about \_\_\_" where \_\_\_ is a generic word that pertains to your chapter and switch to image search. (Why image search? Because then you don't have to click into the results to see the quotes.)
For example, "[quotes about trees](https://www.google.com/search?q=quotes%20about%20trees&safe=active&tbm=isch)":
From "famousquotes123.com":
>
> A fool sees not the same tree that a wise man sees. --<NAME>
>
>
>
From "clickatree.com":
>
> A tree has roots in the soil yet reaches to the sky. It tells us that in order to aspire we need to be grounded and that no matter how high we go it is from our roots that we draw sustenance. --<NAME>
>
>
>
Further searching of "Wangari Maathai tree quotes" turned up "brainyquote.com":
>
> Until you dig a hole, you plant a tree, you water it and make it survive, you haven't done a thing. --<NAME>
>
>
>
OK, trees are obviously an easy topic... What about lists? "[quotes about lists](https://www.google.com/search?q=quotes%20about%20lists&safe=active&tbm=isch)":
From Pinterest (don't at me):
>
> People who want to appear clever rely on memory. People who want to get things done make lists. --<NAME>
>
>
>
From "quotemaster.org":
>
> There is only one thing that you write for yourself, and that is a shopping list. --<NAME>
>
>
>
The only difficulties here are formatting this post and choosing between the absolutely vast number of good quotes.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/06
| 1,402
| 5,214
|
<issue_start>username_0: Today I received the following email which was entitled the same as one of my publications:
>
> Dear Dr. Ian,
>
>
> I followed your research works which were of extremely high standard. I would like to invite you to the World Pediatrics Webinar 2021 which aims to accelerate scientific discoveries and major milestones in the field of Pediatrics. The conference will be held during June 08-09, 2021.
>
>
> Conference Website: [https://www.▮▮▮▮▮▮▮▮-▮▮▮▮▮▮▮.com/](https://www.xn----5spaaaaaaabaaaaaa.com/)
>
>
> You can directly contact me through Whatsapp: +37▮▮▮▮▮▮▮▮▮
>
>
> Please let me know your interest so that we can discuss further. Looking forward to hearing from you soon.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> <NAME> | Program Manger
>
> World Pediatrics Webinar 2021
>
>
>
I get a few of these scam conference or predatory journal emails a week. It takes about 500 milliseconds to recognize the scam. First, that paper was not of extremely high standard. Second, Whatsapp, really? I dutifully report them as junk to my organization's email platform, but they keep coming.
I've found a couple of tangentially related questions:
* [How to warn others about a conference-related scam?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/111054/how-to-warn-others-about-a-conference-related-scam)
* [How to make sure that a conference is not a scam when you are invited as a speaker?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/161541/how-to-make-sure-that-a-conference-is-not-a-scam-when-you-are-invited-as-a-speak)
The first has to do with a specific scam associated with a particular conference and the second is about identifying the scam.
In contrast, my question is about how to deal with the problem once identified, *productively*.
1. What arguments can I make to my academic institution's IT department that blocking these emails should be a priority?
2. If I can't convince my IT department to block the emails for everyone, is there an authority I can complain to? Google? The website's hosting provider? The payment processor?
In addition to the annoyance (which spread over an organization sized number of individuals is considerable and detracts from meaningful academic pursuits), academics fall for prey to deceptive practices all the time [[1]](https://www.pcma.org/fake-predatory-conferences/) [[2]](https://www.technologynetworks.com/tn/articles/inside-a-fake-conference-a-journey-into-predatory-science-321619). This means potentially hundreds wasted on registration fees, which are frequently paid by funds provided by taxpayers or charitable organizations.<issue_comment>username_1: I think the junk folder is the best solution, even if it isn't especially satisfying. I've found that unsubscribing from such lists can be effective sometimes, but not always. And the worst offenders are less likely to actually honor an unsubscribe.
But the institution is probably in a poor position to handle this problem as some judgement is required and false positives could cause issues. It can also be field dependent and the university may not want to deal with all of the possible variations. If a scam outfit learns they are being blocked then they have an incentive to make the appeals more subtle, which makes the problem harder.
You may want a more effective email client. Some can be programmed to automatically trash mails from individual senders or with specific phrasing. Some will learn from your actions and repeat them if new, similar, mail comes in future, though training them may take more that one or two tries.
And if you send out a mass email to your circle of contacts warning about some scam, it might just be treated as additional noise in the inbox of the recipient.
---
Sadly the problem is like the armor v. ordinance issue of the late middle ages onward. An advance in one generates an advance in the other, resulting ultimately in [Mutual Assured Destruction](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction) of the atomic era.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I am going to focus on your point 1:
>
> What arguments can I make to my academic institution's IT department that blocking these emails should be a priority?
>
>
>
Please don't.
If you manage to convince your IT department to make it a priority to block such emails, then it's quite likely that there will be false positives across your institute. You say that it is straightforward to identify these scam emails, and I have no doubt that as a human, indeed, you can. But there will also be humans writing invite emails on behalf of legit conferences or journals. Those humans may not have English as their first language. They may inadvertently use turns of phrase that you find characteristic of spam invites. As a consequence, some legit invites will be discarded along with the spam invites. The cost of these discards is asymmetrical: the cost of manually discarding spam is a slight annoyance, but the cost of having a legit invite discarded could be a missed career opportunity.
Ask yourself: how many colleagues missing out on legit invitations is it worth for you to no longer have to manually discard the spam invitations?
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/06
| 667
| 2,992
|
<issue_start>username_0: I want to prepare video courses in the field of informatics sector such as programming, system administration, network administration, cyber security, etc.. and make profit them on Udemy, YouTube, etc.
However, to prepare good quality courses I'll examine technology giant's sites, articles on google scholar, SE sites, blogs, official websites, videos, even courses, books and combine all of them. Of course, I'll change sentence structures and words in my talking and tell in a different way as much as I can.
However, I can't determine if this is plagiarism or not ethical, or if it is needed to give credit how I'll do this.
Even, I don't know if I show the software UI on my courses is copyright or any other right issues.
Can you please give me any advice?<issue_comment>username_1: Textbook writers regularly synthesize information in the way you suggest. Some information is common knowledge. When they take ideas from particular sources they credit those sources, whether they quote directly or paraphrase. Not doing that would violate copyright in many instances.
Without more detail it's hard to advise you. I suggest you look at several books in the areas you want to cover in your videos and see what they do. Look at videos too - you will want to do that in any case since they will compete with yours.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Plagiarism isn't just about copying words, it's about failing to credit sources, especially those contributing intellectually to some work.
>
> Of course, I'll change sentence structures and words in my talking and tell in a different way as much as I can
>
>
>
You can't take something you've read and just reorganize the sentence structures and call it your own work. Even just copying paragraph structures and organization is plagiarism. You can, however, read something, then after understanding it, write about it in your own words, and *credit* the source as the place where your understanding originated.
As long as you write in your own words (different from changing sentence structure or using a thesaurus) and cite sources, you are not committing plagiarism. You can cite any source you can access, there's no limit on that (besides exceptions where something is provided to you in private under some sort of non-disclosure agreement, private information protected by law like health information, or censored by a government for national security reasons, etc).
Copyright is a legal issue, and especially if you are planning to profit off some venture you need legal advice beyond what you can get asking questions on StackExchange. You will run into copyright issues if you copy bulk text (even if you cite it and make the original source clear, if you copy "too much" a citation isn't sufficient; where this line is depends on jurisdiction and ultimately what is decided in a courtroom) or reuse images in a way inconsistent with the license those images are provided under.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/07
| 4,036
| 16,886
|
<issue_start>username_0: I started a new faculty position this past fall, which also entailed moving to a new city where I don't know anyone. When I first moved here, I was excited about getting to know my colleagues, as they were pretty friendly at my campus visit (pre-pandemic). But since my arrival, I haven't gotten to know anyone really. I have regular meetings with my department colleagues, but everything is so transactional. I know it's harder to have those organic, friendly chats on Zoom, and everyone was already exhausted from this pandemic when I first joined in the fall. But I'm really struggling with loneliness in this new work environment. I moved here alone, and am dealing with family health issues that have been emotionally draining (and some of my colleagues are aware of both of those facts). I've recently started seeing a therapist, so I'm trying to get the help I need, but more than anything I just really wish I had even one friend at work so every dept. meeting wouldn't have to feel like a meeting with strangers every single time.
I'm rather stuck, however, with what to do. I guess I expected that when I first joined, they would be the ones to welcome me and make an effort to get to know me a little (it's what I've done when I've had new colleagues). But now all this time has passed, and it's starting to feel like that window is closing. I don't know if I should just give up and accept that they're not social (or at least not with me), or make some attempts on my part. I've made some efforts here and there, but nothing has worked so far, and that has shaken my confidence, and makes me feel like maybe they don't care to know me.
I know that socializing and developing friendships at work might seem very secondary. This is an otherwise good job and I'm grateful to have been hired, but I just feel like such an outsider and very lonely because of it (I'm also the only one in my field at this university, so even the classes I teach don't even seem to fit in with my department's curriculum). I'm not about to quit my job over it or anything, but being in a perpetual state of outsider-ness is really getting to me and I don't know how to address it. It doesn't help that academia is often such an isolated work environment and many professors just aren't very social even in the best of times (hence why I'm posting here specifically).
**EDIT:** Just wanted to comment here that I'm very grateful for all of the responses. I feel a little less freak-ish, and a bit more motivated to stay patient and keep the efforts going in the meantime.
I'll also add that I think one of the reasons I feel so bothered by my department's current dynamic is that it makes me feel like I need to conform and be as transactional and subdued as the rest of them, which is very contrary to my own personality. Anyway, I think that trying to connect with people - but not at all on my own terms - is contributing to the stress of it all, so I'm glad to have had that realization too.
Thanks so much for the advice and words of encouragement!<issue_comment>username_1: I don't know if this is much of an answer, but it's become more than will fit in a comment.
If you just joined in Fall 2020, it's not unusual that you haven't made the kind of connections you're looking for yet, *especially* given the challenges of the pandemic. I'm a PhD student, and I'm sure it's very different for faculty than for students, but I'm not fresh out of undergrad and have been through a couple career transitions prior to grad school. In my experience it takes a year minimum—even in the best of conditions—to organically develop relationships with coworkers/colleagues. (It took me longer than that to build close friendships with folks in my cohort, and we had weekly, in-person classes together for a year.) Genuine connections with coworkers tend to accrue in small increments over that time, and almost always in the interstices between "official" work demands. It sounds like you're fully aware of all this, but an occasional reminder doesn't hurt.
As you mention, everyone is exhausted these days. Perhaps your colleagues are all on the introverted side, but it doesn't sound like this situation has much to do with their feelings about you specifically. If they'd all been actively avoiding you or unfriendly, that would be a different story (and this is not the story you imply, at least, when you say your efforts "haven't worked so far"). Your colleagues may also be trying to give you space to address (or not feel close enough to engage with you about) your family health issues.
In any case, the window is far from closed. I'm still friends, a decade later, with some former colleagues who barely even spoke to me for the first few years at my previous workplace. And although I'm obviously not a super outgoing make-friends-easily type of person, my sense is that that sort of experience isn't unusual.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Ah mate, I am in the same situation. Moved city to a new place, a new job in Feb 2020. What a time to do so!
My colleagues are super nice, but covid just makes everything hard. People are having personal issues, burnout etc, and it makes the friendly "hey let’s get a coffee together" very hard (legally impossible often). Not just logistically, but also psychologically. [Mental health conditions are skyrocketing, the worst since WWII in the UK,](https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/dec/27/covid-poses-greatest-threat-to-mental-health-since-second-world-war) and of course this has an impact on the ability of everyone to socialize.
People are tired, "Zoom burnout" is a real thing, and many people are just exhausted of all this screen time socializing, all the time. Zoom does not substitute face to face interactions, you can’t talk 4 people at the same time, argue, or tell a joke. All does feel like "mandatory fun" when you are having a friendly chat, even when it’s with actual friends.
But remember: *This is the pandemic*. It’s not you, it’s not them, it’s the very rare and extreme situation we are all living in. It does not feel like an extreme situation because our daily lives are very mundane, but it is very hard for the human brain, especially if you are a social person.
I am sure many of those people will be more than willing to go get a coffee/beer/social\_thing with you when it’s possible.
I am telling all this from personal experience, not only with how my colleges behave, but how I personally behave. I am a super social guy, I love meeting people and I think group relationships are key in academia and research. Not only that, but some of my best friends are people I met on the job. But I am tired. I often don't join the "social coffee" chats our group organizes, I don't try to catch up with people to see how they are. Now, believe me, the moment all this goes out, I will be the first to propose a night in the pub! Your window is not closing, people are just doing the best they can to survive this thing.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: I also started a new faculty position during the pandemic, so I know how you feel. There is also not really anyone else at my university working in a similar area. It's very difficult to develop new relationships with colleagues via Zoom, etc. While it isn't a substitute for the casual encounters which help build connections with new colleagues, there are a few things I have done to at least try to get through until in-person social contact is possible again.
1. Press forward with existing collaborations. This has the benefit of progressing my research, but also keeps me in touch with friends and colleagues around the world socially.
2. Reach out to connections about starting new projects. Similar to 1 there is also a social side to this.
3. Organise Zoom 'coffee' meetings with other faculty members (one-on-one or as a group). In particular other faculty at a similar career stage. Many people feel the same way as you, sometimes all it takes is someone to break the ice.
4. Get involved in non-university social activities. Depending on the pandemic situation where you are some in-person activities may be possible (for example outdoor team sports are allowed where I am). In my opinion this is a good idea even in non-pandemic times in order to have an escape from work.
Hopefully we will all be out of this soon!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Loneliness for new faculty is definitely a problem, even in non-pandemic times. Students/Postdocs/reserach fellows often have research groups or cohorts that provide a ready made professional circle that isn't present when you start as a new faculty. To make matters worse, you will often have had to move a new city/country.
Are there other new PIs at your place? Perhaps you could reach out to them? I'd start by approaching them individually for a Zoom coffee. Perhaps not even in your department, but in related ones. You don't need an excuse beyond "lets get to know each other and each other's work". We have a group of young PIs here that have been key to my development - people who've join the dept in the last 10 years. Mostly we drink together, but also we science together occasionally even now (via zoom).
You say that you feel a bit out on a limb in your dept. How about creating a trans-campus seminar series or journal club or discussion group on some topic connected to your work? Or a group especially for new faculty in any department of the institution.
Finally there are dedicated online communities for new faculty. [New PI slack](https://newpislack.wordpress.com/) is an online community for new PIs, open to any new faculty member anywhere in the world, but I think the members are heavily enriched for North American and Biomedical science. There is also NewPI\_UK that is UK focused more on the UK academic system where people worry about different things (e.g. there is no tenure in the UK, our grant system is much more project focused rather than program focused etc). I suspect there are others.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: There are two aspects to "making connections": professional and personal.
First, a few words about professional connections. If you are the only person in your subfield at this place then most of your connections are normally found elsewhere, say through conferences and such. But you can also develop a side interest in a related field that is more widely represented at your place. One with an ongoing seminar series might be best.
But the focus here is on personal, local, contacts. Assuming that you don't want to work *all* the time, which is unhealthy in any case, look for some activities and interests that you share with others, even with grad students in a large place. When I was a doctoral student at a large university, a few of us were very interested in cycling, normally 50 miles or so a couple of times a week. Most of the group were young faculty. The fact that it was aerobic was an additional point in its favor as there is nothing better to clear the mind than a good workout (yes, debatable). Some of us played paddleball/racketball/handball occasionally. I usually lost. Some of this may not be possible in pandemic times. But running/jogging in a widely separated group should be safe enough and is healthy.
You can even walk and talk with proper separation. The talk could be professional or not. Commiserate with your peers about how badly your favorite sports team is doing.
The grad students, along with spouses, organized a pickup softball game once a week. Again, faculty were welcome.
But there may be opportunities for museums or music, especially if we emerge from the pandemic. Book discussion clubs. Interdepartmental things might be possible. Look for common interests. Or even spend a bit of effort to expand your own interests.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: In our company we have started to create "coffee break" video sessions which are explicitly not about work. Most are once or twice a week; and span different organizational boundaries (e.g., mostly on the team level, sometimes more orthogonal to that).
Maybe you can encourage such a voluntary coffee break in your group as well. I would specifically not make it something outside the regular times of work, but smack in the middle. Think of it like the time when you accidentally meet people at the coffee machine. Use the time to talk about anything you would do to socialize.
Also, if you have a common text chat infrastructure, just use that to actively do private or group chats with whoever you can think of. I.e., if you have the feeling that someone mentions something that bothers them in one of your meetings, just follow up on that ("I noticed ... are you OK?"). You don't want to be creepy, but maybe something develops from that.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: There are already many good answers specific to the academic environment. I just thought I'd add my two cents as an expat.
I moved to a different country 8 years ago and struggled much with the same issues you describe, though I had the advantage of being a student at the time and not having a global pandemic going on. Coincidentally, this country is rated as one of the hardest places to make friends in, I found out later. My problem was people were friendly but it was difficult to make a genuine connection because most people were local and already had all the friends they needed. Yes, it sounds silly. Yes, it was completely true. The friend saturation curve is real and the older you get the more likely the people you meet are already at their desired maximum friend capacity. I know you just moved to a different city instead of out of country, but I think the same situation applies.
**The solution I've found: Find the other foreigners/non-locals.**
Those people are also lonely and they'd love to be friends with you! You just need to find them. If the city is large enough there are bound to be facebook/social network groups for folk new in town, whether they be from abroad or not. Your university might have some sort of international office. You could try to start a zoom coffee club/ Friday beer at your work place or find out if there is one. Or join some interest group, sports club ect. It's good to be friendly at work but there is no need to limit your social contacts to the work environment.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: Whereas I agree with the answer of username_1, I do think that we have lost the culture of welcoming new members to our working groups.
This might have different reasons.
At first, science and academia tend to build an environment, in which everybody is under pressure to produce some results. And in general, this is not an easy task. Also, it is easy to identify ourselves with the outcoming and the progress of our work, as we usually work a major amount of time on our own to gain those reuslts. I know it from myself: When things do not work out that well in my research I tend to focus a lot on it and I may also become rather unsocial.
Nevertheless, I think this is neither good nor normal. We all should feel responsible to give newcomers a warm welcome. Even if (or maybe especially because) our experience was different when we came to the insitute, university, etc.
My experience is that two crucial points correspond to the achievement of a successful integration process.
1.) **The team leader:** He or she has to form a team, where everyone feels respected and well esteemed. If this is met, I have no problems to welcome other people - as there is nothing that I can lose from somebody entering new in our group.
2.) **The institution** has to set up an environment, where it is simple for people to meet, that didn't know each other before.
I noticed that at universities the rôles are sometimes not well organized. The administration of the university might be one reason, why you are here, but they live (obviously) in a completely different world.
The professor might be another reason why you are here, but he or she is busy and trusts the students, that they will welcome you.
Whereas the students either are locals and then often do not have the motivation or the means to integrate people from elsewhere (as they never made a similar experience or they have reached a saturation level of friendships as pointed out by username_7). Or they are not locals and may experience the same issues like you.
Both of the points above cannot really be changed by you.
But what you can change is the way how you treat this situation. There are many other people facing the problem as you, and this is a good starting point (as many other posts already made a lot of suggestions here).
And giving other new members in your group later on a warm welcome might be an even better one.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/07
| 6,234
| 22,982
|
<issue_start>username_0: I wrote the following email to a professor (I've removed any personal or specific details):
>
> Dear Prof. **<NAME>**,
>
>
> Hope this email finds you well.
>
>
> I am **Name**, an undergraduate in the mathematics department.
>
>
> I write to enquire about **Course code - Course name** being offered in fall semester. What can I expect from the course content and what are the prerequisites? Would it be along the lines of **Name of a Book**?
>
>
> **One sentence describing previous courses I've taken**
>
>
> Looking forward to hearing from you soon. Thanks for your time!
>
>
> Best,
>
>
> **Name**
>
> **Department**
>
> **Institution**
>
>
>
The subject line was:
>
> About **Course Name** next Fall Semester
>
>
>
I thought this email is perfectly fine, and it's how I generally write to professors. To my shock and surprise, I got the following response:
>
> I am sure very soon you will be writing many more official emails, so you must know how to address them appropriately. You may see course content on the department webpage.
> **Initials**
>
>
>
Could someone help me figure out **(i) how to respond to this**, and **(ii) what went wrong** so I can avoid it in future emails (to any professor in general)? Thus far, no professor has pointed out so explicitly that something is wrong with the language of my email - so I'm in a state of great confusion right now.
---
Additional details:
1. I haven't interacted with this professor before, so this was my first email to them.
2. It seems I was at fault for not checking the course content on the department webpage before writing this email. However, that page has not been updated in years and I just wanted to make sure the content is still the same. Lastly, I think this wouldn't have made them feel that I *addressed them inappropriately* - since that has more to do with email etiquette than the content of the email.
---
**Follow-up question:**
I'm thinking of apologizing and explicitly asking how I can improve my email's language: "Thank you for your reply, and sorry for the seemingly inappropriate language of my email. I would be grateful if you could kindly pinpoint what part of the email was inappropriately written, so I can be more careful in all future communication."
Would this be a good idea? I read somewhere on this very site that it's never impolite to ask how to be polite.<issue_comment>username_1: General rule: be concise.
1. Show you did some efforts, next time mention in the email "I have seen that the course page has not been updated in years and I was wondering if it still actual" but only if you feel the course is outdated;
2. You will be following his/her course, why should he/she care about the previous courses you attended?
I have a general question: why did you write the professor, what is your goal?
I have the feeling you would like to build a connection with this professor. There is nothing wrong, but don't be impatient, wait until the course *started*.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Another thing that is slightly unusual (and possibly may considered inappropriate by someone) is the signature. In my experience, usually you don't sign your e-mails "Name - Department - Institution" unless you *work* there. Being a student does not earn you that right.
That said, I agree with the others that the mail is not particularly inappropriate or noteworthy.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Since no-one here is the teacher in question, it is difficult to know exactly what they meant. The only way to be sure is to ask them, but given your initial contact with this person, that is probably a bad idea. If the person really meant that you were wrong when *addressing* the mail (and were correct), I can see only one possibility:
* The person is not a professor, but a lecturer/teaching assistant/PhD student/...
To berate a student over this is a bit nit-picky in my opinion, but it might be caused by an underlying annoyance, such as:
* You can read about the content, including answers to the questions you asked, on the course web-page, where the teachers' correct title might also be displayed.
Honestly, it can be quite annoying to receive emails with questions which could have easily be answered if the person asking the question had bothered to look. I am not saying that is is definitely the case, as I have not seen the course web-site, but it might be.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: **Your language isn't the problem, your email is well-written, but you've seemingly wasted the professor's time. You could have looked up the information**, as they have explained: *You may see course content on the department webpage.*
Comments suggest I'm ignoring the professor's words:
>
> you must know how to address them appropriately
>
>
>
The word *address* can mean *speak to*, perhaps *write*, in this instance. I believe the professor is annoyed that you've written to them and you should have done your own research first. An appropriately written email would ask a specific question beyond what's online.
Given you've seemingly annoyed the professor, I suggest you don't respond.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_5: Your email is impeccably written. If I compare it to the emails I receive from my students, it would fall in the 99th percentile in terms of email etiquette, grammar, formatting, and including the information relevant to the question you are asking.
Your email also compares very favorably with the professor’s reply, which violates several standard rules of email etiquette. Seems to be a case of the pot calling the kettle black if you ask my opinion.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_6: The email is very well written. Do verify that the name is not misspelt; some take great offence to this. Additionally, please check if the website offers any details on communication, I.e. TAs to contact etc.
If there are any guidelines there, do follow them.
A lot of professors (especially at the type of institute I infer you are at) simply don't respond to these mails due to time constraints. This may or may not be justified, but it is the prevalent culture. The class strength could also be a consideration here.
Finally, I would strongly recommend that you don't respond with anything besides thanks. Close out this communication and don't worry about any adverse effects, most likely the person won't remember this after a few days. This is rather culture-specific advice, which wouldn't apply in other settings.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: First, no reply is needed and will probably result in another push back.
But the only problem I see, other than possible insensitivity by the professor, is that, while one letter might be fine, if it is short, it takes time to read (with your personal details) and more time to answer. Imagine being on the other end and getting 30 of these (300?). What if yours was the 15th such mail? This why course websites exist. They are supposed to provide the information you ask for and depend on students reading and interpreting them in their own situation. Had you targeted some missing piece of information there, and asked about that, then the professor owes you some explanation.
The book(s) listed and syllabus, even if only in outline, should be enough to answer your questions. A personal reply shouldn't be needed.
But, it would probably be a mistake to reply to the professor's email. At least nothing more than "Sorry. I'll re-read the website".
If there is no course website at all, then a query, or maybe complaint, to the department might be in order. But that doesn't seem to be the case here, given the reply.
It would be wise to "step gingerly" around this prof for a while, however, in case they are just a jerk.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: There is nothing inappropriate (that anyone can see here) in the way that you've written your email. The response from the professor suggests that they're some combination of (a) incredibly time-constrained, (b) sloppy and unclear in how they communicate, and (c) a jerk.
* It's possible (as username_4 suggests) that the essential "offense" in their eyes was to ask about things available in the online site. If so, then their first sentence was a sloppy and mostly mindless piece of aggression that doesn't really mean what it says.
* The curtness, snarkiness, and level of aggression communicates that they don't like interacting with students by email, do not want to spend time on it, and want such querents to go away and not bother them.
* Given the above, writing them again and asking for more time to be spent on even smaller minutiae -- like revisiting what they meant in a hastily-written throwaway email, and to spend even more time parsing the grammar of the original student email that they've already expressed contempt for handling -- is only likely to make things worse.
I suggest that you accept this line of inquiry as not useful and likely to produce only further confusion and frustration on both sides. Do not email them again on this matter. If you must email them again in the future, on some different matter, make it as brief as you possibly can (shorter than your original email), and try to pose a question that can be given a very short, clear-cut answer.
I'll say that the *only* thing the professor really got right there was in accurately predicting your next instinct would be that, "very soon you will be writing many more official emails", and to be aggravated-in-advance by that prognostication. Resist the temptation to fully prove them right!
Also, consider asking around if this professor is good to interact with (maybe people you know or a ratings website). If their course is not required, then you may be getting a signal that they're just not a good professor.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_9: Suggestions have been made that the Professor's problem might be grammatical (some nit with your opening?) or formal (he prefers to be referred some other way, a different title or something?)
But what if he is giving technical advice? That is, perhaps he is referring to emails in particular, since he mentions them.
Note that emails in email software are often displayed in some form like:
`<NAME>`
Emails must also have a subject line, which should be relevant.
* **What was the subject line of the email, if any?**
* **Was the display-name that you used, if any, correct for him?** While the "display name" part is how it's saved in your address-book, is purely cosmetic and does not help the email reach he correct destination, if it exists, **it is visible to the recipient**, and should typically represent the same person as the email address itself. We would probably expect a professor to be put out by: `Asshole Prof`
* **Was the email address you used his correct, direct email address?** Not a group email or some department, but direct to him personally? We probably wouldn't expect that `<EMAIL>` would reach the correct professor unless someone in the admissions dept was kind enough to look up his email for you and forward the email.
* **Does the subject line of his reply contain "Fw:" or "Fwd:"?** If so, this too suggests it had to be forwarded to him from wherever you incorrectly addressed it.
* **If he included your original mail and/or headers, do they show signs of being forwarded**, perhaps even with commentary from the forwarder?
* **Check for further comment or instruction written inline in the included text** if he did include a version of your original email.
* **Is your own email address appropriate?** I've even received emails about job vacancies from some very salaciously-named hotmail email addresses. It's not always a good look.
For example, if the email you have looks like this:
>
> From: <NAME>
>
>
> To: Inquiring Student
>
>
> Subject: Re: Fwd: [No Subject]
>
>
> I am sure very soon you will be writing many more official emails, so you must know how to address them appropriately. You may see course content on the department webpage.
>
>
> = B.B.
>
>
>
> >
> > From: <NAME>
> >
> >
> > To: <NAME>
> >
> >
> > Subject: Fwd: [No Subject]
> >
> >
> > I think this is probably meant for you, Bill? Either it's for you, about Math 102, you, or <NAME>, teaching Math 103. They seem confused - maybe just point them to the web page? Thanks!
> >
> >
> > <NAME>, Admissions Secretary,
> >
> >
> > Example University.
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > To: That One Math Guy
> > >
> > >
> > > From: Mr BoobMan
> > >
> > >
> > > Subject: [No Subject]
> > >
> > >
> > > Dear <NAME>, ***[Actually, it's Dr Bloggs]***
> > >
> > >
> > > Hope this email finds you well.
> > >
> > >
> > > I am Epsilon, an undergraduate in the mathematics department.
> > >
> > >
> > > I write to enquire about MATH 102 - More Math, ***[You probably mean Math 103 - Yet More Math? I see you've already taken my Math 102 course]*** being offered in fall semester. What can I expect from the course content and what are the prerequisites? Would it be along the lines of "Math 103 by <NAME>"?
> > >
> > >
> > > I've previously taken Math 101 and Math 102.
> > >
> > >
> > > Looking forward to hearing from you soon. Thanks for your time!
> > >
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > >
> > > Epsilon Q Emperor, Esq.
> > >
> > >
> > > Math Dept
> > >
> > >
> > > Example U.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
... then there's a whole LOT going wrong!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_10: >
> so you must know how to address them appropriately
>
>
>
Maybe they were upset that you didn't address them as "Doctor". Doesn't justify the impolite response, but some people are sticklers about that.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: I think the email is fine, however if I need to critisise the mail, there are two formulations which would trigger me
>
> Hope this email finds you well
>
>
>
This is not only a cliche phrase used in many [Nigerian scam](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Nigerian_scam#Noun) mails which people tend to get nearly weekly (at least in the past). It can also be seen as a greeting between peers. I mean, it’s probably different in different cultures/regions, and I would probably not use it with people who are sensitive. Having said that, it is a very nice thing to start an email with a pleasantry.
>
> What can I expect from the course content
>
>
>
Here is a similar issue. „Expect“ is a perfectly fine word, but it does have the connotation of „prove to me it’s worth my time“.
So if the professor is stressed out, triggered by the greeting and they feel students should stick to reading the course syllabus (especially for lower years in some universities it’s unusual to have any contact with professors before a course) this might have triggered them to their response.
The „address appropriately“ may not refer to salutation or title, but refers to routing - the fact that it should be sent to student help or a tutor instead of the professor (again, just guessing this might be different for other universities).
Having said that, I would understand the „sure very soon“ meansm: He understands and does not feel offended, and I would not follow up on this matter.
You need to find out how distant/approachable the teachers in your organisation are, as this can vary widely. Rude answers like this one will set the tone.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_12: * I would not reply to the answer of the professor, which I find dismissive; I agree with the other answers until this moment. It seems to me that the professor shows zero interest in making that subject interesting for students. Maybe they don't care about the number of the students enrolled on it. Maybe the course content isn't worth signing up for.
* A better answer would be "I've checked the course webpage and it reflects the current requirements. It's similar to that book. You're welcome to join."
* Regarding your email, I think you can make it shorter and you can specifically cite the course expectations/content on their webpage that you wonder about.
* If you write in an email "thank you for your time", you are implying that they are doing you a favor by using their time resources to answer your question or helping you with something. Maybe they don't consider this as an opportunity that would benefit them in the long-run, but just as a waste of time.
* Maybe in your email you have used an excess of polite clichés.
* If you want you could ask one of your colleagues or one of us to ask the question to the professor in a new email to get a better answer. Or send the question to another responsible for the course.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_13: You didn't break any rule but you may find the professor not well. I suppose the professor's work consists of:
* Teaching undergrads (preparing the course, preparing and avaluating test)
* Supervising PhDs
* Being active researcher (filling up grant proposals, filling up reports, filling up bugets, organizing lab work, writing articles, reviewing articles)
* Being member of some in-university or in-other-university comittee
* Being an opponent to theses (reading, questioning, assessing)
Their schedule is quite full of many things and reading long email has a huge PIA (pain in the ass) score.
Let's go to your email then.
>
> Dear Prof. Last name,
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > This is perfect, unless they are not a professor.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> Hope this email finds you well.
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > Too personal and does not address the issue. Waste of time
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> I am Name, an undergraduate in the mathematics department.
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > I would not recommend introducing yourself in the very beginning of the e-mail, it is distracting from the main topic.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> I write to enquire about Course code - Course name being offered in fall semester. What can I expect from the course content and what are the prerequisites? Would it be along the lines of Name of a Book?
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > This should be the first sentence. There is all you want to ask for and it is polite and quite information dense.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> One sentence describing previous courses I've taken
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > This is not relevant to the question. You are asking for list of the prerequisities, not evaluating them.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> Looking forward to hearing from you soon. Thanks for your time!
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > Too long and pushy. "Looking forward to hearing from you" is sufficient.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > Too informal. "Yours sincerely; With kind regards", these are the proper phrases.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> Name
>
>
>
>
> Department
>
>
>
>
> Institution
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > Just Name. You are not working in the department. Maybe you can add that you are a student of the programme at your faculty.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
I think the key problem was that the professor needed to get to fourth paragraph of your e-mail to get what you are asking for. The other was that the answer is already available on the oficial webpages.
The answer was poignant and sarcastic. But the professor gave some time to answer you. If you asked such question on some forum, the answer would be quite rude and even lacking basic advice. The professor
* Pointed you where to look for the answer.
* Pointed you to look for more effective approaches to written communcation
* Gave you a hint that you should polish your witing style (address the e-mail) and change your way how to get information (address the issue). not only from them.
I can see the hidden message to be "Look, kid, I am not your mom to answer all your questions 'Mommy, where is my [something]?'".
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_14: A Professor is not a demi-god (or full one). He is human, fallible, and as with humans you get all kinds of cases on the "Am I an Asshole Or Not?"
In your case, he hit the mark "Yes, you are - a flamboyant one". With flying colors.
To answer your question:
* your email was perfect, much better than the *"hello, pls snd info on crse for Fri 4. Thx J"* you sometimes get. Keep that level of communication, it will be really useful in the future.
* his answer was the one of someone so full of himself that he forgot why he is in Academia in the first place. Just mentally flip your middle finger and move along.
It really should not bother you.
EDIT: who would have thought that there is actually [a site for that](https://assholesatheory.com/quiz/quiz-are-you-an-asshole/)? Ah, Internet...
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_15: I said part of this in a comment upthread, but in the light of the reworded question, it becomes an answer.
There is a way one could construe the process such that the professor's response is not negative at all.
Step 1: the professor misunderstands "hope this email finds you well" as "hope this email reaches you".
Step 2: the professor now believes that the student has expressed doubt about whether the student has formatted the e-mail address correctly.
Step 3: the professor now wants to reassure the student that "yes, at this stage of your career, of course you're routinely formatting e-mail addresses correctly".
Step 4: the professor expresses this sentiment in the very awkward but well-intentioned form "I am sure very soon you will be writing many more official emails, so you must know how to address them appropriately"
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_16: The one thing other good answers here have not touched on is this :
>
> What can I expect from the course content
>
>
>
This is an awfully open-ended question. The professor can probably summarize the course in ten different ways for ten different audiences - which type of answer are you looking for, exactly?
This forces them to *guess* what you're interested in knowing, or otherwise to cover everything you *might have meant*, which is a tall order of a person as exceptionally busy as a university professor, perhaps only to find that you'll email back with *even more questions* because they didn't correctly guess what you failed to communicate in the first place.
So, while the window-dressing of your letter was superficially exceptionally polite, the content of your *ask* was really quite lazy and thoughtless. This professor likely found that the request, in and of itself, was offensive - not because of *how* it was stated, but because of its *content*.
Asking your professor to summarize rudimentary syllabus information is a bit like treating them like a phone book. It's an enormous waste of their time. You wouldn't call the CEO of a mobile phone company to ask about rate plans - same thing here.
Upvotes: 4
|
2021/04/07
| 910
| 3,915
|
<issue_start>username_0: ***Scholarship and public benefit:***
As a social science PhD student I frequently encounter discussions about the need for "public scholarship" in the discipline. Often these discussions highlight the importance of publishing in non-academic forums that can benefit the public. My understanding is that such forums might include more traditional online media but the focus is usually on freely available and accessible works published, for example, on institutional or self-hosted blogs or sites like [Medium](https://medium.com/).
***The question:***
Instead of listing publicly available non-academic writing on a CV among traditional publications, it seems reasonable to include it elsewhere, e.g. with other volunteer work. Would you find it justifiable if, for example, a student of economics or mathematics or linguistics who regularly contributed to related SE sites listed that contribution on a CV (under volunteer work or elsewhere) as an example of scholarly work with a public benefit? Or perhaps the more relevant question: would you anticipate that colleagues who are not familiar with/frequent contributors to SE would find this a reasonable and even compelling inclusion?
***The context:***
I don't recall seeing volunteer work listed on full-length academic CVs, but I know that CVs for some grant applications have space for it. I ask this primarily because I've never been in the position of reviewing CVs for (academic) job applications or funding requests, so I don't have much of an idea what's convincing or relevant versus what comes off as BS or fluff.
***Non-duplication:***
The question I'm posing is related to [this one about SO/SE reputation](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/7552/stack-overflow-reputation-in-cv) but sufficiently different that it is not addressed by answers there. My question isn't about reputation *per se* but rather participation generally, especially in the eyes of CV reviewers who may have no idea what SE is and what "reputation" means on the site. [This question about communicating SE achievements on a CV](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1658/how-to-communicate-achievements-on-the-stackexchange-network-in-an-academic-cv-o) is also vaguely similar, but the longer answer there focuses on SE's metrics and answers unrelated to "scholarly" output (e.g. questions about working conditions, rather than answers related to the subject matter of one's discipline). I'd also note that those questions were posed 9-10 years ago, and in the intervening time there have presumably been changes in how people view the academic and professional relevance of online, non-academic publications.
What most substantially sets my question apart from others relates to its concern with framing SE contribution as *publicly available* scholarly output—in anticipation, say, of a CV reviewer who wonders, "What work have you done that's related to your research but has had a benefit for people outside the university sphere?"<issue_comment>username_1: Though it doesn't supplant scholarly work, I think public outreach and engagement are an important aspect of academia and are beneficial to list on a cv. In the past this could include public lectures and media interviews, today I can also imagine cv lines like "frequent contributor on the topic of XXX to the YYY forum" or "YYY followers of my science twitter account".
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I have argued both in my (mathematics) department and here on SE (though I can't find the posting) that substantial activity answering questions should count as service to the profession when considering tenure and promotion cases.
My son has a long list of publications in ecology and statistics. But it may well be that his postings on stats.stackexchange.com (> 100K reputation) has helped more people than have read his papers.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/07
| 962
| 4,108
|
<issue_start>username_0: Disclaimer : Please consider I'm in Europe, and this is for European funding
I've been accepted to do my PhD. I've been told in writing something along the lines of "You'll work for Prof. A doing project X for T years". My professor sent me his proposal and told me that even though it was done in 2016 he still has money for a PhD student.
**However** if I look for the project online, the funding agency stops giving funding on 2022.
So I'm worried about this divergent information (what my professor says vs what the funding agencies say) and I'm wondering whether I should ask my professor by email if he indeed has money for me to work on that project and also about how funding agencies really interpret their end date. I see this as possibly inappropriate because he already told me in writing that he can fund me for that project, and I don't want to sound like I'm questioning his word especially at this early stage.
How do funding agencies interpret their end dates? I mean, is a professor only meant to hire PhD's several years before the end date? This seems odd because one doesn't know exactly how long it'll take for a student to graduate.<issue_comment>username_1: It's common for funding to end during a prospective PhD student's expected stay, especially in places where a PhD takes 5 or more years. If grants are for about 3-5 years then this is almost a certainty. It's not unusual to get a student late in a funding cycle - maybe there wasn't an appropriate student for the role until now, maybe a prior candidate went someplace else or left early.
However, yes, it's a bit of a short window to have this funding already expiring within the next year. Sometimes there are other funding streams for a lab, sometimes there are possibilities for non-competitive extensions. You don't have enough information to know this is a problem.
All these uncertainties make it an uncomfortable but also **necessary** conversation to have. A PI should be comfortable talking about funding plans and contingencies and you should definitely ask about it. PhD programs should also have information about what they do when there are funding issues. For example, is there some department funding that can help cover a student if there is a gap?
Definitely ask your professor about funding. Avoid being accusatory and alleging any sort of misrepresentation, and just go in with questions you have: how long is funding actually secured for? What are the plans when it runs out? What happens if those plans fail?
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Definitely talk to your professor. As username_1 says, not in an accusatory tone. Just inquire.
You can say that you read that the project expires ini 2022 and you'd like to inquire what the plans are for that project or any follow-up projects. Maybe the project will get an extension (which might still not be enough to finish a PhD). Or maybe a follow-up grant is in the works? Or maybe the professor is counting on other means. However that may be, they should be counting you in for 3-4 (or even 5) years, depending on field and country.
It's normal to worry about funding and plan for the future, and it's also normal to want to know what the plans are for the continuation of a project. You might be interested in the environment you will be working in, e.g. will there be other PhD students and postdocs, etc.
I had a co-supervisor who had a student leave because he was hired for a project that would run out in 2 years and was told something along the lines of "We're sure there will be money/we can always find money somehow for the other two years" without ever being given a guarantee. He found that a bit uncertain and took a position that had 3 years of funding guaranteed.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In some countries, offers come from universities, as opposed to individual researchers, and the university guarantees the funding. You should ask other students, or the graduate chair if there is one. In any case, it's a good idea to clarify this with your supervisor.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/04/08
| 653
| 2,772
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm in my last semester of a computer science BSc and need to write my thesis. Highly competitive environment, apparently it's the norm here that BSc theses should try for a publication. In Europe. I have gotten informal (but written) confirmation from a professor that the topic I suggested is ok, they even assigned some additional mentors. But none of them is very responsive, the thesis is not formally registered yet (it's mandated by university policy that registration needs to happen quickly/before substantial work) and I'm supposed to write a proposal.
I'd like to get an idea of what the norm is for such a proposal (to tide me over while I wait for feedback on the one I wrote). I think for a good research proposal I would need to do a literature review (even if just condensed into the introduction), but that would be a substantial amount of work (read multiple dozens of papers I guess). That can't be the usual expectation (*before* starting the thesis, while applying for a topic), can it?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I have gotten informal (but written) confirmation from a professor that the topic I suggested is ok, they even assigned some additional mentors...the thesis is not formally registered yet (it's mandated by university policy that registration needs to happen quickly/before substantial work) and I'm supposed to write a proposal.
>
>
>
Write as little as possible: The professor has informally agreed that the topic is okay and has assigned their resources. The professor is satisfied. Write something, check it is okay with the professor, and submit it. The professor is unlikely (imo) to be interested in the formal requirements, they (imo) just want you to get on with the work.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Generally a good proposal will need to have a literature review (perhaps brief) to motivate the research. A bachelors thesis will not need to be as good of a proposal as one for a grant that a professor would write especially since like the other answer said, you already have approval so it seems like a formality. My undergrad thesis I did as best I could but i think i only cited 10ish papers total and only some where in the lit review part (which imo should be a motivation part not just to show you read a bunch of papers that may or may not be relevant.
So I would do as much as you’d like. It’s good practice, which is really what the undergrad thesis is about. Hard to say exactly because I don’t know exactly your schools policies.
I’ll also add that at my school the proposals were entered into a scholarship contest so there was motivation to write a good
One. I tried but I guess mine wasn’t that good because I didn’t win the contest haha.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/08
| 573
| 2,290
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am working on my first independent publication and am unsure how to report the significances of two statistical tests in one table.
My professor has recommended that I should perform two statistical significance tests for robustness and present them in my article.
So far I have only done the t-test.
(If the value is significant according to the t-test, asterisks are added indicating the significance)
But I should add the significance of the Wilcoxon test as well.
The problem is that my tables with the t-test are already big enough and I can't expand them any more.
What can I do to also report the significance of the second test in the same table?
Should I perhaps write the values in **bold** if they are also significant according to the second test?
Or does anyone have a completely different idea?
Adding columns to the table or creating a new table is out of the question.
Here you can see an example of a table:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/J6vbM.png)
Many thanks in advance!<issue_comment>username_1: Those stars (three on all but two entries) use lots of real estate and are very distracting. Footnotes for just those two would help whatever else you do.
Without the stars you might be able to report the second set of results this way:
```
xx.x (yy.z)
```
with the caption explaining the parenthetical numbers.
You can also format to make better column width choices.
Please align the columns on the decimal points.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: **Use a different symbol.**
You're reporting your t-test p-values using asterisks, just use crosses or daggers or any other symbol to denote the Wilcoxon p-value. Alternatively, just list the p-value itself in the table - the way it's formatted, it would actually occupy *less space* than the asterisks. I'd also recommend cleaning up the table a bit - there's not really any reason to include the single asterisk in the legend since it's not used anywhere in the table (although you might want to keep it if some Wilcoxon p-values are between 0.1 and 0.05). You can also tighten the spacing between the asterisks, as they currently draw more focus than the values themselves, and take up a lot of space.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/08
| 1,209
| 5,126
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm considering taking a postdoc after 5 years as an analytical chemist in the pharma industry (small molecule). This may seem backwards and counter-productive due to the massive pay cut but here's my reasoning:
* I am extremely unhappy in my current role; I've been pigeon-holed into developing methods for a rather
niche technique that isn't versatile and incredibly uninteresting.
I've also been pushed into pure project management and doing little
to no science.
* When searching and interviewing for roles I want, it has been
highlighted that, while I have industry experience, I am not
experienced enough in mass spectrometry or large molecule work, which
I do not have the opportunity to train at my current job. I've been
searching for 6 months now with several interviews that all came back
with the same feedback about my lack of mass spectrometry or biomolecule experience.
* A postdoc position is likely available to me through my personal
network and it would be an intensive way to train in mass spectrometry and large
molecule analysis (as well as some data science and bioinformatics). There is a grad student who currently handles most of the technical aspects of the instrumentation and sample prep (he'll be my immediate mentor) while the PI is more on the bioinformatics and publication side of things. I will be asked to help conduct analysis, maintain the instruments, and write papers (the PI has mountains of data but no time or desire to write the papers).
* My logic is that, with 2 years of focused mass spectrometry training and 5 years in
industry, I would be a more attractive candidate and have more
options in terms of where I might land a job (different industries,
possible academic facilities staff, or national labs staff). I would also have materials for presentation that highlight my competency whereas right now, I only have my PhD work (in a different technique) and a generic industry presentation (cannot use company data so I can only give lectures on general topics in pharma).
* My long term goal is to shift my expertise to mass spectrometry and either join a national lab, core facility, or build up an analytical department at a startup. Mass spectrometry is incredibly versatile and is a critical hard skill in pharma, biotech, food science, environmental, and other key industries.
Am I thinking about this correctly? Or am I making a mistake be treating the postdoc as a training opportunity and stepping stone?<issue_comment>username_1: My Bayesian assessment is "bad idea". You may get others who just want to reassure you, but I feel compelled to caution you.
Move to another company somehow or push your bosses into a new assignment.
If you're really stuck in your role, maybe consider an MBA. (If you can get into a top 10 school...doesn't make sense to self-fund an MBA with time off otherwise.) You might hate that even more since it is not "science". But it is school and training and sort of a break. I saw a lot of people do that with their careers at the 5 year mark and it really worked well for them to advance themselves and sort of have a clean break from the previous company. When you interview out of MBA school, you're mostly seen as an MBA and the previous work time is just seasoning, not key. Also, just emotionally, a lot of people at that 5 year mark in industry sort of feel like taking a couple years "off" and being back in school.
Don't do the post doc. It's too backwards on age, $$, respect, everything. And you may not even get the training you want. It's a mill out there and postdocs are not the customers, are very junior itinerant journeymen.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Sorry, this doesn't seem to be a good idea, especially considering some of the more subtle points you've shared. In general taking post-docs after 5-6 years need not be a bad thing, but people would generally shoot for a prestigious fellowship, not something through personal contacts.
I also want to recommend that you take this just because of how unhappy the current role makes you, but considering your situation I can't. You're in that tricky (not uncommon) position where your PhD, current role and future aspirations are in different fields. As such, you should be very wary about letting go of what you have for something that you potentially may get. There is every chance that the grass appears greener on the mass spectrometry side, and after being trained on it (by a grad student!), you may find that there are difficulties and unpleasant challenges that you aren't currently aware of.
You seem to move towards mass spectrometry in the long term, and I get the uneasy feeling that you're jumping onto the bandwagon without enough thought. Primarily because if you really want to make a big switch, getting a nameless (i.e. without a fellowship) postdoc and being trained by a grad student (and neither earning certification nor being under the wing of an experienced academic) doesn't sound wise.
There's every possibility that I'm assuming too much, so please use your discretion and don't be hasty.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/08
| 390
| 1,646
|
<issue_start>username_0: I’m stuck in my research (I'm a PhD student) with a task/question that neither I nor my advisor are knowledgeable about (we are looking for vendors of a niche item and have had very little success in that). I have found a group on campus that I think may use this tech (based on their published research) and I want to reach out to a grad student there that I think may know where they get this tech from or who makes it for them.
Would it be inappropriate to email them just to ask this question? It isn’t really a scientific question so I don’t want it to come across in a bad way.<issue_comment>username_1: Nope, this would be totally appropriate.
If they don't respond, your advisor could escalate to their advisor.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Under recent circumstances (Covid lockdown) the e-mail asking for either collaboration or details of their equipment is sufficient. Just phrase it well. You don't need to hesitate to ask the professor or department head and other officials.
Answering this question two years earlier (no plague) I would recommend you going to their department and asking face to face. Either the students or professor/officials.
Think of it like a conference - even there the students are talking to the professors, how else the research seniors can communicate their knowledge to the younger ones?
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I agree with the other answers that this is entirely appropriate. If reaching out to this one group doesn't yield results, it may be useful to cast a wider net by using a departmental (or similar) mailing list.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/08
| 1,414
| 4,920
|
<issue_start>username_0: My PI helps to modify my thesis. He keeps changing the degree mark '°' to '0' as the superscript in a degree centigrade mark. He also changes every 'in the phase' to 'at the phase'.
As I searched, superscript 0 was used when initially creating the degree mark. But now ° is used in all the degree mark. 'Phase' means a period of time and in most paper and textbooks, people use 'in the phase'.
I'm confused about these changes. Is the '°' wrong, or 'in the phase' wrong? What do you use in the paper/thesis writing?
---
An example of using '°' and 'phase' in my thesis:
'The cells cultured at 30 °C for 3 days were in the stationary phase.' 'Stationary phase' is one of the cell-growth phases that range from several hours to several days.
Thanks to @Houska for your vision and practical suggestions <3
Thanks to @AndreasRejbrand for correcting the degree sign to be 'U+00B0: DEGREE SIGN'. I have changed the sign in the title and body. In my PI's comments, he highlighted my degree sign (that I added through 'Symbols' in MS Word) and commented 'Should be a zero in superscript! Change all the rest.' So I believe he means using a zero.
---
PS. My PI is a Chinese who has been working in the UK for 20 years. His spoken English is fine, but sometimes he mixes up "she" and "he", or forgets to add 's' in a verb with the third person.<issue_comment>username_1: There's a single Unicode character "℃" which could save you having to think about all this.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: For the International System of Units, the units of measurements are defined by the [SI brochure](https://www.bipm.org/utils/common/pdf/si-brochure/SI-Brochure-9-EN.pdf). For the degree, unit of plane angle, and the degree Celsius, unit of Celsius temperature, the SI brochure [at p. 133](https://www.bipm.org/utils/common/pdf/si-brochure/SI-Brochure-9-EN.pdf#page=19) and [at p. 149](https://www.bipm.org/utils/common/pdf/si-brochure/SI-Brochure-9-EN.pdf#page=35) uses a circle and not a zero.
However, at [table 8](https://www.bipm.org/utils/common/pdf/si-brochure/SI-Brochure-9-EN.pdf#page=31), the circle is rendered with an "o" (probably they didn't have the circle in that font). In any case, no zero.
You can refer your professor to that document. Further, if you're using LaTeX, you can use the `siunitx` package and write the angles with the command `\ang` and Celsius temperatures with the command `\SI{23}{\celsius}` (example with 23 °C). From the [package documentation](https://texdoc.org/serve/siunitx/0), you can see that also in this case the degree symbol is a circle.
If they still insist, let it go.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: As you (presumably) continue down the academic career path, you will be buffeted by all sorts of "helpful suggestions" that span the range from ignorable noise to microbullying by those in positions of authority over you. Editors wanting picky little formatting edits, some good some bad. Reviewers with weird comments. Granting agencies and university bureaucrats wanting you to fit something to their format or structure even though it makes no sense in the context.
**Choose your battles.** Let people "win" on the small stuff if it greases the wheels to get the real help and support you need.
Fighting over degree symbols is pretty certain to not be a battle worth fighting. If your P.I., your University thesis office, or a journal publisher wants it some specific way, just do it. And be prepared to revert back if someone else with higher positional authority wants it differently (e.g. the publisher of your accepted paper trumps your PI).
As to your "phase" question, I'm a bit confused about it. But apply the same logic. Maybe it's sufficiently wrong or jarring to insist on doing it right, maybe it's not worth the bother. And maybe you can just smilingly say, "no, I'm sure this is right. If you want, I'll double check."
Finally, recognize that **someone's pencilled edits on a manuscript may not mean "I insist on this other way" but "I'd do it this way, use your judgment". So maybe you can just say, "thank you for the comments" and not do it.**
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: **Yes**, it is completely wrong to use ˚ as a degree sign.
The reason is that ˚ is U+02DA: RING ABOVE. It is not at all a degree sign; instead, it is (semantically) the ring above the A in Å.
The correct character is °, U+00B0: DEGREE SIGN.
This is almost the first time I have seen someone misuse U+02DA: RING ABOVE as the degree sign.
However, it is *very common* that people misuse the masculine [ordinal indicator](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordinal_indicator#Masculine), º, U+00BA: MASCULINE ORDINAL INDICATOR as a degree sign, especially in fonts in which it is not underlined. The ordinal indicator is used in some languages to indicate ordinal numbers, e.g. *1º* for *primo* in Italian.
Upvotes: 4
|
2021/04/08
| 810
| 3,451
|
<issue_start>username_0: Academic job applications often require one to submit a few recent papers in the application. I have been a postdoc for the past couple of years and my role has primarily been advising: coming up with research problems for the PhD students and guiding/helping them to write a good research paper. As such many of my recent and current papers have a student as the first author, with me as the second author (or third author in the event that I am advising two students on the project).
Is it okay to submit some of these papers as part of my application? Or will it look bad since I am not the first author?<issue_comment>username_1: Every paper published by a reputable publisher is a good paper and should be on the CV. Advising students who rightly have first authorship is also a good thing. In some fields, advisors aren't co-authors no matter the input on student papers.
It think it a mistake to leave such things off of the CV. In fact, somewhere in your application materials you might want to explain that you were advisor to the other author(s) on the papers. Probably not in the CV itself, but a statement of purpose for an academic job will benefit from indicating a willingness and history of advancing student research and careers.
I assume you know your own field's standards, but in some, people assume that the last author did the work and the others were along for the ride. I dislike that sort of thing, actually. But a faculty position in most places is more than just a heads-down-don't-bother-me researcher.
---
Edited to add. Including the papers themselves as separate from CV references is a bit different. The first suggestion is to ask first. The second, in the absence of guidance, would be to include a mixture, with mostly first author papers, but a sample of the others. But an explanation of the situation on the latter should be fine.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If I were in your situation, I would just show the ones from grad school that were first author. You should have a few from the last year or two of the degree and they may have even come out after you left.
I would not enclose the non-FA papers. Don't open that box. (But of course show them on your CV, since that has everything.)
And I would not have spent a postdoc, not getting recent first author papers. As you can see they would be desirable, now.
Of course, if you get to an interview and are asked about it, have a practiced poised answer ready. [Standard interview prep for any job interview is to write out 2-3 sentence canned answers for anticipated questions. Especially important for weak areas, since you just want to give a forthright but short answer and move on. And if you think about it ahead of time, this works much better.] But don't enclose as select examples, work where you were not FA, if at all possible.
When they ask for select papers to attach, they probably just mean a couple. Won't read more than that. So use selection and pick the best ones. And those are not going to be second author ones if first author ones are available. In other words, when they ask for your recent work, there are two conditions: "your" and "recent". And (I assert) "your" is the more fundamental, important criterion.
And of course if you don't have any FA papers even from grad school, enclose what you have. It's not ideal. But it's what you got. So just plow ahead.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2021/04/08
| 857
| 3,497
|
<issue_start>username_0: I graduated from DRCongo, and here we still use the old Belgian system.
I did the Polytechnic, and my diploma is called license en `Polytechnique Option Genie Electrique et Informatique`.
Basically, we spend one year in pre-polytechnic class, the 3 years of grade and by the end we get a diploma de grade for the first cycle and then we spend another 2 years to get the so-called diploma de Licence en Polytechnic. Basically here we spend 6 years at Uni to get that diploma.
Now that I am applying for UK universities I don't know how my degree translates in the UK educational system.
Should I call it a Master degree or a 2nd Cycle Bachelor Degree?<issue_comment>username_1: Every paper published by a reputable publisher is a good paper and should be on the CV. Advising students who rightly have first authorship is also a good thing. In some fields, advisors aren't co-authors no matter the input on student papers.
It think it a mistake to leave such things off of the CV. In fact, somewhere in your application materials you might want to explain that you were advisor to the other author(s) on the papers. Probably not in the CV itself, but a statement of purpose for an academic job will benefit from indicating a willingness and history of advancing student research and careers.
I assume you know your own field's standards, but in some, people assume that the last author did the work and the others were along for the ride. I dislike that sort of thing, actually. But a faculty position in most places is more than just a heads-down-don't-bother-me researcher.
---
Edited to add. Including the papers themselves as separate from CV references is a bit different. The first suggestion is to ask first. The second, in the absence of guidance, would be to include a mixture, with mostly first author papers, but a sample of the others. But an explanation of the situation on the latter should be fine.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If I were in your situation, I would just show the ones from grad school that were first author. You should have a few from the last year or two of the degree and they may have even come out after you left.
I would not enclose the non-FA papers. Don't open that box. (But of course show them on your CV, since that has everything.)
And I would not have spent a postdoc, not getting recent first author papers. As you can see they would be desirable, now.
Of course, if you get to an interview and are asked about it, have a practiced poised answer ready. [Standard interview prep for any job interview is to write out 2-3 sentence canned answers for anticipated questions. Especially important for weak areas, since you just want to give a forthright but short answer and move on. And if you think about it ahead of time, this works much better.] But don't enclose as select examples, work where you were not FA, if at all possible.
When they ask for select papers to attach, they probably just mean a couple. Won't read more than that. So use selection and pick the best ones. And those are not going to be second author ones if first author ones are available. In other words, when they ask for your recent work, there are two conditions: "your" and "recent". And (I assert) "your" is the more fundamental, important criterion.
And of course if you don't have any FA papers even from grad school, enclose what you have. It's not ideal. But it's what you got. So just plow ahead.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2021/04/09
| 459
| 2,028
|
<issue_start>username_0: It is generalized that journal publications are normally more complete research papers than those in conference proceedings. However, when applying for a job in the industry, most companies (e.g. Facebook) ask for first-authored publications at peer-reviewed conferences (e.g. ICRA, RSS, IROS, or similar).
Why is this? Are these top conferences more valuable than top journals like Nature or Science from an industrial standpoint? Why could this be?<issue_comment>username_1: It depends on what field you are in and the types of jobs you are looking at. In computer science, conferences are typically valued more than journals, although this doesn't necessarily mean the quality of the papers at conferences are better than journals. A popular computer science department ranking site, [CSRankings](http://csrankings.org/#/index?all&us), does their rankings by top conferences, where the three you list are used in the Robotics area.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Speaking from the perspective of a roboticist with publications in the conferences you listed and in Science:
Hiring for industry jobs (especially at junior levels) is going to be focused on finding employees who can use and modify existing robotics paradigms to achieve company goals. Conference papers (especially at the venues you name) provide useful evidence of this ability. They are also often the result of a short, focused piece of effort, which matches desired industry workflows on projects.
In contrast, a robotics paper that makes it into Science is likely to either be a description of a high-level principle arrived at through long academic study, or to report a new phenomenon that can be incorporated into future robots, but are not at a tech-readiness level to be incorporated into products or services. Industry interest in these kinds of results is limited mostly to companies that are making senior-level hires and/or are big enough to be running their own research departments.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2021/04/09
| 313
| 1,334
|
<issue_start>username_0: In February 2021, my paper was accepted and the proof reading process started immediately. I have returned the corrections in begin of March, but after that no sign of communication. I send 3 emails to the Production editor, without any luck. How do you recommend to continue?
---
Finally they replied and told me that they have not received my edits through the online proofing system. I have submitted everything four times and nothing is received by the other end. It is over a month since the proofreading process began and concerns only 9 edits!!! I talked with the eproofing service, but the result was the same. What do you suggest me to do? –<issue_comment>username_1: Try a different email. It could be that the production editor resigned, is on leave, has been reassigned, etc. You could try the journal email, if there is one, or the publisher email, or even the editor-in-chief.
Worst case scenario, phone the publisher.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: It's likely (or perhaps only possible) that the production staff has seen your corrections, used them and taken the next steps. I don't think I've ever heard from a journal between the time I returned proofs and the article appeared.
So not to worry. You might wait a while, then ask the editor when the paper will appear.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/04/09
| 2,972
| 12,648
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am fairly new to academic conferences. I am registered to attend (*not* present at) a mathematics conference (graph theory, to be specific) in about a week and a half; I recently received the agenda and, based on the topic, some of the talks seem a little "advanced" for me. I have a decent general understanding of the topic (I have an undergraduate math degree and a master's degree in computer science), but am still unfamiliar with some of the advanced topics.
What do I do in cases like this? How can one do self-study to prepare for conferences like this to make sure that you'll understand the topics?
Also, how much of the talks "should" one expect to be able to comprehend? How much is "normal" for individuals at various "levels" in the field (e.g. undergraduate students, graduate students, working mathematicians)?
I do realize that, given the short time frame, there'll probably be a limit to how much I can do to prepare for this particular conference. However, I would like to be better prepared for future conferences in this area.<issue_comment>username_1: Nobody can know everything. Even just in mathematics the last time it was possible to literally know it all was early in the 20th century. Things have advanced too fast and too far for such things now.
A conference might be expected to present the latest ideas in a sub field. If that is your specialty you would be expected to follow "generally" but would probably require additional study afterwards if the subject of a talk was important to your work. But a "general understanding" and a few notes about how and where to follow up is probably enough for most people.
I doubt that your education, as you describe it, puts you at the research edge in graph theory. If you are doing research in that, then a quick literature survey of closely relevant topics would be good preparation, but I'd guess that few people do that. If the proceedings are available in advance, skimming the papers will give you an idea of where the holes are in your understanding.
But at the conference take a few notes, especially on topics that are not known to you, as a guide for further study. If you attend (physically or virtually) with colleagues, start a conversation over coffee/tea/whatever to ask others for their insights.
On the other hand, if one of the speakers is your dissertation advisor, you'd probably be expected to understand most of it. Or at least grasp the general trend of thought.
Math is pretty esoteric at the edges.
---
Another kind of "preparation", however, is to prepare to meet new people and share a few ideas. Harder now with thing mostly virtual, but a great way to build contacts.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This is a non-math perspective, but similar problems are faced in other fields as well.
As correctly mentioned in another answer, nobody can know everything. As a corollary, nobody at a conference will attend/carefully listen to all the talks (even if it were possible to). Time and mindspace are both limited, so it is a good idea to plan beforehand which talks/presentations to attend. I personally don't like to attend more than 3 in one session (assuming each is 20 odd minutes). This allows time to absorb and network, which is an important part of conferences.
Once you've chosen the talks to attend, it may help to do some background reading on the speaker rather than the topic itself. If you read some of the recent work done by them, you may get a better perspective of their direction, way of approaching the problem, and this may help you follow the talk better. The same topic can be interpreted quite differently by different speakers (again, I don't know if this is true in math), so reading up on the subject will not necessarily going to equip you well. Knowing the general research interests of the speaker will atleast facilitate a discussion with them (most speakers are happier to talk to you if you have some familiarity with their work).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: You don't go to conferences to hear things you already know. You go to conferences to learn about things you don't know yet.
In that respect, you are in the perfect situation: You have lots to learn, and you will learn a lot. You should look forward to the conference, rather than being stressed about it.
Of course, the stuff you learn will be different from what people who are experts in the field will learn. But this is not the point: You will learn lots of things which are new to yourself, and this is what counts. (In fact, you will likely learn much more than the people who are familiar with the field: The conferences where I learned the most new things were certainly the ones which were out of my own comfort zone.)
Of course, you should try to do something to increase your learning experience. As far as I would say, this mostly means talking to people at the conference, in particular about the things you would like to understand better.
You will notice while at the beginning, there will be lots of things you won't understand, this will get better by the end of the conference, since you will have learned a lot of new things.
And if you feel like you don't understand a word, keep in mind that at most conferences most of the attendants can't follow a non-negligible part of the talks!
Enjoy the conference!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Excellent answers here already. I will try to add a little.
Part of the reason for attending a conference like this is to learn what's out there that you may want to learn - not necessarily to understand it there. So read the abstracts and decide which presentations to attend (if the conference is large there will be simultaneous ones).
You may find times when no talk is even close to your interests. Skip those. Take the time for a cup of coffee - maybe with someone you introduced yourself to at an earlier time. Other junior people like you will be easier to connect to than senior featured speakers. Making connections is as important as learning from the talks.
This is from <https://www.conference-service.com/conferences/graph-theory.html> about the 25th Ontario Combinatorics Workshop
15 May 2021 - 16 May 2021 • Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada
(maybe it's the one you're going to)
>
> The objective of this meeting is to have an atmosphere conducive to
> research discussion and collaboration. The setting of the meeting is
> informal to provide a friendly environment for students and
> post-doctoral fellows to present their results, to exchange ideas, and
> to gain exposure to various topics in combinatorics. It is also a
> place where students and faculties meet, which may foster future
> collaborations.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Personally I go to talks I don't understand all the time. I love diving in over my head and getting to know a new field. If something looks really cool, *then* I go read the paper. Or sometimes I just read the interesting papers that the speakers cite, rather than the speakers' own papers.
Many people do the opposite --- they read in advance the abstracts of all the talks and then the papers of the talks that seem most to their research and then go into the talk prepared to either learn or ask questions. This is just a matter of personal choice and style of learning, and maybe discipline as some may be be easier to communicate in talks than others.
Other people only go to the conference to pick up the proceedings and schmooze. They think you never learn anything from talks, you should just read the papers, and you get the real work done at conferences through meeting people and collaborating.
Sadly, some people go to conferences only to be seen, or perhaps as some weird ritual of academia, and don't seem to be trying to learn at all. I don't understand that and I'm glad you aren't in that category. You are off to a great start to be asking this question!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: There's a saying that each talk should contain a part that everybody understands, a part that only the experts understand, and a part that only the speaker understands (some also include: a part that the speaker does not understand either). When you're not an expert (as most people on most subjects) the point of going to a talk is to understand the first part and get the general flavour of the argument from the remaining parts.
I would advise against trying to prepare for a conference. To me, conference talks serve as an invitation to read the corresponding paper(s) or study the subject. If a talk catches your interest or turns our to be relevant to your research, *then* it's the time to study. Plus, there's a fair chance the recordings of the talks are going to be available online so you can revisit them later, and if not you can always ask the speakers for a copy of the slides (they're almost universally happy to comply).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: The first thing is I think it's important to have low expectations in terms of how many talks you'll really get something out of. When I go to a conference I feel like it's been a really good day if there's one talk that I really got something important out of. And that doesn't mean I understood the whole talk!
The other key thing (both as someone going to a talk and as someone presenting) is that a large function of a talk is to serve to advertise and introduce a paper. Sometimes that means the talk leads me to go read the paper, sometimes it just means I'm aware that a certain result is part of a certain authors work and then I can find it if it turns out that I need it down the road, and sometimes it lets me understand a paper that I tried to read but failed to understand. So don't think of the talks as something that you need to prepare for, but rather the talks are the preparation to read papers at some later point. As a grad student its fine if you don't understand any of the details of any of the talks, if it means you've learned a bit about what kind of questions which people in your field are working on. Then you'll learn who would be interested in your results and where to look if you need certain kinds of techniques.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: There's a helpful approach that I've heard ascribed to <NAME> with the Emerging Scholars programs he developed in California and Texas. This is for students from various groups who historically don't do well in calculus. In addition to extra sessions with specially trained TAs, the students in the program also attend math research talks! Here's the advice they were given.
There are people who love going to the opera. It's usually not because they speak the language of the libretto, know the plot well, or have memorized the score. Rather, they find it a beautiful experience and enjoy whatever they get out of the evening---the staging, the emotions, the melodies, the costumes, the orchestra... Going to a math research talk is like going to the opera: Almost certainly you won't understand every idea presented, just enjoy what you can---the overall structure, examples, small details, how it's similar to or different from other talks, possible connections that pop into your mind...
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: 1. Pace. This applies even with ACCESSIBLE, enjoyable conferences (like chemistry). Go through your book and make a list of the talks and do some selection of them. Not 100%. Something well short of that. You just don't have the capacity to get use out of the stuff anyways. Look at the list and decide which ones are interesting or comprehendable or close to you or cute speaker or whatever criteria. (It won't be perfect and you will miss something interesting and go do something not, but forcing a selection process increases investment and you will have some Bayesian effectiveness also.) When taking a break, grab a longer coffee. Check email, whatever.
2. If it is a several day conference try and sneak off and do a half day golfing. Or at least look someone up in town (outside the conference) for dinner. Obviously don't completely ditch the conference. But get a little non-binded-oxen-mouth grain.
3. Emphasize coffees, beer drinking, etc. CHITCHAT!
4. Make it a goal to come back with at least one collaboration. Make it a game and see what you can do. Cool things happen at "boundaries". Preferrably something small, tangible. (Not some grand collaboration that we read about here with sob stories of not getting published. But just some human "connection". Shit is so lonely otherwise.)
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/09
| 1,716
| 7,221
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a quick question about a hypothetical situation:
An international student A in the US helped another international student B in the Europe finish the entire several homework assignments and an entire final exam. And now, the A has every evidence and chat files, and he wants to report the non-compliance of code of integrity to the European university of student B.
Would student A be punished since he helped student B finish the homework and exam? In this case, student A did not violate any discipline of his university in the US and the laws of the United States. Would student A still be punished by his university or by the law of US?<issue_comment>username_1: It is possible that A would face discipline if it became known, especially if everything became known to A's university. Academic dishonesty is independent of borders. There are no US laws for this, however. Honor codes don't have a "cross border" exception.
And saying that "A did not violate any discipline of his university in the US" might not be a fair interpretation.
Moreover, if A uses this as a way to attack B, then B might have a legal case to make against A. Or, would simply inform A's university what happened, which would make it known. I suspect it wouldn't be ignored and might be treated as a serious matter. No guarantees, though.
But this seems like a hypothetical that is unlikely to be realized.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You seem to assume that the academic honesty rules at a university will always stipulate that dishonesty only counts as being against the rules if it occurs at that university. That is a dangerous supposition to make. Many universities have academic misconduct policies that refer broadly to collusion, cheating, and other forms of misconduct, without stipulation that the misconduct must occur in relation to an assessment at that university. In such cases, there would be a genuine argument over the proper scope of the policy, and whether it may apply to instances of misconduct in relation to assessments at another university.
Just to give you an example of this, here is the present [Academic Misconduct Rule](https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2015L02025) at my University. Section 6 of the policy provides that "It is academic misconduct if a student: (a) in relation to an assessment: (i) cheats; ... (iii) improperly colludes with another person; or (iv) acts, or assists another person to act, dishonestly or unfairly in or in connection with an examination...". While the policy certainly only applies to students enrolled at my University, you can see that it does not specify that the assessment in question must be an assessment at the University. Likewise, Section 2 of the policy, which sets its scope, provides that "This instrument applies to all students of the University." Again, observe that it does not specify that the instrument applies only with respect to acts undertaking in relation to assessments and other matters at the University.
If student A were a student at my University (subject to the linked rules), I think there is a reasonable chance that his actions here would be considered to be a breach of this policy. The student would of course have an opportunity to argue over whether the policy applies to an assessment at another university, and they would probably argue that this should be implied, irrespective of the specified scope. Perhaps they would convince the academic misconduct committee of this (such that their conduct is considered out-of-scope) or perhaps they would not. I would think that most academic staff would be concerned about this behaviour, and would be reluctant to consider it out-of-scope.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Given that student A won't personally gain anything from doing this (only hurting student B), I think it is wise for A to wait at least till he graduates (and better, gets a job). If B were to report A then A's university wouldn't do anything since A already graduated.
The reason for this is that it would be too much hassle for A's univeristy to try to take his degree away, and this would probabily be seen as too much punishment in any case (A obtained his degree fairly, after all). If A's university really decided to revoke his degree, then he could probably fight it in court successfully with a decent lawyer (again, due to it being such an extreme disciplinary action for such a minor offence). This would also give A's uni bad publicity.
Also, even if A's degree were to be revoked, he still has access to his decree certificate and transcript, and this would be enough proof for most employers (most companies don't have the time to call every new hire's uni to confirm their degree is authentic). Plus, if A is already working, his employer won't be constantly checking whether his degree gets revoked. Even if they did check, they wouldn't fire A if he is performing well in his job.
It would be more risky for A if he pursues further study instead of work as then A's new university could take some action against him (assuming B finds out what A's new uni is or B tells A's old uni and A's old uni then pass this on to A's new uni).
In conclusion, the risk to A after graduating is negligible, and even if he did it while still attending university himself, it would be very unlikely for his uny to take any MAJOR action against him. It would be up to A to decide whether he wants to run the risk of having to do a small penalty like taking an academic integrity course or just getting reprimanded.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: To answer the literal question: probably the U.S. university would not hear about it at all, so, ... "no, nothing would happen here".
Even if a U.S. university did "hear about it", I don't think there are procedures in place to *do* anything about it.
So, yeah, probably any (routine/typical) academically unethical stuff a student here does abroad will have no impact on anything in the U.S., at least in the near term.
But, wow, I have to say, this is a very dangerous, apart from severely unethical, line of action. Woof. Stay away from this kind of thing. It's like borrowing money from professional criminals.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: There is an academic offense usually called *facilitation* (or something similar). Basically helping someone complete an academic assessment is considered on par with cheating, and an offense as serious cheating. Certainly where I work a person can be accused of facilitation even if the second party is not in the same class or even in the same university.
The most extreme facilitation scheme is to get someone to take the exam for you, and I know of cases where both the student and the facilitator were from different universities and sanctioned separately. In particular, the facilitator was found to have committed multiple offenses and was dismissed.
The situation you are describing can lead to blackmail as the facilitator could extort advantages (financial or otherwise) by threatening to “out” the cheater. As a result, I doubt the facilitator would go unpunished (in Canada at least) even if the cheater was elsewhere.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/04/09
| 1,312
| 5,697
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am enrolled at a small graduate program in the US. I came here because the PhD advisor I will be working with has a great reputation and because I wanted to work with her. However, the courses I am taking here are simply not up to the mark from what I expected good graduate courses to be. I am worried that if I start my PhD without having good courses I will be under-prepared to handle challenging problems later, and my exposure to interesting physics would be limited the ones I encounter during my research. People who are past their PhD programs, how important do you think coursework is? Do you think it is worthwhile transferring to another PhD program now?<issue_comment>username_1: The main purposes of coursework in a doctoral program in the US is twofold.
First, they give you some breadth of field and assure the faculty that you have broad knowledge. For this purpose it may not matter so much that they are less rigorous than you would like. People in the US, anyway, feel that PhDs need a broad view of their field to serve as a basis.
But the second, more important purpose, for the candidate, is that they prepare you to get through the (usually) necessary qualifying exams, sometimes called prelims. The faculty has probably tailored the coursework at that level.
Some programs actually only have two requirements: Pass qualifiers and write an acceptable thesis. In that case, the coursework may be irrelevant for some students if their training is otherwise sufficient.
But after you finish a degree, few people will be concerned in anyway with your coursework. An exception might be in a teaching institution, where the department head might want to know that you will do a good job teaching certain necessary subjects.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> I am worried that if I start my PhD without having good courses I will be under-prepared to handle challenging problems later, and [various bad things]
>
>
>
There are a few things to note here that might put you at ease. Firstly, while it is true that the quality of the material and instruction in a course certainly matters, even more important is the drive and work ethic of the student. Depending on your willingness to engage deeply with the material, and search out other material, you can pretty much make your course as rigorous as you want it to be. If you find that there is a gap in the material in some respect (e.g., some mathematical assertion that is not proved and that you don't know), look up other material to supplement what is in the scope of the course. Since you are a PhD student now, one of the things you should be getting good at (or at least practicing with a view to getting good at it later) is looking up other sources of material to supplement gaps in knowledge.
Beyond taking courses as a student, a very effective way of learning a topic is to *teach it*. Since you are a PhD student, you should have some opportunities to tutor some of the early undergraduate courses in your field, and maybe even some of the later undergraduate courses. If you become an academic, you will probably end up teaching both undergraduate and postgraduate courses. Teaching a course requires you to fill out a deep and systematic knowledge of the subject that goes well beyond what was required of you as a student (even as a high-performing student), so it is a very effective way to solidify your knowledge. Obviously right now you will not be teaching your graduate courses --- you are the student here. But you can look for opportunities to teach into some early undergraduate courses, which will get you on the path to solidifying your knowledge of foundational material at a deeper level.
Finally, *don't make the error of thinking that your learning ends when your coursework ends*. Even after you have finished all your courses and you are doing pure research, you will find yourself exposed to thorny problems that necessitate learning new material, or going back and relearning material you have previously studied and forgotten. Often a formal course undertaken in graduate school is just the *first iteration* of learning a topic --- you do the course and learn a bunch of things, and then if you don't apply them for a long time (e.g., years or decades) you forget a whole bunch of it, and then when you need that material you relearn it, and so on. The main advantage of doing the formal coursework in your training is that when you find you need to relearn it later on, it is a lot faster.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I would talk to your supervisor about this. She is probably as ambitious as you are if she is as good as you say, and it benefits both of you for you to be well prepared for the work.
It is an unfortunate fact of life that sometimes you have to waste time jumping through hoops to get where you want to go, but if you are in courses any way, there should be some way you, the instructor, and your advisor can come up with to make sure you get the knowledge and training you need out of the experience. If not, you can also self-teach, arrange to spend a semester at another school and take their courses, arrange to teach the course yourself (then you will *really* learn the material!) or take a summer school course on the material.
Finally, it is possible that your expectations for postgraduate training are too high---quite often postgraduates are expected to work out a lot more things for themselves than undergraduates. Your supervisor is way more likely to be able to assess if this is your problem than I am or anyone else not at your university is, so I would talk to her first and foremost.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/04/10
| 1,503
| 6,509
|
<issue_start>username_0: There is a journal editor who keeps sending me review requests. He sends a new one shortly (a couple of weeks) after I return the previous one. I tend to accept because they align quite well with my expertise and I want to stay in good terms with this editor, who is a prominent figure in the field. I am a slow reviewer, but tend to give quite detailed and comprehensive reviews (compared with what I usually get for my own papers), and I guess the editor is happy with the quality of my reports, otherwise he wouldn't keep asking. However, I wouldn't mind if he asked less often. After all, this is only one journal and I also get review requests from other journals.
I have no experience as editor, and I am wondering if there are any best practices from that side. Is it common for an editor to keep "milking" that reliable reviewer? For those of you who have editorial duties, do you have any limit on how often to ask? Once a month, once every two months?
My intuition tells me there's a risk the reviewer gets tired of getting so many review requests from the same editor and the editor may end up losing that valuable resource.<issue_comment>username_1: I'm not an editor, so I don't have the first-hand perspective you're asking for. Anyway, according to Publon's Global State of Peer Review 2018 report, ~10% of reviewers are responsible for ~50% of peer reviews ([Nature News summary](https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-06602-y), [full report](https://publons.com/static/Publons-Global-State-Of-Peer-Review-2018.pdf)), so some reviewers probably do get "milked". The report also discusses if there's a rising "reviewer fatigue", where review invitation acceptance rates are going down. That might make an editor more likely to repeatedly invite their more reliable referees.
Since your profile mentions you have a physics background, I'll mention something I've heard from APS editors. They try (across the journal family) to limit review requests a bit. First, they try to avoid asking a reviewer review multiple manuscripts at the same time, but do make exceptions for e.g. resubmissions. Second, they have a stated aim to give reviewers a two-week break between submission of the last report and the next invitation to review.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: An editor should and normally does keep a database of reviewers. It contains more than just their email addresses. There is no particular reason why it can't contain preferences for frequency as well as the other information. So, an editor can and should ask, and try (hard) to honor those requests. Then the frequency is determined individually and need not be the same for all.
It would be fairly easy to write an application that will move potential reviewers forward or backward in a queue so that the process is automated, more or less.
Another system is to provide a list of papers to a set of reviewers and let them bid on them. This is harder to automate since editor judgement is probably needed to match papers with reviewing skills, history, and preferences. But a fairly large subset of the needed reviews can be handled purely via reviewer requests. Some CS conferences use this method. Then, fewer specific requests need to be made.
You are getting a lot of requests because (a) you accept them and (b) you do a good job apparently. You will keep getting them unless you ask for a pause or a slower or faster request rate. Accepting one two weeks after completing the previous one feels like service above and beyond the call of duty to me, actually. If it is burdensome in any way, or interferes with your own work, speak up.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Even for reviewers I know well (and probably have worked with), I will try not to ask the same person to review journal submissions more often than every 4-6 months. I certainly wouldn't say "good job on that last one, here's the next one for you!"
But it all comes down to how people respond. If someone declines, I'm more likely to wait a long while before asking again, but if they agree whenever I ask, I can imagine that window narrowing. Especially when it often takes asking 8-10 people just to get 3 reviewers.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: From my experience as an editor, it is not unusual for referees to ask for "time off" from being assigned reviews and give bounds for the frequency of requests. As username_2 suggested, some editorial systems allow referees to enter this information and the editor sees it before sending out review invitations. I was glad to honor such requests from reviewers---I wanted them to feel satisfied & respected so that they would write more helpful reports in the future.
Similar to username_3, I tried not to ask anyone (other than editorial board members!) to review more than twice a year. However, we aren't mind readers. If your pattern is to submit a helpful report and then say yes to another request soon afterwards, then maybe you have the time, really enjoy reviewing, etc. What editor wouldn't follow up on such enthusiasm? My advice is that it's up to you to speak up about what you have time for, how often you're comfortable reviewing, etc. I think there's very little risk of getting on the editor's bad side by setting up those kind of parameters.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: The last time I handled a journal which had a standard review deadline of ~28 days, I had a personal limit of once every two months. It's not a strict rule, and if e.g. a paper is revised within two months I will still invite the same reviewer. This limit is also not based on any statistics or data - it's simply something I intuited. It was also rather rare for me to actually run into the limit since we don't usually get that many papers in only that single reviewer's expertise.
If you are getting too many reviewer invitations, absolutely feel free to decline. Editors see so many declined invitations that they are probably not going to bat their eye at yet another declined invitation. Just say you don't have time (which is true as well). There's a good chance you can also indicate in the journal's editorial management system periods for which you aren't available.
You don't have to feel bad about declining - there are thousands upon thousands of researchers in the world, and there is always someone else who can review the paper. If you can suggest someone else, it's not even that inconvenient for the journal to invite them.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/10
| 1,307
| 5,589
|
<issue_start>username_0: One of the references I use in my text is paper A.
However, I've actually read an unofficial, unpublished translation B which can be found online.
The translation uses more modern definitions/terms and corrects some errors.
**How should I properly reflect the usage of the translation in my bibliography?**
Currently, I use the original reference together with a note in the bibliography which explains the situation:
>
> [reference A entry] Translated unofficially by *translator* as *title
> B*, *year B*. Translation available online at *url B*.
>
>
>
Note that the original author did not give permission to publish the translation.
From the *Translator's preface*:
>
> [author] has asked that all republication of any of his works (in original **or translation**) be ended.
> He has not actually invoked copyright (which, as stated above, he does not believe in), but asked this as some sort of personal privilege.
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: Let me recommend, just to protect your own reputation, that you cite only official sources of the document, even if it is in a language you don't read.
However, if the translation is either of an out of copyright work, or authorized by the copyright holder, as seems *not* to be the case here, then the translation can be properly published and you can cite it. If it is visible on the internet then it has, in effect been published, even if it is infringing.
If you honestly found the translation on the web then there isn't any issue in your reading it to understand the original. You can't unsee things, after all. But, as a professional, you don't want to contribute to copyright infringement.
But the issue goes beyond the minimal requirements of copyright. The author, according to comments made here, has expressed a clear preference that translations not be made and yet. Even if they "don't believe" in copyright, they still hold it until they give a license or release it to the public domain. I would respect the clearly stated wishes of the originator. At some point in your future you will be thankful if others respect your copyrights and other clearly stated wishes.
My only additional worry is that, if you can't read the original, that you need to be assured of the accuracy of the translation.
---
See [this](https://copyright.uslegal.com/enumerated-categories-of-copyrightable-works/translation/) for a discussion of copyright of translations (in the US, anyway).
---
There is, however, one additional consideration, though I'm pretty sure it doesn't apply here. It is possible for an extension to a paper be written in a different language. The structure of that extension would be very different from a translation, however, even if it had to give fairly extensive explanations of what is said in the original. In that case, the original would have frequent citations to statements, not just an overall statement of the origin. Moreover, the extension would need sufficient creative content to be considered a copyrightable work in its own right.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Citing both, as you currently have, is fine and provides good a good indication to readers who are unfamiliar with this paper.
With regards to the fact that the translation was not permitted by the author, that is strictly not your problem. Copyright doesn't apply to people who are viewing or otherwise using the copied content, but to its distributor (i.e. the translator in this case). This would be no different to me simply sharing the URL of an unofficial stream of a football match (where the official source is a payed TV channel) with a friend -- I would never get into trouble for this, only the website hosting the stream could.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: This is an unusual situation, and, based on my observation of "ambient stuff", I suspect that the question refers to some part of <NAME>'s writing.
I am generally at least partly sympathetic to AG's politics, in math and in life, so I'm not approaching this in a hostile way.
However, if one/we is/are paid indirectly from the people, it is not moral or ethical to try to with-hold the results of our labors. (And, srsly, why would we want to?)
Legalities are another thing, and I have not idea, especially about variations between countries.
But, circling back, although I myself might be embarrassed by public airing of ooooold documents of my own, I do feel that I owe people an accounting for what I've done. Not behind paywalls.
EDIT: in response to @username_1's reasonable comment: as my general advice would be, "be honest". Yes, it is tricky in this situation. I'd say, yes, tell where you sourced the translation, give a link to the original, *AND* remark that the original author has made ... those requests. Which may affect those links.
That is, in citations, especially "in modern times", it seems nearly impossible to make things easily uniform. "Telling the truth" (as ambiguous as that obviously is) is a better guide than "style guides"...
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: In my experience, with a dilemma like this, it is better to provide ALL the information, including a condensed explanation of your thought processes. That strategy supports the primary purpose of citations: identifying the source of the ideas and revealing where you found that source so your reader can review it themselves. Additionally, by revealing the sources, the dilemma and your decision, your honesty protects your academic/writing integrity and reputation.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/04/10
| 569
| 2,227
|
<issue_start>username_0: The US News website states that their process for ranking graduate programs "involves factors ranging from the personal to the objective. [...] U.S. News is able to present the most current figures on enrollment, job placement, faculty and other critical quality indicators." And they survey "experts who teach and direct programs in these fields to evaluate their peer programs."
Source: <https://www.usnews.com/education/best-graduate-schools/articles/rankings-faq#1a>
From this we know their scoring function includes weighted inputs of: enrollment, job placement, faculty metrics (citations, publications, impact?), and "expert" assessments.
Does anyone know more about the score formula? What are the specific inputs? How are they weighted?<issue_comment>username_1: The US News ranking algorithm is proprietary. They don't say what it is.
A few years ago some Reed College students attempted to reverse engineer the undergraduate program rankings.
See
<https://www.reed.edu/reed-magazine/articles/2019/usnews-discrepancy.html>
<https://www.insidehighered.com/admissions/article/2019/07/29/reed-students-challenge-us-news-formula>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Actually, I think your premise is not entirely correct. Under *US News*'s methodology, most graduate programs are rated **entirely** by their reputation, as measured by "surveys of knowledgeable individuals." There is no hidden formula at all. See FAQ #2 in the document you linked.
Specifically, **for all fields other than business, education, engineering, law, medicine and nursing**, the rankings are:
>
> based solely on the peer assessment data from academics involved in that particular field
>
>
>
where:
>
> The expert assessment data for these areas comes from surveys of knowledgeable individuals in academia and practitioners in each profession. Survey respondents are asked to rate the programs with which they are familiar on a scale of 1 (marginal) to 5 (outstanding).
>
>
>
It is only **for the six fields listed above**, as well as for undergraduate program rankings, that the expert assessment data is combined with statistical data using a proprietary formula.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2021/04/10
| 889
| 3,768
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm an undergraduate studying computer science at a local community college. Currently, I'm enrolled in an intro computer programming class that I unfortunately am unable to test out of (I asked my advisor). It is the prerequisite to the OOP class at my college (the class that AP Computer science would transfer to), which I took four years ago as a freshman in high school. I have already taken data structures and algorithms and am presently taking discrete math. The point being, I have very little to learn from this class. Last night, I received an email from my professor saying that my code on a recent assignment was identical to the solution in the textbook.
I will admit that I did search to find the answer code because:
1. The autograde is extremely bad and requires spaces and other punctuation to be identical, all while not telling you what is wrong unless you look closely. It runs a series of units tests and compares the text output.
2. Again, I won't learn from this class, so I'm not hurting myself by not properly learning
3. The tests are worth 80% of the score, and I have been doing those fairly, so anything I do on the assignments will have little affect on my grade.
4. The problems are incredibly fake and are nothing like the real world problems I engage in at work.
Generally, I've been searching to find a solution to a similar problem and then editing it until the autograde accepts it (so what I'm copying serves as a template to save time). In this case, I stumbled upon what turned out to be the actual answers.
So technically I did copy the answers, but it was not me attempting to get out of work that I would actually learn from or need to do to pass the tests. I am very frustrated with how awful this class is and please note I would not do this for any other class.
What I am not sure of is what to do now. I already have received a zero for that week's work (a tiny percentage of my grade) so I could go forward as if nothing had happened and ignore the remaining assignments (each week is about 55% easy work that I have been doing, 45% horrible labs that I often skip) and end up with about 85% on the course assuming my future test scores represent those in the past.
Looking at the academic policy on the syllabus, as my first offense I will likely not see any other actions against me, but I don't want my professor to think I am a cheater. I have never cheated in any class and I don't consider what I did in this case to be a problem (I would argue it breaks the letter, but not the spirit, of the rules). How should I respond to this and go forward?<issue_comment>username_1: I would suggest to just bite the bullet for that small assignment and be careful in future ones. If your CC has a page where students can leave reviews of courses, considering leaving a review of this course describing your professor's actions to make future students aware.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Honestly, your best course of action is to apologize to the professor, admitting your fault and vowing to do better in the future. You can beg weakness and panic, but don't try to justify it to them or others. Such an apology is best made in person, possibly impossible now, and embarrassing, but it adds an extra element that you understand the error.
If you learn from your mistakes you are becoming a better person. But if you refuse to learn, others will cease to respect you, with long term consequences.
But by stepping forward with an apology you might assure the professor that you understand the issues, in which case they won't feel quite the need to watch your every future step with a jaundiced eye.
You screwed up. Own it. People aren't perfect. We can learn, however.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/04/10
| 1,294
| 5,515
|
<issue_start>username_0: **Background:**
I am pursuing PhD in a Canadian University in mechanical engineering.
My PhD work is computational and I work in collaboration with experimental groups. I am in my 4th year and I have published two journal papers till now. The funding in my group acquired by my PI is always in collaboration with some experimental professor in our department.
These experimental professors have direct contact with big industries and other large universities. It always feels as if my group is piggybacking on the influence/success of the experimental groups.
Now my advisor has good standing in computational mechanics research community, but I don't think she has the influence to acquire funding without the help of the experimental groups. All the past members of my group were Chinese and they have got academic positions in China and few are pursuing postdoc. I think many wanted to stay in Canada and enter into industry but couldn't due to poor contacts of my advisor. While the graduates of the experimental group go into both academia and industry due to their advisor's closer contacts.
**Goal:** I want to be in academia but I am also open for research scientist position in Industry.
*Issue: However, I have a feeling that considering my research group has poor funding record, it means I will always have poor future prospects post graduation.*
**Question: Is this analysis true?**<issue_comment>username_1: This is hard to judge without knowing a lot more about why there is a lack of funding. It might be a local problem, in which case you might be fine. But if the funders generally don't value this field or even this line of inquiry within it then you could wind up in trouble. In that case, you need to be prepared to be flexible in the lines of inquiry that you commit to.
There is an especially sad case at the moment. The woman [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katalin_Karik%C3%B3) who did the fundamental research (mRNA) that led to the development of two of the current COVID-19 vaccines, was, if I understand it correctly, denied promotion to full professor at the University of Pennsylvania since she was unable to attract sufficient funding for her research. Finding no future there, she left for industry. Moreover, her research shows promise for attacking cancer generally, which is a pretty big deal.
This was extremely short sighted on the part of Penn, of course, but at top universities funding can be a critical issue. And, of course, it is also proof that even the funders of research don't understand the nature of research and the impossibility of a guaranteed outcome. There can be a certain risk aversion that is counterproductive, though funds are limited.
---
I suspect that Penn is kicking itself at the moment as it doesn't share in the recent mRNA patents. Perhaps that is a suitable comeuppance.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: There is probably a decent correlation, yes. And it shows a lack of shrewdness not to have noted this (let alone ALL the other issues with tentative funding, aside from job prospects.)
However, you are 4 years into this thing. Get the piled higher and deeper. Move on, make new choices. Watch your six.
Read the Robert Frost poem. (It's not about just picking the "right" path, but that you don't get to explore every path. Life is too short!) Keep your eyes forward on the next forks. Work hard. Do your best, with what is in front of you, not in the past.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Does working in a research group with poor funding means poor future prospects post graduation?
>
>
>
>
> All the past members of my group were Chinese and they have got academic positions in China and few are pursuing postdoc. I think many wanted to stay in Canada and enter into industry but couldn't due to poor contacts of my advisor.
>
>
>
I think the second statement says a lot more about prospects than the first. Sure, there is probably some second level correlation between lab funding levels and all the things that help you get a job later, but it's a lot more direct information if other people graduating from the lab are having trouble finding the positions they want/positions like the ones you want. (of course a caveat may be that these people actually got positions they *did* want, and just had different goals than you; this may be hard to know for sure)
That doesn't mean all is lost, far from it, but it seems like it might be a good idea to build some of your own connections that will help lead you to jobs in the future. This is a good plan for everyone, of course, but you may need to rely on it more than someone whose PI/lab already has these connections built in. It may be that your experimental colleagues are a good bridge to other labs in an experimental field that could also use your computational skills, as well as in industry.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: Often job postings list a requirement that candidates "show evidence of ability to obtain significant outside funding." So your worry may be justified. But that weakness in your application is at least partially offset by the number and quality of your publications, regardless of the source of funding. I wouldn't say you will "always" have poor future prospects---funding isn't everything, and you will have other ways to demonstrate your qualifications, and those will increase over the years. In any case, what are your options for correct this problem?
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/04/11
| 8,307
| 35,946
|
<issue_start>username_0: **TLDR:** I spent a long time helping with a paper from a group at another university. The first author, who was at the same institute as me, promised multiple times I would be one of the coauthors. But, **the night before submission**, he informed me that I won't be on the author list. There are about 20 coauthors in total.
Now the paper is on the second round of revisions (and on arXiv). I learned that I would not even be acknowledged in the "thanks" list. What is the best thing I can do here?
The field of this paper is between applied statistics and computer science. The authors are not listed alphabetically.
---
Full story:
I am quite new to publication. A friend from another group come to ask for help. He is postdoc leading a project. I started helping by providing comments on writing the paper, polishing the paper, and providing a statistical model. He said with the model, I could be the second or third author.
Later he told me that I might not be the second author because **they decided to not use my model, but I will still be on the author list**. I understand this.
I trusted him so I don't have a signed document or any record to prove that he promised this. I was still providing comments. We discussed this specific project more than twice a week. Each chat lasted more than one hour. I asked him once to include my name, but he said the paper will not have any names on it until it is good enough for publication.
Right at the night before the submission, he called me saying that he cannot add my name because his supervisor doesn't want me on the list. I don't personally know his advisor, who has a dominant personality. He is the only first author.
His rationales of excluding my name were:
1. I did not write anything, and by the rules of the publication, I **have to contribute in every major aspect** of the paper.
2. He thinks: only first authorship will help my career. Even if he gives me the authorship, it won't benefit my career.
3. One of the supervisor's students who gave comments was also excluded by the supervisor.
4. He is new to that group, so he wants to build a better relation with his supervisor.
5. The supervisor said almost all authors must be in the group at the first place. (By group, I don't know if it is the research group or this project group. There is at least one author who is completely unaffiliated with the supervisor's group and never attends any group talks.)
To calm me down, he further promised me three things that night:
1. He can bring me into other projects he is leading in the future. This has never happened and now I don't think further collaboration with him will help me.
2. This current paper is unlikely to be published at a top journal but his next project is very likely to be published at a top journal.
3. He can later introduce me to his advisor for further clarification or collaboration, but this never happened.
Later, when I asked him for a written agreement regarding a future collaboration on another project, he hesitated, saying that he cannot be sure about the contribution and authorship until the work is finished. Since then, he's been occasionally ignoring my calls.
I disagree with rationale #1. He intentionally prevented me from writing down anything on the paper. He only took my feedback. Moreover, no one contributed on every aspect of the paper except the first author. The publication culture of this field is that everyone is highly specialized and only works in a narrowly defined area.
He also admits that I spent more time than the second author on this paper. To my knowledge, most of the coauthors did not write anything on the paper.
Well, I was convinced by him that night. His point 1 is probably generally ethical. What do you think?
However, I thought I could at least be acknowledged, but now it seems like my name will not appear anywhere in the paper. I would like to be at least thanked in the paper, without having everyone think that I am trying hard to free ride. What can I do?
*(Using "he" is not intended to imply that the first author is a male. The story should be read as gender neutral.)*
---
The night before submission, he sent me a screenshot of the text exchange with his supervisor. The conversation goes like this:
>
> **He:** I think we should probably add HighGPA because she provided a lot
> of feedbacks and helped with the statistical methods.
>
>
> **Supervisor:** My student Jane also provides feedbacks and comments, yet
> I don't put her in the list. All authors should be in the group and
> the weekly group talk from the beginning.
>
>
> **He:** I respect you as the final decision maker. I actually promised
> HighGPA an author slot a few months ago, and since then, she've been
> providing helpful feedbacks and spending not less time than anyone
> else in the group. Can you do this as a one time courtesy and I
> promise that this will not happen in future?
>
>
> **Supervisor:** Maybe next time. We already have 20 authors. Now add Joe
> Doe because he helped with initial data collection.
>
>
>
---
A timeline is added for better organization of the events.
**Before Jan 2020:** A posdoc shortly shared the same advisor with me before. I worked for one project he was leading. In that project he trusted me: he let me edit and rewrite the paper, add my own contents, and then he blindly approved them.
**Jan 2020** He joined a new group.
**Feb 2020:** Posdoc presented the idea to his new group. At the same day, he invited me to help with the project by providing remarks and helps in applied statistics. I start to help with the project by providing him feedbacks every week. I did not put my advisor or my previous advisor in the loop because they are less relevant to his subfield; this is the first mistake I made.
**March 2020:** He invited me to his PI's group meeting, with the condition that I, just like other members, have to read and present a paper once a while. I find this requirement ridiculous as I have my own things to do so I did not go. *(This could be the second mistake I made. Back to then I underestimated the value of networking and presenting. Now I won't forgo any chance to preach my paper and idea.)*
**April 2020:** I was asked to prepared a statistical method. He promised that with the method I can be second or third author.
**May 2020:** My statistical method was rejected in a group meeting. I am not sure if he brought me up for the method. He said to me that I cannot be second author but there will be no problem for authorship. He first asked if I can improve and revise the paper just like what I did before for the last project. I agreed but later he hesitated to let me directly write or comment on the paper. I respected him.
**Late June 2020:** He finished an early draft and I asked him to include my name. He said "no worry, the names will be added before submission." I am still providing feedbacks twice a week.
**Sep 2020:** The paper is about to be finished and he contacts me less for feedbacks. He contacted me asking if I can revise the final version. I agreed but he found reasons to delay sending me the up-to-date version.
**Oct 2020:** Finally he send me a semi-final version for my final feedbacks. He politely and indirectly ask me to not to directly write on the paper or comment on the paper. I still trust him and respect his request. I provided oral feedbacks instead. Though I find it weird, as he wrote 95% of the paper and based on his previous style, he will be more than happy if I am willing to write on it.
**Late Oct 2020:** The night before submission, he told me that his supervisor refused to include me as an author. He send me the screenshot. Note that he handles the submission process of the paper and his advisor hardly ever writes down a sentence.
The first author explicitly complained to me that the second author contributed very little, yet the supervisor "forced" the posdoc to put the person up as the second author. He chose not to fight the supervisor because he is new to the group and he wants to build networks with team members.
**Early 2021** The paper is on arxiv without my name being thanked.
I agree with all of you that acknowledgement carries no weight in academic career. However, I am human so to be thanked or not to be thanked makes a huge difference.<issue_comment>username_1: Basically, you spent XYZ hours on this work depending on your colleagues promise that you would be co-author. This is time you would have spent on your own research otherwise. Pacta sunt servanda and you did your part.
In addition, I agree with @JochenGlueck that if the paper already has 20 authors, there is no good reason why you shouldn't be also one of the authors.
You could try to get an acknowledgement, but, frankly, that's not worth much.
Probably, I would express a mail with a low-key message of disappointment, listing the most important of the above arguments, plus the arguments that you feel you considerably contributed to the results (that your work led to a dead end is not your fault and may have triggered their current line of insight) and you disagree with their judgement that you do not deserve co-authorship.
Papers, especially with many authors, are so complex today that if one really strictly applied the rule that authors must be authors in *every major aspect* of a paper, there would be authorless papers, simply because nobody has full overview over every aspect.
I would not demand anything, just let them know that you felt let down. With this, you should cut your losses and not work with these people again, declining politely if they ever had the cheek to ask you again in the future (yes, people are that gormless).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: While we cannot conclusively determine whether or not you would have deserved co-authorship, for the reasons others mentioned (number of authors on the paper, the time you invested into this project, etc.), it seems likely that you should have been one - or at the very least acknowledged. Now, let me share with you my hunch why that never happened, and how you can maybe learn to protect yourself from a similar situation in the future.
The postdoc's PI never even knew about you. Everything you write about the situation boils down to keeping you in the background, probably the postdoc claiming what you contribute for himself:
1. "We don't add names before we're ready to publish."
2. "I'd like you on the paper, but my adviser thinks you shouldn't be on." It's not
me - it's them!
3. And he keeps you compliant and quiet by promising you future projects that never
happen.
Maybe my personal Hercule Poirot went overboard here, but this smells rotten. You will only know if you finally *directly* contact your postdoc's adviser. While contacting a senior PI might be culturally discouraged, the path through their underlings preferred (not where I am from, but in some parts of East Asia, say), I'd encourage you to always cover your bases in the future.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Sorry, but you may not like this answer.
Spending time and effort helping someone on a paper, even giving advice on presentation, doesn't make you an author. Had they used your statistical model, assuming that you created it and it is of publishable quality, then you would, of course, be an author. But if they decided not to use it, then you have no real claim to authorship of this paper. If the model is a standard one that you merely suggested that they use, it probably doesn't make you an author if they use it.
However, if you helped them understand the problem better, perhaps that being the reason that they didn't use your model, then they really should acknowledge your contribution to their thinking even if it isn't directly represented in the paper.
I'd suggest writing to the authors, maybe to all of them, asking for an acknowledgement of the form "Thanks to HighGPA for contributing ideas to early versions of the paper". That much is owed, I think.
If they object, then I'd let it go and focus on your own work, unless you want your advisor to get involved. But your advisor, speaking informally with theirs, can make things happen.
---
And writing to all of them is probably more effective than writing to only the lead author(s), as you then become harder to ignore.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Very strictly speaking, the following is rather a discussion of the circumstances than a plain answer to the question *"What is the best thing I should do here?"* Anyway, I think the following points should be pointed out in some detail.
**Should the OP be a co-author of the paper?**
Many (not all) people here seem to agree that, given the information the OP provides, the OP should actually be a co-author of the paper. Still, I think it is worthwhile to list the following points in detail:
* Giving extensive comments on a paper might or might not, in general, entitle you to be a co-author of a paper. This might depend on the cumstoms of the field and on both the relevance and the quantity of your comments.
(username_3 makes, in their answer, a point that contributing comments and suggestions does not make you a co-author; I can follow this argument to a certain extent, but I would also be careful with it. For instance, in pure mathematics, it is indeed very uncommon to give authorship to somebody who merely made comments and suggestions. But then again, authors are listed alphabetically - i.e., not ranked by their contributions - in pure mathematics, and typically papers in pure mathematics don't have so many authors. If it is possible and common to rank authors by their contribution, things might change. As I said above, the details might depend both on the quanitity and the relevance of the suggestions provided, and on the specific field.)
*Remark:* In an earlier version of this answer I said that I agree that the OP should be a co-author. username_3's answer made me re-think this claim and phrase it a bit more carefully. But still, I'm under the impression that things did not go well here be any reasonable standards. Since the first author has already promised the OP authorship, it seems at least odd that the reasons that they are given now for not being listed as a co-author, contain several
non sequiturs (please see below).
* The rationale that the OP "ha[s] to contribute in every major aspect of the paper" in order to be a co-author is, obviously, ridiculous. Is anyone seriously supposed to believe that each of the 20 co-authors of the paper contributed to every major aspect of the paper?
* I'd like to specifically point out the following aspect that has already been briefly mentioned in username_1' answer: the mere fact that the OP's statistical model - which was initially seen as a major contribution by the first author - did not make it into the final version of the paper, is no indication of whether this model did or did not contribute to the findings in the paper.
It is a major point in scientific research that, at the beginning, we do not know how things will work out in the end (that's why it's called *research*, after all). Our only way to scientific insight is trial and error, and it happens very often that what we tried first does not work out well, but guides us the way to a better solution.
For instance, many of my papers have gone through many stages of "development" and it happens frequently that what seemed to be a key idea at the beginning got, at some point, completely removed from the paper. In general though, this does not necessarily make this idea an irrelevant contribution to the *development* of the paper!
Whether this is the case in the OP's concrete situation is, of course, not possible to determine from the information provided.
**Why would they do this?**
Several suggestions of why this has happened have already been suggested. I would like to add that there is actually quite a large variety of further potential reasons, and it might be extremely difficult - even for the first author and their supervisor - to figure out in retrospective which of them applied. Here is a - completely non-comprehensive - list of examples of potential reasons:
* It might be their honest opinion that the OP's contribution was significantly less than the contributions of each person listed as co-author.
* The aforementioned point might be only the supervisor's opinion. The first author might disagree, but might not have the courage to bring it up, given the supervisor's dominant personality.
* On a related note, somekind of misunderstanding might have occurred between the first author and their supervisor. Consider, for instance, the following hypothetical dialogue:
First author: "I think OP should be a co-author of the paper, too."
Supervisor: "What's their contribution?"
First author: "They contributed many very useful remarks and comments on the paper."
Supervisor: "That's not a sufficient reason to be a co-author; my student xyz has also made several remarks, but they're not listed as a co-author, either."
First author: "Ok."
I've witnessed many "discussions" between people with "dominant personality" and their supervisees/employees that followed such a pattern (although on other topics). There are various problems involved: (i) A "dominant personality" is a character trait that is quite strongly correlated with forming strong opinions, and with forming them quickly. This can easily lead to a sentence such as in the fourth line of the above dialogue, where the supervisor expresses a certain opinion despite that they still have insufficient information to make this conclusion. (ii) People with "dominant personalities" are - almost by definition - difficult to argue with, and even more so if you are in some essential way dependend on them. This might result in the first author just giving in instead of pointing out that there can be various degrees of contribution by means of giving comments and making remarks.
* Maybe the first author was indeed playing you false and never had the intention to add you as a co-author.
* They (or only the supervisor) might follow a "policy" that people from outside their lab need to contribute more than people from their lab in order to get co-authorship. (Needless to say that such a policy would be ridiculous, but people tend to do a lot of ridiculous things).
* For some weird reason they might even think that it is better for the OP not be co-author of the paper. (They might, for instance, argue that it could hurt the OP in the future to be a co-author of a paper when the OP is, in their opinion, not able to give good arguments of why are a co-author.)
* Then again, it might be real malice, or somekind of discrimination, be it conscious or unconscious. (Maybe one them doesn't like people with blue hair, or people who are [white on their right side and black on their left instead of the otherway round](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Let_That_Be_Your_Last_Battlefield), or some other kind of nonsense that human prejudice is able to come up with.)
* Another option is simple ignorance on their side. Maybe they think it's "not a big thing", and thus didn't bother to really reflect on what they were doing.
Of course, combinations of several such reasons could have occurred, too. My main point is that there are various possibilities which differ considerably with respect to the intensions and (non-)ethics involved, and it is, in general, extremely difficult to figure out which reason applies to which extent.
So my advice is to be extremely careful about making any assumptions (and even more so about making any accusations, even if only in private).
**Relevance of the situation to the OP's career**
It has been argued that having one more paper where the OP is one of 20 co-authors might not necessarily do a large benefit to their future career.
Still I think that there are several potential benefits which should be pointed out:
* Even "not a large benefit" would be different from "zero benefit". In particular with regard to the very competetive academic job market we should not forget about this.
* It is my understanding that the OP is a mathematician. So while being one of many co-authors of a paper in a field between applied statistics and computer science might not count as a huge scientific contribution, it can serve the OP another purpose which should not be underestimated:
It would give the OP the opportunity to argue (for instance, in front of a hiring committee) that (i) they are able to work in interdisciplinary projects, that (ii) their work/expertise is appreciated by people from outside their own field, and that (iii) they did not only work with people from their own lab.
In some hiring processes these points might make a significant difference.
* One point which is, in my opinion, too often neglected is that there tends to be a considerable difference between a person's *opinion* and their *actions*. I've heard numerous scientists claiming that "qualitiy is more important than quanitity", that "counting publications is not a good indicator of how capable a researcher is", and that "Researcher X has a lots of papers, but most of them have a different first author, so we shouldn't conclude from this that X is really good."
However, whenever it comes to *concrete decisions* (in particular, to hiring), all those "irrevelant" or "non-conclusive" indicators suddenly play a very prominent role in the decision. Sometimes this can even be observed within a single sentence, when somebody says e.g. "Well, I have to say I really don't believe in citation counts, but if we compare candidates A and B it is really remarkable that candidate A's work got fourth as many citations."
So assuming that a paper with 20 co-authors would most likely not benefit the OP in the future is, to put it bluntly, a bit naive in my opinion. It might even happen that someone explicitly notes that this paper shouldn't count too much but, unconsciouly, still takes the higher number of total papers as an indicator of the OP's qualities as a researcher. (Of course, if we only restrict the discussion to this single paper, the effect won't be very high - but such things add up during a career.)
* Another point is citations. Even if the OP would be just one of many co-authors, every citation for that paper would occur is an additional citation for the OP in a bibliometric database. In my experience, people don't make much of an effort to differentiate where all the citations of a researcher come from - they just look at a few numbers such as, for instance, the total number of citation, and maybe the top-cited articles and/or something like the h-index.
So to sum up, I'm somewhat reluctant to conclude that this publication would not have benefitted the OP much.
**What to do?**
Now we come to the actual question, and my answer will most likely be disappointing for the OP:
*I don't think that much can be done about this.*
Pressing people to make you a co-author could, in general, be a dangerous thing to do. If the reason why the OP was excluded is on the rather harmless end of the spectrum (for instance, a misunderstanding between the first author and their supervisor), a simple email with a kind request for clarification *right after the decision to exclude the OP* might have had some chance of success.
However, the paper is now in the second revision, and at this stage the (other) authors might even be a bit more reluctant to add another author. If they did so, it might be expected (at least in some fields) that the corresponding author at least briefly outlines (for instance, in a response letter that accompanies a revision) why the new author was included. "We first excluded OP as a co-author without good reason, but now we admit that we were wrong" is probably not a good thing to write there, so the corresponding author would need come up with a more decent formulation. Of course, this would be absolutely possible without too much work, but it still is one additional obstacle (at least psychologically) that the other authors would have to pass in order to grant the OP co-authorship.
**Further remarks.**
* That the OP is not even mentioned in the Acknowledgements is a different point. This seems to be completely weird - giving credit in the form of a simple "thank you" at the end of the paper is essentially for free for the authors, and as a rule I would always thank everybody who helped me to improve a paper by providing me with a non-trivial amount of non-trivial comments.
* Despite all that has been said above, it is important to note that such kind of "collaborations" still have the potential to benefit the OP in the future, even if they turned out like this.
For instance, depending on the personality of the first author, they might now be under the impression that they owe the OP (or they might not be under this impression - as mentioned above, this is difficult to say.)
The first author might also mention the OP's expertise to other people working in different groups (not necessarily the first author's group), which could increase the probability of future collaborations (not with the group responsible for the paper under discussion - the OP will probably not be particularly keen on working with them again - but with different and, hopefully, more obliging collaborators).
The point I'm getting to is that what has happened is reason enough not to work with this group again, but I would advise against adding any further damage to the relation with this group (should they ever suggest to the OP again to work with them on a paper - OP can just kindly decline, referring to lack of time or the like).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: If the supervisor of the postdoc and your own are not in the loop yet, they should be. At the very least, they should be able to provide perspective.
My feeling is that if someone has worked on a project, even if their particular solution didn't work out, they should be considered for authorship.
I don't know what field you are in, but the claim that papers don't count if you are an author but not the first one is dubious.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Without knowing the field you're working in, it's difficult to say who should be author.
In some fields, co-authorship is given for any number of reasons, such as to acknowledge the PI who originally collected the data, even if they weren't directly involved in the paper.
In other fields, authors are only the people who both worked on the paper and are asserting that it's true. They would instead directly acknowledge other people's help and/or cite something to indirectly acknowledge the work upon which the paper is based.
I would think that you should get *some* recognition for the contribution that you described, but I don't know that it would qualify you for authorship without knowing your field. And I also don't know if you actually agree with their findings, and thus maybe it's better that you were *not* and author, but simply acknowledged.
I'd also like to mention what I've taken to calling a 'null acknowledgement'. That is, you used someone else's work, but then went another direction. This is especially important in data citation, as there are a number of observational fields where someone might see something of interest, look at data from an instrument to get context and determine if it's a known type of event before doing a deeper analysis. Although you might not cite that instrument or its data, you still used it. And not acknowledging that you used it might affect their continued funding.
Similarly, if someone helped you determine that an approach to analysis was not correct, they still helped you get to your solution, and deserve some recognition.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Your “friend” is no friend to you at all, and behaved unethically in promising you coauthorship and making other promises that he has not kept, and that it’s not clear he had any intention of keeping. The other answers analyze at length whether you being a coauthor makes sense or not, but that seems beside the point to me. You were *promised* to be made a coauthor, and such a promise must not be made if there isn’t a good reason to make it, and must be kept if it were made and it is even remotely reasonable to keep it (which it clearly is).
As for your question of what you should do, the main thing you should do is learn from this experience and in the future not put yourself in a position where it is so easy to exploit your labor and talents. The reliance on verbal promises, lack of written documentation, and the fact that only one person knew about your contributions, have all put you in a vulnerable position.
Aside from that, you can try to argue that you deserve an acknowledgement, and you can try to make other people in the “friend”’s group aware of his nasty behavior. There are some arguments to support doing both of these things. It’s also possible that none of them will be productive and that trying to do such things will only lead you to a waste of time, frustration, and disillusionment with the academic research and publishing process. So another possibility is just to let it go, learn from the experience and resolve to avoid such situations in the future. Which one of those paths to take is your personal decision. In any case, good luck!
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_8: While some others disagree, I think you have a strong case for co-authorship of the paper, particularly since you did work on the project in consideration of a promise to be included as an author. The role you played sounds sufficient to me to warrant co-authorship, particularly on a paper that already has so many authors (who presumably each did a small part). Irrespective of this, there is a legitimate issue of research ethics in making a promise to you that you would be a co-author and then reneging on this after you did your work.
In terms of what to do now, *if you wish to pursue the matter* I recommend you seek a resolution from an independent adjudicator at your university. For example, you could ask for the matter to be adjudicated by an independent faculty member in the university's research committee/research office. There should be some kind of faculty member at the university who has expertise on the ethics of research authorship, who can adjudicate an internal dispute of this kind and provide a resolution sanctioned by the university. Indeed, that kind of adjudication would generally fall directly within the purview of academic staff in the university research office.
To get the ball rolling, I recommend that you write to the corresponding author of the paper, note your disagreement on the matter of authorship, and inform him that you would like your authorship/non-authorship to be adjudicated by an independent academic in the university research office. Write to the university research office and ask for an appointment to explain the matter and to seek an internal adjudication. This might also be a matter where the university ethics office might want to get involved, in view of the promise of authorship and later withdrawal of that promise.
Regardless of whether you are eligible for authorship, the university is likely to take a dim view of the fact that you were promised co-authorship and then this was withdrawn after you had made your contribution to the project. There may be an ethics breach involved here, due to misrepresentation of your right to authorship, and you have a good case for *some kind* of resolution in your favour. Certainly I would think that an adjudicator would be sympathetic to your position, even if they feel that your contribution falls short of what is required for co-authorship.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: This is only a partial answer, specifically discussing the point of whether the OP should be a coauthor or not.
While I would agree with the general premise of other answers discussing this point (e.g. @username_3 and @JochenGlueck), I would like to take a different point of view. In my opinion, the details of the contribution of the OP and whether their statistical model made it into the paper or not do not matter much, since the promise alone is (or should be) sufficient to gauge the magnitude of the OP's contribution.
The reason for my conclusion is that I think the metioned answers do not sufficiently acknowledge the **nature of a promise to become a co-author**. Undoubtedly, the decision whether one should be a co-author of a scientific paper is based on whether one contributed or not, as @username_3 and others write. However, at the point where one is *promised* authorship by the first author, the relevant parties have already determined that your contribution is indeed valuable. A contribution to the scientific progress of a project cannot be nullified by further progress afterwards.
Of course, in the real world, the first author may have hastily promised authorship. Even if that is the case, however, the hasty promise in itself is malfeasance. As the OP states, they invested a lot of time into the work. They may not have done that if they had not been *promised* that the resulting contribution will warrant authorship.
So in my view, the situation is a clear case of the OP's work not being valued appropriately by its co-authors, one way or another. The OP was either tricked by the first author or their authorship was wrongly denied.
With regards to recommendations for action, I do not have anything to add to the other good answers.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: Authorship can be a contentious issue. In this case, I think it is actually impossible for any of us, including the OP, to know whether it *should* have been granted. While the OP helped the main author via discussions and suggestions, the final version of the paper may look very different and be the product of many other discussions, suggestions and contributions by other people. In all the projects I have worked on, I have had conversations with people and heard suggestions. They have offered this freely without making co-authorship demands, nor have I offered co-authorship because people close to me in academic positions have told me that would not be appropriate. To me, work that has co-authors involves more collaboration. Devising the idea together, being part of the team that evaluates and discusses approaches.
The postdoc in question may not have ever been in the position to offer authorship. They are working on a project defined by their supervisor and funded by a project their supervisor submitted. The main ideas for resolving the problem may have come from the supervisor. I am a postdoc, but I would not offer coauthorship of anything without discussing it with my supervisor. It may be, in fact, that the LW's statistical model was excluded by the supervisor because it was part of a collaboration that the supervisor was not comfortable with and that was outside of the scope of the funded project.
I think an acknowledgment would be nice, but it is not something to be demanded and probably does not make a difference for the OP except a warm feeling. Lessons for the future are more that not everything is about authorship and the scope of most projects predetermines who can and cannot make the author list. This answer is offered since most people have said that the OP should be a co-author, and it is possible that the scope of the work was much greater than the OP's contribution, and there was simply not a good argument for the OP's inclusion on the list. The OP may also have a dominant personality that makes it difficult for the postdoc to voice that perspective.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/11
| 680
| 2,989
|
<issue_start>username_0: If your supervisor gave you an unviable project that was a dead end in honors or masters, do you think that they will write badly about you in a letter of recommendation to make themselves look good?<issue_comment>username_1: Assuming you proved the project to be unviable, you advanced knowledge, a worthy contribution, which your supervisor will surely write highly of.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: To be honest, if you intend to have this person write a letter of recommendation for you, I don't see any alternative but to talk to them about where you stand and how supportive they can be in a letter.
I doubt that anyone who wasn't a complete jerk would object to such a discussion. And having the discussion would give you valuable information about what you can expect. If they put you off or object to the question, then I'd suggest looking elsewhere for letters.
If the prof gave you an infeasible project (too easy or too hard) then they share in the outcome, though going back if it proves too easy is a good plan, though too late, now, to implement. My doctoral dissertation could have had a hundred proved theorems had I not warned my advisor that it was all trivial and signified nothing. It would have been nothing but "junk food" without substance.
Research is tricky since you are initially looking into the unknown void. For undergraduates it is especially tricky because of the time limitations on such things. The same may be true at the masters level if the degree is time limited. Some open questions in mathematics have remained so for a hundred years.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I suspect it has to do with why you thought the project was unviable and a dead end, and whether after all was said and done your mentor agrees with that or not.
I teach design courses, and very often a design doesn't work out the way students thought it should. This is fine. We shoot for a "proof or disproof of concept". At the end, we hope the students understand whether their design choice was a good idea or a bad idea, and whether their design process was working for or against them.
One of my favorite projects was an abject failure -- in that it didn't meet the needs of the process they were designing. In many other aspects, it was highly successful. The students opted for a high-risk design, and made a very compelling case why knowing whether that design worked or not was a valuable pursuit. They knew it was risky going in, and by the time they were done, we categorically understood why it would not work. Their process was fine. It would have been a very different story if they reached the same outcome, though they had misunderstood how risky their approach was (and should have), or if after all the effort, they still weren't completely sure whether it worked or not. This was the right kind of failure.
Somehow, this doesn't feel like how your project ran, but I could certainly be wrong about that.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/11
| 888
| 3,121
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am writing a paper and want to reference another source. In academic Hebrew, this would be said using the abbreviations for, "*See* (source)" or "as explained in (source), *see there*". Is there a comparable abbreviation in latin?<issue_comment>username_1: Quod vide, q.v. in short.
I agree with the other commenters though, its pretty obscure in English writing.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: *Confer*, or *conferatur*, abbreviated as `cf.`
[Cf. the information here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cf.).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Two answers already, both of which can be correct, depending on context (as @username_1 commented on one of them).
As I mentioned in a comment, We have a [Latin language](https://latin.stackexchange.com/) sister site.
I think that the best explanation is the accepted answer to [this English language & uasge question](https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/25252/how-does-one-correctly-use-q-v), (q.v) which I quote here in its entity:
>
> q.v. stands for the phrase quod vide : "on this (matter) go see"
>
>
> Cf. is used chiefly to refer to articles proving or documenting one's
> point or having authority, not to avoid treating a particular aspect
> in the course of the writing.
>
>
> Compared to cf., most authors restrict the use of q.v. to refer to
> another part of the same work (usually a book) where they treat with
> the subject matter. This is also used to advise the reader to read
> another work they endorse.
>
>
> In a monograph or a large book there is seldom one perfect way of
> serially organizing all content. q.v. is a means for the author to
> help readers learn more at their leisure.
>
>
> * without making footnotes
> * without distracting or boring people already knowledgeable
> * without repeating part of the material
>
>
> On critical editions, you will sometimes find q.v. in margin comments
> or apostilles as a quick comment for a quote, giving its source.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: ### Don't use Latin abbreviations unless you're writing in Latin, or the journal's style guide says otherwise.
Simply put, most journals' style guide will dictate the use of a particular referencing style, which will include a particular method of in-text references. For instance, in a paper using the [APA referencing style](https://guides.libraries.psu.edu/apaquickguide/intext), you might write "According to Miller (2019), most foos bar" or "Most foos bar (Miller, 2019)", while in a paper using the [IEEE referencing style](https://libraryguides.vu.edu.au/ieeereferencing/gettingstarted), you might write "According to [23], most foos bar" or "Most foos bar [23]".
As a result, there shouldn't be any need for Latin abbreviations unless you're writing in Latin, or the journal's style guide requires it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Others have mentioned putting "q.v." ("which see") after a citation, and mentioned that it's pretty rare. I'll add that after *two or more* citations you can pluralize it to "qq.v.", which is even rarer.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/04/12
| 905
| 3,748
|
<issue_start>username_0: I will be finishing my PhD soon, and I have a just managed to a get job lined up in industry. I previously received an offer for a postdoc position but for various reasons had to turn it down.
Longer term I would love to be able to return to academia, maybe even build a career straddling the two in some way. But I'm concerned that the door will close on academia if I'm out of it for too long.
**While I am working in industry in the next few coming years, what can I do to put myself in the best position to make a return to academia?** Obviously things like keeping up to speed with my field is a given, but publishing papers is something that would have to happen outside of a full time job, and that could be a struggle.
The job I'm taking has some indirect relevance to my field and obviously some transferable skills. There is also a small (10%) research component.
I'd love to hear from people who have successfully switched between the two<issue_comment>username_1: At least one version of this was pretty common in some fields many years ago: Work for a number of years, say a decade or two, then return to academia with your experience to share. That experience was valued and welcomed. I have to say I haven't seen that in a very long time, though I'm sure it happens now and again. The change seems to have resulted naturally from a combination of financial realities in academia, changes in institutional priorities, overproduction of PhDs, and maybe somehow the law of diminishing returns.
I think your best bet is to follow the advice of @user2768 above and hope for the best, but enjoy what you do and reflect every now and then on how you see life vis a vis your career. If it feels like a crossroads, a difficult decision, yes it is.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: In **Germany** there are actually quite a lot of such positions at the so-called [Fachhochschulen](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fachhochschule). To be a professor there, it is actually expected to have worked in Industry for at least 3 years (or so, depending on the state) and share your industry experience for a more applied education of students. Of course, an excellent PhD is also necessary. And usually one needs to have some form of achievements while being in industry; e.g. papers, presentations, patents, rise to leadership positions, cooperations with academia, or similar; such that continued applied reseach can be expected.
This is in addition to the comments of @user2768 and @username_1.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Aside from becoming famous for your published work there are a couple of things, both of them a bit difficult.
First, stay in contact with the academic world. Maintain contacts with professors. Work informally with students if you can find the opportunity to do so. Offer to teach some advanced course in your specialty as an adjunct. Attend a research conference occasionally where both academics and industry researchers congregate and share interests.
Second, and this sounds a bit strange, I know, don't get yourself into a financial situation where you absolutely can't live on a much smaller salary. If your life-style demands every dollar of your industrial salary, then you won't be able to make a transition. Make sensible investments that leave you secure enough to move and make sure long term financial planning leaves you flexible.
I have a friend, whom I've mentioned elsewhere. We both went to good universities (PhD) with good advisors. We are close to the same age and now both retired. His salary was always about twice what mine was. He worked in industry. I was in academia. Both of us were well paid for our respective positions.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2021/04/12
| 306
| 1,201
|
<issue_start>username_0: It is recommended to send a copy to an IEEE conference with the hyper-references activated?
This includes hyperlinks to sections, equations, tables, references, etc. The paper was written using LaTeX.<issue_comment>username_1: **Yes: They help navigate the document.** (Except if the conference forbids them, then no.)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: **Yes, with a caveat:** make sure that the hyperrefs don't include any information that can't be gleaned from the text itself. For example, a common mistake is to use `\href` to hide a URL, as in:
```
Our tool is available online \href{http://www.github.com/some/repo/}{here}.
```
This is acceptable on websites but not in a paper because if the paper is printed, the URL is not visible and impossible to recover.
Similarly, this is bad:
```
As we showed \hypertarget{page1sec2}{earlier}, every Foo Bar is a Foo Baz
```
since it only displays the text "earlier", so an offline reader will have trouble following the backward reference.
Generally, tools like `cleveref` (`\Cref` / `\cref`) do a better job of displaying something that is readable both in text and in interactive form.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]
|
2021/04/12
| 795
| 3,527
|
<issue_start>username_0: I did a campus interview two weeks ago (US universities, R1, Engineering). I was not the last candidate, so, by considering the last one, the search was closed one week ago. In the last meeting with the department chair, he said the department will select the final candidate next week and it seems they have made some decisions based on the information I have. I received an update this weekend from the department chair indicating that they are working with the dean's office and I should get an update this week. First, I interpreted this email positively in a way that probably I will be their first choice since they should keep all finalists on hold until the first candidate (assuming to be me!) signs the offer, which normally takes time (negotiation, salary, lab space, ...). So, there is no reason to notify me if I am not the first candidate.
Then, I looked at this matter differently and thought maybe they already have offered another candidate and they are indeed waiting to get some approval from the dean for that person (probably the candidate has some requests). Because sometimes dean's office can approve the final candidate after a few days since it should not be a long process. I am not sure which case is more likely. I know that I should be more patient, but it is honestly difficult!
So, my question is about your experience with the hiring process and its timeline.<issue_comment>username_1: I think it’s unlikely they would contact you if you’re not one of their top candidates - not necessarily their first choice, but near it for sure. Faculties frequently don’t even have the decency to let interview candidates they will not hire know. That said, it’s also not terribly uncommon for a group wanting to hire someone, and for the dean to say no, maybe because the dean wants to go in a different direction from what you do, maybe because of pressure from other groups, etc. Good luck!
I missed the timeline part: to get administrative approval and the formal offer drafted can take several weeks, in part depending on how large the department you would like to join is. I don’t know if the current pandemic situation impacts it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It is most helpful to think of the faculty hiring process as a black box. Decisions get made according to some opaque process of which only a small amount of detail is revealed to you, the candidate. But the bureaucracy of a university, and the dynamics of a job search involving multiple finalist candidates, are complicated, so the reality on the ground can involve a lot more that’s going on than what you are being told. I don’t mean a lot more necessarily bad stuff, or a lot more good stuff - just in general more people and more decisions (some perfunctory and some that are more uncertain) on which the outcome depends. Some of those decisions can be purely logistical or financial in nature (or even political) and quite far removed from the question of whether you are “good enough” to get hired by university X.
The bottom line is, if the department chair is competent then they have likely shared the maximal amount of information they can reasonably share with you at this point without risking misleading you into believing the outcome will be either better or worse than it might end up being. The only thing that’s reasonably certain at this point is that you’re still a viable candidate. For anything else, you’ll have to wait for the black box to do its thing. Good luck!
Upvotes: 4
|
2021/04/12
| 874
| 3,527
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently working on an abstract for conference submission. The contents of the proposed presentation build heavily on part of my master's thesis.
Since the abstract has to be written anonymously, however, I am struggling to find a good way to refer to the work I did in my thesis.
Some thoughts on a few options I had so far:
* Although my thesis hasn't been properly published, simply pretending it doesn't exist feels weird and academically questionable.
* I'm worried that, by citing it using my last name while making no connection to me as the author of the abstract, I would make it seem as if I did significantly less work myself, minimize the apparent impact of the presentation, and thereby drastically reduce the chances of getting accepted.
* Referring to the previous work I did using "in my master's thesis..." seems like the best option so far, but citing work without providing author and title feels odd too.
Is there any established way of going about this?
In case that makes any difference, I am working in the field of linguistics.<issue_comment>username_1: Don't lose track of the purpose of an anonymous abstract. It is there to provide double blind reviewing so that reviewers aren't influenced by the reputation of the author. They aren't intended for final publication and an edited version is what will appear if anything does.
You could cite your own work as by "this author" listing it as unpublished or to appear or thesis, etc. That is sufficient for review. If the abstract is eventually published, it will be in a form in which you correct those references.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You certainly shouldn't be removing relevant sources just for the purposes of blinding; you can just use standard techniques for blinding instead. When I write an academic paper I just write it without any blinding and then at the end I make a "blinded copy" where I cover any references to my personal details or my own papers with `[BLINDED]`, and also remove my own papers from the bibliography. That gets the point across perfectly well without detracting from the substance of the material. I have never had any complaints with this method. Here is how you could do this in an abstract:
>
> **Do toads control the human race with their psychic mind-powers? Adding to the experimental literature**
>
>
> **Author:** `[BLINDED]`, **Institution:** `[BLINDED]`, **Email:** `[BLINDED]`
>
>
> **Abstract:** The present paper considers the theory that toads have extra sensory perception (ESP) and mind-control powers, first set out in McMahon (1901). Later papers claimed that toads control the human-race with their mind powers, and were the cause of both world wars (see e.g., McMahon 1922, McMahon 1938, McMahon 1950). Empirical evidence relating to this theory was examined in Tolio and Ribbert (1972), Tolio, Ribbert and Smith (1979), and Smith and Zhang (1988). More recently, experiments comparing the hypothsised psychic powers of toads against a control group of young human children were performed in `[BLINDED]`, and further experimental comparisons between toads and grasshoppers were conducted in `[BLINDED]`. In this paper we extend the experiments in these latter papers to compare toads, snakes, dogs, and horses. We find further evidence that toads control the human race with their mind-powers. We hypothesise that our toad masters have allowed us to publish this paper for various nefarious purposes.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/12
| 380
| 1,644
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD candidate and when i'm writing a manuscript for a conference or journal i have the same question. Let's say my manuscript is about a topic A.
When i'm doing my bibliographic research i find lets say 30 papers (or more) relative to the topic A. Should i do exhaustive reference of all of them in my manuscript or i am OK if i mentioned the most important of them or the most representative that proves my point? I have a feel i should include everything but maybe its a thing of my OCDish personality, because it doesn't seem every paper add something so different from another (at least from my manuscript point of view).<issue_comment>username_1: This is something you should discuss with your supervisor. Conventions vary by field and venue, so your supervisor can give you more precise advice than random strangers on the internet.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: For a thesis it is normal to include a much more complete bibliography that results from a literature search. This seems to be what you are describing.
However, for a paper, it is much more normal, and useful, to include only those you need to cite in the work itself; those from which the current work derives. Don't send the reader astray from the advances you present in your paper.
There are a few exceptions, such a the inclusion of an especially seminal background paper on which the whole (sub) field relies, and certain review papers whose intention is to give a broad overview of a topic, rather than, necessarily, to advance it.
It is good, of course, to keep an annotated bibliography for your own future use.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/13
| 1,313
| 5,605
|
<issue_start>username_0: This is my last semester as an undergraduate and I am taking a graduate course in a physics field I was interested in (won't mention the name since I do not want to offend anyone who is researching in this field). The class ends with a report in which we have to summarize research in a particular subfield. Looking over and reading papers to write this report, I realize I do not like this subfield at all. The papers are confusing and technical; I have a basic understanding of each of them but not a thorough understanding of all of them. So far I have read 7 papers and I am comfortable talking about and explaining the methodologies and results of 3 of them; for two of them I am comfortable talking about the methodologies but not the results; and for the last two I have a vague idea of the procedure. I also do not have the stamina to read more papers. I find the topic boring, complicated, and difficult.
What should I do? Should I abandon the idea of going to graduate school? I do not really want to go to industry that much and I really do like physics. Or should I try exploring a new field in physics? Or will an advisor in this field be helpful, since I am reading the papers on my own to write this report and no one is guiding me?
Any advice will be appreciated.
PS: I am not enrolled into a graduate program yet.
**Update:**
If I go to another field in physics, what should I do to see if I like researching in that field? Should I read papers, introductory textbooks? What papers would be the best for a beginner like me? How can I find introductory papers on, let's say, arxiv (is there some kind of section called "Basic"). I am not enrolled in a graduate program yet, and thus I do not have an advisor, so I like to know what I should do in the meantime. Also, my parents and relatives are not researchers so I am kind of alone in this right now.<issue_comment>username_1: I'm going to address your primary concern, which is that you are finding the papers in this particular area difficult to understand.
Let me be clear - this is perfectly natural, especially when you are not familiar with reading papers or a particular field. Reading papers is a skill you learn, especially in graduate school, so do not fret. In graduate school, especially for PhD programs in the USA, the may have introductory research classes that pair you with a professor. This allows you to explore research in certain areas with guidance and work through understanding papers together (hopefully).
My recommendations on next steps are as follows:
* Speak with your class instructor or a professor at your institution about this area. Ask them about their thoughts on the state of research and starting materials to familiarize yourself.
* Look at the references in these papers. Are they citing certain textbooks? Can you follow the chain of references back to the seminal works that they are likely building on?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Read material oriented to undergraduate- and graduate-level students:
* Grab a year's worth of the American Journal of Physics.
* Skim until you find articles of interest to you, ones you can latch onto.
* Read them, understand them, work backward from the references they use, find appropriate textbooks.
Try to figure out reasonable entries to current research fields:
* Hang out at Physics Stack Exchange.
* See what interests you and ask questions as appropriate.
* Ask for recommendations for good new and old review articles and read them.
Reflect and digest, concurrently with the above:
* Explore what your attraction to graduate work is: personal satisfaction, a calling, career preparation, fear of leaving the educational system, and so forth.
* Learn as you go and observe your reactions to what you learn.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: There're a few ways to interpret why you don't like research in this field:
First way: you don't like the particular field because the papers are confusing and technical. In this case I want to point out that from your description, you've done *spectacularly* well. I was barely able to understand one single paper when I was an undergraduate, and you understand seven! You have nothing to fear about graduate school in this field, in that case.
Second way: you don't like the particular field because the topic is boring. This is a more serious objection. If you genuinely find the topic boring (that is, you find the end goal boring, even if it is achieved; or if you find the problems that you'd solve daily uninteresting) you might want to work on another topic.
Third way: you don't like the particular field because the topic is complicated and difficult. Unfortunately enough, graduate study in virtually every field is complicated and difficult. That's a big part of the reason why many people never attempt it. If you genuinely do not like complicated and difficult things, you might want to avoid graduate school entirely.
>
> If I go to another field in physics, what should I do to see if I like researching in that field?
>
>
>
Ask someone who's researching in that field. If you don't know anyone to ask, try asking the graduate students and/or professors in your department, even if they don't work in that field. It's possible your department will have a graduate advisor of some kind. Here's [an example from Stanford](https://physics.stanford.edu/academics/graduate-students/graduate-resources/graduate-student-advising). Even if you are not a graduate student, you could still ask the graduate advisor.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/13
| 4,321
| 18,166
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm not 100% sure how to phrase my question, but I've been grappling with this for sometime and thought maybe the responses would provide me some insight.
I'm currently at PhD student soon to be on the market for postdocs with the goal of staying in academia. My dilemma is this: I am reasonably content spending a large amount of time/mental energy on research. However, I worry that this contributes to a culture of overwork and reinforces academia as a "ivory tower" inaccessible to those without the privilege of being able place such an emphasis on research.
To expand: Much of my life is spent directly or indirectly on research. I don't really subscribe to the idea of having to work "X hours a week" and regularly take day or week long breaks from my research when I'm not feeling like I'm making progress. I also regularly see a therapist and try to take care of my mental health as well as possible. However, even with this in mind, my desire to manage my mental health seems to be rooted in the desire to be more productive. When inspiration does strike, I'm happy to stop whatever I'm doing and follow up on the idea for as long as I'm captivated. Thus, even though I'm not always "doing" research, in the back of my mind I'm usually thinking of something related to research.
So far this seems to have worked reasonably well for me and feels sustainable long term.
However, one effect is that I spend more time on research than I'm paid for (honestly this is probably true of any PhD student). What I worry about is that my willingness to research in this way helps to reinforce a lot troublesome aspects of academia. In particular, I wonder about what the effect on the work-life balance of my fellow PhD students, both in the sense that it normalizes what may be an unhealthy work-life balance for many people and in also the sense that there are many people, for whatever reason, who cannot do this even if they wanted.
Unpaid internships/adjunct faculty positions are perhaps a similar and more self-contained example of a similar dilemma- they may be individually beneficial, but certainly reinforce societal barriers and limit who is able to succeed.<issue_comment>username_1: Those that dedicate themselves to their career will do better than those that don't. This is beyond your control: You cannot meaningfully influence the masses dedicating themselves to their careers,\* nor the masses that don't. You're just one person, I don't think:
>
> [your] willingness to research in this way helps to reinforce a lot troublesome aspects of academia.
>
>
>
You can control your own career path and you can influence the careers of those you hire. You seem to have a good perspective. Use it to make the best decisions when influencing others.
\*Unless, perhaps, you dedicate your life to changing the system (likely at the cost of not contributing to research).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I will avoid the discussion about "fair work practices", which I find problematic for the reasons explored in the comments. Instead, I will address two questions that I think are at the heart of your question.
>
> Does the fact that you work long hours contribute to a "culture of overwork"?
>
>
>
Arguably, no. Investing a certain amount of time into your work is not an endorsement for others to follow your path. There are large individual difference in how much capacity a person is able and willing to commit to their research. You are responsible for keeping your own mental and physical health in check, but not for the health of others.
>
> How can you avoid contributing to a "culture of overwork"?
>
>
>
This is mostly about how you interact with others. Fundamentally, adopt a mindset that acknowledges and embraces individual differences.
1. Don't glorify worked hours as a performance metric. Don't walk around telling people how busy you are.
2. If you're in a position where you supervise students, encourage them to work the number of hours that feels right for them. Encourage them to view their time as a valuable asset and use it in a productive way. Don't scold them for not putting in a certain number of hours (assuming that they don't clearly put in less hours than they are contractually obliged to - if so, first try to understand what's going on).
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Professional boxers, even though they are in a physically very demanding and rough line of work, take great pains to care for their fists. Folklore says that traditional kettlebell athletes (who are generally the stereotypical 'tough' guys) have elaborate palm moisturizing routines. Its because they realize that hands are necessary for their sustenance.
For academics, the equivalent is our minds. Its just that simple, we need to care for them on the highest priority. This doesn't have to come at the cost of advancing a career, we have to figure out how. The 'how' is very person dependent, because some of us can happily work longer and some of us can't. The individual must find their balance and not wait for legislation (most likely that will follow once enough individuals work on themselves). Most of all, it may help to de-emphasize the mind and treat it like any other biological system.
Let's stop thinking that it can take care of itself and keep pushing it beyond recovery. Ethics, fair work practice and work-life balance are abstractions we create because we don't like to individually take a call and firmly accept our limits, mental and physical.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: It seems that one of your main concern is that you keep thinking about your research outside typical "business hours".
Just to give you a different perspective: not all jobs outside academia are the type of 9am-5pm, where you finish the work at specific time and immediately cut off mentally from it. Consider a few examples:
* entrepreneurs - most (small) business owners work way more than 8 hours a day, and even when they finish their work for the day they keep thinking about their businesses, the same way you do think about your research;
* professional athletes - most sportsmen, or sportswomen, be it footballers, tennis players, pole jumpers, etc., organize their entire lives and daily schedules around their career. Besides training and keeping fit, they have to strictly control their diets, often give up some pleasures (e.g. limit the use of alcohol, do not attend late night parties, etc), constantly monitor their performance and adjust their training techniques. Moreover, they have to remain in focus - it may seem strange to you, but they also keep thinking about their work, about opportunities to improve etc, all the time, also after training sessions;
* artists - similarly as the two groups above, artists usually think about their work all the time, they are constantly "at work" searching for inspiration and contemplating ideas.
Yet we seldom discuss overwork culture among, e.g., sci-fi writers, painters, or professional body builders. Thus, there has to be something more to academia than the raw amount of time devoted to work, that provokes these discussions.
There are many competitive career paths, which are followed by passionates willing to devote to them much of their time, if not entire lives. This cannot, and arguably should not, be changed. On the other hand, there are things about academia, such as dishonest PIs manipulating students into performing unpaid work unrelated to their thesis, which are truly unethical and which can be fixed.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I don't see a "culture of overwork" unique to academia. Ask a small business owner, a salesperson, professionals in industry, and so forth. What you'll find is that, like academia, there's a natural selection process always in the works, selecting those who are successful. And in that competition there are always those who are willing to work harder, those whose concept of life-work balance is quite different from others'. What works for you might not work for me.
It might be illuminating to see what happens at businesses offering Unlimited Vacation as a benefit. Anecdotally people end up skipping vacations and time away. Humans are interestingly diverse critters.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Astronat made a great comment:
>
> No one wants to be part of a system they dislike, but that's not a reason to opt out of the system. It's a reason to change the system.
>
>
>
Since people tend to have different working styles and personal lives, how could one expect a one-sized-fits-all approach to work-life balance? You can improve the system by working to encourage and normalize a personally-defined work-life balance wherever you can (e.g. in your own life). This is one of my advisor's greatest attributes -- she actively supports me approaching my work in a way that works best for me and my family. Advisors like her will make great strides in improving the system, one student at a time.
It seems like another one of your worries is as follows. You enjoy working longer hours than others may be able to sustain. If this puts your work ahead of theirs, then you have inadvertently disadvantaged them for not working as much as you.
My response is perhaps a bit idealistic, but **life is not a race**. Sure, competition is an inherent part of academia as the available resources and openings are finite. But your success does not preclude others from enjoying their work, just like the success of others should not prevent you from enjoying your work. There's a great discussion about this (for mathematics) on [mathoverflow](https://mathoverflow.net/q/43690/146401).
There is a constant flow of preprints and papers in my field. Rather than letting myself be jealous or feel like I am falling behind, I let myself enjoy learning about a beautiful and developing subject at my own pace.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: I believe that many of the problems you listed result from the demand exceeding the supply for faculty jobs. In a game-theoretical sense, this results in individuals choosing hardships that, when repeated over a large system, might seem unethical. Ultimately, I think you would have to change the incentives of the entire academic system to avoid these choices. Not even an university president likely has the influence to change the entire system.
>
> I wonder about what the effect on the work-life balance of my fellow PhD students, both in the sense that it normalizes what may be an unhealthy work-life balance for many people and in also the sense that there are many people, for whatever reason, who cannot do this even if they wanted.
>
>
>
Many PhD students want a faculty job, and are willing to work extra hours to make themselves more competitive for one. For someone whose primary goal in life is to get a faculty job, working more hours to the point of having an "unhealthy work-life balance" is their optimal strategy.
In other words, you could choose to work less hours. That might make you less competitive for a faculty job, meaning the job would go to someone who had more research output (possibly due to their choice to work more hours).
You would have to change the hiring criteria to avoid this. However, school rankings are partially based on the research output of the school, so schools have an incentive to hire more productive faculty.
>
> Unpaid internships/adjunct faculty positions are perhaps a similar and more self-contained example of a similar dilemma- they may be individually beneficial, but certainly reinforce societal barriers and limit who is able to succeed.
>
>
>
Such positions will exist as long as people are willing to take them. While an university president might be able to abolish such positions at their school, there are many other universities that would benefit (in terms of research output leading to higher rankings) from offering such positions.
Also, that's a very relevant username.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: I think that indeed one should not dismiss, as it has been in some answers, the fact that the overwork culture is perpetuated as much by the increasing pressures in academics as by the people actually overworking. It is important to keep this in mind not to misunderstand some fundamental equilibriums. For example, some user spoke about "scarce research funds" as a justification for overworking whereas it is arguably overworking that lets governments or private research agencies keep the research funds low.
Now back to your issue, it would be irrealistic for you not to work when you want to ; however you might want to reframe your conception of success as it most likely influences your willingness to work in a way that may be negative. As I see it and from my experience, it often switches the will to work out of curiosity, interest or pleasure toward the hypothetical pleasure or satisfaction that academic recognition would bring you.
Academic recognition is indeed the common (and in some ways natural) definition of success ; I would say it could be rather a consequence of success where "success" would be something closer to "a job well done". This latter definition has the inconvenient of being harder to (self-)evaluate which could explain in some way this shift. But the former definition has the issue of making people work, and sometime overwork, for a future and often illusory satisfaction while, indeed, degrading other people's working condition.
All this said, if you work now in a way commensurable to your will to work when your will is driven by this second definition of success, that is driven by the satisfaction of working itself, of solving something or having done a job well (as obviously not all academic pleasures are immediate, but they should be directly related to your work), I think that the bigger part of your moral dilemma disappears. As you enjoy your work, overworking (with respect to the normal standards, not to you) don't feel like your spoiling your field ; as much as throwing food would make you feel bad while eating and enjoying it wouldn't.
Note that a corollary of this view is that if working at this pace is not enough to keep working in academics, you should be OK with it as it would otherwise mean overworking (now with respect to your health and life balance) in order to stay in academics. This potential resignation or forbearance helps you further feel like you are doing an ethic choice.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: So, while this might not apply as much to your position as a PhD student/postdoc, I want to chip in with a slightly different perspective for a bit of completeness.
Many answers compare doing research outside of the regular 9-5 to doing art, or practising a sport outside of regular working hours, and saying nobody is surprised when professional writers or boxers work/practice for more than 8 hours a day. So for research, which is something most of us got into because of an intrinsic motivation as well, it feels like it should be the same.
I will be the first one to admit, if I really get into trying out a new concept / constructing a new theory, I often won't want to stop. *And I don't mind*. However, I have noticed the "culture of overwork", in the negative sense that you describe **present at permanent academic positions**. Specifically, in positions which require some amount of teaching.
(Now, I understand that there are research-only positions in the US; I also know about very prestigious research-only positions in France. But in the UK system, you are typically expected to split your time 40-40-20, that is **40% of your time on research, 40% on teaching, 20% on admin**. This balance might differ from country to country, but most EU entry level academic positions have some teaching requirements, anywhere between 20 and 50% on paper.)
And, while I definitely do understand the value of sharing our knowledge and teaching the next generation (which not all of my academic colleagues always seem to), my primary motivation to get such a position was to enable me to do research as a professional calling. I entered into a contract with the University, in which I promise a part of my time in services, and in return they promise I will be allowed to do research for a part of my time. And then reality sets in: on paper, the Uni "believes" that preparing a 2-hour lecture is just 2 hours of additional work. Marking student work is, again, not factored in realistically. If one spends 4 and a half working days dealing with teaching activities, it only leaves evenings and weekends for research. But really, is the problem in the research you did on Friday evening?
In this case, I think the question you ask has very much merit. In fact, the UK academia has been somewhat vocal about it. The core of the issue is exactly what you point out: *does working after hours perpetuate these unhealthy expectations?* There was a strike related to this issue in 2019, and a colleague of mine perfectly summarised the issue when I asked him *what are they going to do while on strike*. His answer was: **while on strike about culture of overwork in academia, he would work on his own research and grant proposals**.
And I agree with his sentiment. I am not doing research because somebody pays me to. In that sense, it is the same as producing art or training to master a physical activity: I do it for intrinsic value. An academic position, fortunately, allows me to support myself while I do something I am passionate about. I joke with my friends that *I refuse to work for money* -- if I did that I could sell y skills much better.
So in my opinion, there is nothing problematic with spending (a lot) of your time working on something you are passionate about. It is your time, your choice: if you *prefer* spending it doing research as opposed to e.g. playing a musical instrument, there is nothing wrong with that. The problematic component "perpetuating the culture of overwork" in academia is, I think, that many people do more *"work"* than they get paid for.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/13
| 1,323
| 5,384
|
<issue_start>username_0: **Update**: I did contact the department's teaching committee about this situation and they seemed to keep an eye on my PI. Six months later (I have graduated at that time), the girl who was humiliated and another young PhD student in my group asked for a long medical leave at the same time because of mental health.
My previous colleagues recently told me that this PI has been removed from the department's faculty group, but he still stays in the department as a technician.
**Background**: I am a PhD student in my final year, and I'm writing my thesis now. My PI (not a professor) is in his late 40's and is generally kind in public. However, he is often moody, and I feel he stresses his students out by repeatedly making judgemental statements about them in the lab. We usually try to keep our cool and let him take his bad mood out on us. One colleague is a major target of his bad mood. This is probably because she is not always in a good health and asks for sick leave occasionally. My PI only allows us to take in total 4 weeks of leave every year (despite our university grants 8 weeks of leave in total). However, in my opinion see she works hard on her experiments day and night.
**Situation**: Last year, at a lab meeting, this colleague said that two of her cousins had COVID. My PI smiled and said **'Oh now I see the problem in your family gene.'** There were 4 PhD students (including me) and a technician present. I was shocked and the others also seemed to be at least surprised. After the lab meeting, I asked the colleague if she was OK, and she smiled embarrassedly.
I would like to report this to the department. However, I wonder if this may be more of my colleague's choice. In my opinion, my PI has created a toxic environment for all of us, and I don't want to let this go. He makes micro-bullying or threatening statements occasionally, but this public humiliation seemed very serious and crossed a red line. We've been treated similarly but not as bad as this, so people seemed to accept my PI for who he is. However, recently my colleague is treated especially badly by my PI and she looks very frustrated. I feel bad for her and feel I need to do something.
**Question**: As this public humiliation happened about one year ago, how can I report this if I don't have recorded proof? Are there other choices to make our research environment healthier? What can I do?
Thanks ahead for any help and suggestions.<issue_comment>username_1: This should definitely be reported and, as it seems nobody has done it yet, the ethical choice for you would be to do so.
Of course, it would have been much easier to gather evidence if the incident was reported at the time when it happens instead of a year later. However, as Joel pointed out in a comment, there are several witnesses and (by a simple binomial distribution), it is quite probable that at least some of them recall it, albeit in a patchy manner.
Your university should have a platform which enables you to submit such things anonymously so that you aren't scared of any backfire from your PI. It is only if the case is judged by the university's disciplinary panel that you (and your colleagues/technician) may be asked to testify publically. Since you seem to be in your fifth (final?) year, by the time this were to happen you should be (essentially) done with your thesis, which practically eliminates any chance of retaliation from your PI which you may be concerned about, at least directly relating to your graduation as a PhD.
If, however, you are applying for postdocs or other roles which require recommendation letters in their application, you should consider avoiding testifying in public against your PI until you have secured this next role, as the lack of a good LoR from your PI could be a hurdle into securing such a role.
Overall, I do think this should be reported (better late than never). Just think that if you just let it through, your PI would continue to abuse (verbally and otherwise, as already done to you) to future students. You don't want this to happen, do you?
Edit: Even if the PI is not sanctioned due to lack of evidence, knowing they have been reported will be a warning that he cannot go on with this kind of behaviour without any repercussions.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: We do not know your local laws and culture, so beware that advice here may be inaccurate.
>
> He makes micro-bullying or threatening statements occasionally, but this public humiliation seemed very serious and crossed a red line.
>
>
>
* It is the pattern of behavior, not the specific example you gave, that is what you need to report.
* A recording is not necessary to make a complaint.
* Reports are usually made to a union, ombudsperson, office of civil rights, or diversity office. It depends on local customs. Check your university's policies, or possibly local laws.
* Usually being rude, offensive, inappropriate, wrong, or stupid is not against the rules, but threats, bullying, and harassment are. Do not expect all bad behavior to result in punishment.
* Do expect to get the same amount of leave that the university policy
says you should get.
>
> making judgemental statements
>
>
>
Keep in mind that judging people is part of the PIs job. But it should be done in an appropriate manner.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2021/04/13
| 1,193
| 5,129
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am teaching a subject for a group of students I have not met before, and the exam coming up. It is a 14-day take-home exam. My previous experience with examining similar students indicates that there is a somewhat widespread problem of failing to answer in sufficient detail or sufficient rigor. (My subject is rather "mathematical", but the students are rather "not mathematical", so they are not used to mathematically rigorous thinking.) When reading their answers, I feel I would like to ask about the omitted details\*, and I suspect quite many of the students would answer my additional questions correctly. If only I could provide them this chance...
I thought of allowing the students to submit their drafts early. Then I would glance over the answers and comment on those who should be expanded or detailed, without indicating whether the content of the current answer is correct or not. I think this would achieve the goal.
However, there is the problem of anonymity. Normally, the students submit their answers to an online system which anonymizes them and only then do I get to evaluate them. The system cannot be used for early draft submission, though. Another way would be for the students to send me e-mails with their drafts, but that would breach anonymity. **Question:** Could you recommend a solution of how to anonymize the draft submission? I also would like to ensure that each student is only given one chance to submit the draft (which seems like an additional difficulty in designing an anonymized system).
\*You could suggest to formulate the questions absolutely precisely so that there is no way a thoughtful student would miss what the answer should be and how detailed it should be. I am trying this to an extent (taken to the extreme, it would make the questions awkward), but this does not always work as well as I would like. Also, what I am trying to evaluate is primarily not the mathematical rigor but the general understanding and some other things. As long as a student can answer correctly and in sufficient detail (regardless of whether this is right away or after additional questions/comments from me), I feel the student deserves a good grade.<issue_comment>username_1: This should definitely be reported and, as it seems nobody has done it yet, the ethical choice for you would be to do so.
Of course, it would have been much easier to gather evidence if the incident was reported at the time when it happens instead of a year later. However, as Joel pointed out in a comment, there are several witnesses and (by a simple binomial distribution), it is quite probable that at least some of them recall it, albeit in a patchy manner.
Your university should have a platform which enables you to submit such things anonymously so that you aren't scared of any backfire from your PI. It is only if the case is judged by the university's disciplinary panel that you (and your colleagues/technician) may be asked to testify publically. Since you seem to be in your fifth (final?) year, by the time this were to happen you should be (essentially) done with your thesis, which practically eliminates any chance of retaliation from your PI which you may be concerned about, at least directly relating to your graduation as a PhD.
If, however, you are applying for postdocs or other roles which require recommendation letters in their application, you should consider avoiding testifying in public against your PI until you have secured this next role, as the lack of a good LoR from your PI could be a hurdle into securing such a role.
Overall, I do think this should be reported (better late than never). Just think that if you just let it through, your PI would continue to abuse (verbally and otherwise, as already done to you) to future students. You don't want this to happen, do you?
Edit: Even if the PI is not sanctioned due to lack of evidence, knowing they have been reported will be a warning that he cannot go on with this kind of behaviour without any repercussions.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: We do not know your local laws and culture, so beware that advice here may be inaccurate.
>
> He makes micro-bullying or threatening statements occasionally, but this public humiliation seemed very serious and crossed a red line.
>
>
>
* It is the pattern of behavior, not the specific example you gave, that is what you need to report.
* A recording is not necessary to make a complaint.
* Reports are usually made to a union, ombudsperson, office of civil rights, or diversity office. It depends on local customs. Check your university's policies, or possibly local laws.
* Usually being rude, offensive, inappropriate, wrong, or stupid is not against the rules, but threats, bullying, and harassment are. Do not expect all bad behavior to result in punishment.
* Do expect to get the same amount of leave that the university policy
says you should get.
>
> making judgemental statements
>
>
>
Keep in mind that judging people is part of the PIs job. But it should be done in an appropriate manner.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2021/04/13
| 370
| 1,646
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am submitting a paper to a journal. This journal allows authors' affiliations to be indicated either with superscripts or by listing the authors from each institution on its own line. I am trying to decide which of these to choose.
I normally submit papers with superscript affiliations because this is less wasteful in terms of space. But, the layout of my current paper is amenable to both formats (the author order doesn't matter, and this alternate format seems clearer). My experience is mostly with LaTeX with the revTex class, so it's just whether the "superscriptaddress" is listed in the beginning of the document or not.
In the absence of guidance from the journal, what factors should one consider when deciding which style to use?<issue_comment>username_1: Which way to do the superscripts really just depends on what the journal/conference says the is the way to do it. Either try to find the style guide for the journal, their latex template if they have one, or have a look at some of the recent papers that they have published to see which way they do it.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: If many authors share the exact same affiliation, use the superscript form.
If one or more authors each have multiple affiliations, use the superscript form.
If authors come from departments whose names indicate distinct disciplines, and these multiple expertises are relevant for the multidisciplinary aspects of the paper, do not use the superscript form.
Use these rules as rules of thumb, not as ironclad rules. In the end, this is a matter of personal style and opinion.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2021/04/13
| 515
| 2,225
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently writing my dissertation/thesis and am quite new to using glossaries. I'm unsure if I'm going a bit overboard regarding the number of terms I'm including in my glossary. E.g. I talk about the terms Breadth-First Search, Depth First Search, and Iterative Deepening A\* Search (All search algorithms) for which I have included glossary definitions so I am able to use their corresponding abbreviations.
Would it be convenient to include definitions in a glossary for terms such as "Rubik's Cube" and "Cubie" and "Facelet" - Rubik's Cube Jargon. My dissertation revolves around a Rubik's Cube Solver. Terms like these are plastered throughout the report and I'm unsure if I should just write a simple description in some form of bullet-pointed format, separate from the glossary, or would I just include terms like these in the glossary. The first mention of these terms is visibly internally hyperlinked.
Any advice, recommendations, and ideas are most welcome
Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: Since your thesis is about Rubik's cube a section where you establish cube vocabulary, complete with definitions and examples, is entirely appropriate. You can duplicate some of that material in the glossary, but I suspect your readers won't need to refer to it often. I would not introduce abbreviations or acronyms for "cubie" and "facelet".
The first time you introduce a standard algorithm like depth first search you explain how it works and note that you will abbreviate it as DFS. You put that in the glossary.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: There are two separate concepts here - a glossary (a list of technical terms with explanations) and a list of abbreviations. They are sometimes, but not always, combined (and sometimes aren't present at all - my PhD thesis had neither).
Choosing whether to use one or both is a matter of taste (unless your institution has relevant guidelines for your thesis). You can abbreviate and explain concepts in text if you choose to do so, as long as the abbreviation/explanation is given clearly where the term first appears. If you are concerned that the glossary is too long, you could restrict it to a list of abbreviations.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/04/13
| 1,036
| 4,620
|
<issue_start>username_0: I wanted to know how much weight the college someone got a master's from matters while applying for a doctoral program?
So for instance, if a person is enrolled in a college which is not well known and his application is great in terms of research projects, CPI score, TOEFL, GRE scores etc., then would that person's application be considered worse than a person who is doing master's from a very good college (well-known)?
In particular, I wanted to ask this because I have heard that those Indian students are preferred for PhD programs in Physics in good colleges in US who have done Master's from a top IITs like IIT Kanpur or IIT Madras and students who apply from a lower ranked IIT get frequently rejected.
P.S: Those who have no idea about IITs can take the question in a general context from my first paragraph.<issue_comment>username_1: This answer applies to doctoral admissions in the US, and, while not universal, is pretty regular.
First, your successful admission will depend on a weighting of many things. There won't be a standard, published, weighting, but only the general sensibility of the individual faculty members on the admissions committee. Note that most (not all) doctoral admissions is by committee, not by individual PIs/advisors.
The important factors, varying for every candidate and for every committee member, in a rough order of importance, are grades, especially in the field for which you seek admission, letters of recommendation from professors, standardized exams (some places), writing ability in English (some places), research experience (more important if you have a MS, than otherwise), and intangibles. A gap or two in your education can normally be made up as most degree programs are relatively open ended in time.
Among the intangibles might be the place(s) at which you studied, but letter of recommendation from people who know you well would be much more important. A good student from a mid range place might be greatly preferred over a mediocre student from a great institution.
If your previous education is at relatively unknown places then it is likely to be ignored except in a few exceptional cases. If a university already has some experience with others from your place, then their success might help to make a prediction about yours. But it is, I think, much more likely to be a favorable impression made by a good student than the opposite situation.
And note that some great and demanding professors can be found at quite unknown universities. You can learn a lot from them.
The committee needs to make a fairly accurate prediction of the likely success of a candidate. Grades and supportive letters, along with prior research experience are very important. It is much more important what *you* have done so far and what others think of you, than other things.
Wherever you study, work hard, make a good impression. Stay in contact with professors who support you. But also know that the competition is very fierce.
Also note that most students in the US enter doctoral studies immediately after their bachelors degree. A MS is seldom required and can often be earned along the way.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This is a long comment, not an answer, but I often see this misconception in particular with students from India considering graduate admissions in the US.
Graduate admissions in the US are decided by committees of professors in the department that will admit you. The professors will read your application, and then they will make a collective, *subjective*, judgement about which students are most likely to succeed in the program, and admit those students. There are no other criteria. Different professors may have different opinions based on their own experiences of what indicators make a student likely to be successful (and different definitions of success!), but these tend to average out in committee discussions.
This seems strange to someone from India, where these kinds of decisions tend to get made based on some formula involving various numerical criteria. You might complain that the US system is subject to bias from the professors and even possible corruption. It is, but in the US we have decided that the benefit of being able to take into account subtle, unmeasurable considerations outweighs (in our context) the disadvantages of bias and the risk of corruption.
It is, of course, possible to make some generalizations about whom committees tend to admit and what they tend to consider in admissions, but these are predictions about human behavior, not rules.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/13
| 255
| 1,224
|
<issue_start>username_0: There are many similar questions regarding whether PhD GPA matters after grad school, but this question is specific to obtaining academic funding as a professor. When applying for funding, do funding agencies look at the professors previous GPA and take that into consideration?<issue_comment>username_1: It is extremely unlikely that anyone would care, especially a source of funds. They are interested in you research potential and your productivity. There might be various aspects to that for specialized awards, but no one will ask you for your doctoral level transcripts. They are largely meaningless in any case.
If you passed comprehensive exams then you learned enough to go forward and that is assumed if you completed a doctorate.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Unless your transcript is part of your application package, a review panel for funding would have no access to such information. The only way they could find out would be if a member of the review panel taught you, and if that occurred, that member would probably have to declare themselves in conflict. In the US, that means they wouldn't even be able to be in the room while your application is discussed.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/04/14
| 2,705
| 11,748
|
<issue_start>username_0: This is probably a very broad question. It might be difficult to find one answer across all disciplines. If anyone could share their personal experiences on how they have designed tests and the thought process behind it, I would really appreciate it.<issue_comment>username_1: In the absence of other factors, in my opinion, at least in mathematics, a free response is always the more valuable type of question. The educational value of getting shown, where precisely your argument went wrong is much higher than just being told if the final result was right or not. It also allows for a much finer grading, as I can both give partial points for an almost correct reasoning leading to a wrong answer as well as deduct points for incorrect reasoning leading to the correct answer.
That being said, a test question never happens in a vacuum and the problem usually is lack of time. This can occur in two forms, lack of working time to correct the test and lack of time during the test.
Personally, I believe the former is a bad excuse. Unless you have a 200+ people class without any TAs (in which case, clearly something else is wrong), it is always possible to correct a full-text exam in a reasonable amount of time.
This leaves the latter point. Any exam has a limited duration and it might not be possible to cover all topics in this time. My personal response would be to leave out some of the less important ones at random. As long as the topic selection is not announced to the students beforehand, they still have to study all of them and the results will be similar. But this is a point where a good argument can be made for turning part of the test into multiple-choice. In this case, the most important topics should still all be free-responses, but you could add a small multiple-choice section covering the rest. However as these are not the important part of the test and they are there to save time, I would keep them simple. (E.g. picking the right definition or "does A imply B?") After all, if marking the right answer is not substantially quicker than writing it out, then you are not saving time.
In any case I would always invert the original question. Don't take a concept and decide of it should be multiple choice, but instead decide how many multiple choice questions you have to make and then pick the questions that work best.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: There is a problem with multiple choice questions in general: They are very hard to design well. The time you "save" in grading isn't free. You need to spend a lot of time and thought on question design and you really need to find a way to verify the questions so that you don't get negative correlations between the answers and the knowledge of students. The latter has a statistical test, whose name I've forgotten after all these years. Sorry. Maybe someone can supply it. Some auto graders will supply that item analysis for you, actually.
In a free response question, the grader can apply judgement based on subtleties. In a MCQ, that all has to be designed into the question and the provided answers. And it isn't always easy. In a free response question, a small mistake in the question itself can sometimes be worked around if the student says something "sensible". There is no such chance in a MCQ.
Ideally, there is one correct answer, usually one clearly incorrect answer. But what of the others? Ideally, again, they should be designed to capture common student misconceptions so that feedback can be given to the student on why they chose the wrong answer and what they need to do to correct their thinking. Just an "incorrect" doesn't give any insight, especially if the incorrect answer are just chosen without *deep* thought.
If you aren't willing to spend an hour or more designing each question and if you aren't able to validate the test, then MCQs are very dangerous. The national level standardized tests do that sort of prior analysis and post validation. They also likely have a few surprises with new questions.
---
The statistical test I'm thinking of measures an individuals answer for each question compared to their overall score over all the questions and aggregates it over all the test takers. If the people answering question 1, say, do worse overall on that question than their overall score on the exam, then the question itself or its answers are likely misleading. Getting this feedback as the test creator can be quite humbling. Something is wrong, either in the teaching or the testing.
If you need to give MCQs for reasons of scale or otherwise, then expect problems. Try to build in some flexibility in the usage so that it doesn't punish people who actually understand things. This is very hard if good students "waste" time in considering weird questions when they should be doing something more productive. Students aren't always very good about picking the low hanging fruit first and then going back for the harder ones. Online testing might make that more difficult, actually as going back over skipped answers might not be well supported.
---
I assume it is still true, but at one time education degrees in the US required a course in test design. Given that, there must be text books devoted to it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I like multiple choice for Q's where you'd otherwise have to explain the sort of answer you want too much or you think they might misunderstand:
"What operation has the highest precedence? +, ^, \*, /". I'm looking for a binary operator, not () or unary minus. Limiting the answers is the easiest way to specify that. "What is the formal name for a folder? Directory, file-bucket, Organizer, ...". Students can spin out on a term like "formal" and "the formal term that would be in the manual" is long and not all that much better. "Why did Virginia object to the 1st constitution? A, B ... ". There were lots of reasons. Writing "the best reason" tends not to help much. Choosing from a list with one clearly best answer is safer.
Of course, it depends on what you want to ask and how much detail. We could just as easily have them show the order of operators in an equation; or ask "briefly list 3 reasons Virginia...".
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: True or False?
--------------
Since there's a lot of intersubjectivity here, and I agree that multiple choice is not optimal for assessment, I notice that one aspect of multiple choice has been left out, so I'll play Devil's advocate: **true/false questions**.
While it does depend on your content area, adding a few well-written T/F questions to make up a part of an evaluation can be useful. It can save students time of writing out full answers better devoted to FRQs while still showing that they retained certain facts. It is up to the author of the test (that's you) to decide what merits a free response in a given subject matter. For example, in teaching world language courses, it can be a simple way to evaluate if a student has retained key cultural, geographical, or historical topics. Keep the statements simple and to the point (even drawing attention to negative statements). Even then, **it can be better to ask a short free response question to eliminate guessing** or cheating. Take things like really big dates or facts that students either know or don't (i.e. What year was the Battle of Hastings?), which do not benefit from a multiple choice question. Asking it as T/F doesn't ward off guessing and statistically encourages it. One deterrent for this is to use a free response or short answer question to spot check a random T/F question; this also encourages differentiated learning and critical thinking. Unless you are trying to get a computer to grade the entirety of an exam (don't; people take the tests and people can grade them), there's no more work for you to read "1066" than to see true or false circled. It is a better example of the student's work and retention. I would go with the short answer question there.
Think way back to your earliest spelling tests and which was the better assessment: did you show what you were thinking and how you were learning when you wrote out the word your teacher said or when you saw four words with three spelled close but wrong?
Overall, free response is the best insight and evaluation of your students; it leaves more room for the individual and less for testing errors. Of course, some disciplines and depths can fit in multiple choice better than others, but reading FRQs is not as tedious as writing multiple choice and a gives a better demonstration of nuances. I suggest sprinkling in just a handful of T/F for differentiation and time management.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: A great use of multiple choice questions is in [formative assessments](https://www.edutopia.org/blog/5-fast-formative-assessment-tools-vicki-davis): you can test and quickly see which of your students have common misunderstandings. These questions don't work so well to assign grades, as then the student isn't interested in what they misunderstood, but are great for use in quizzes during teaching or between session to allow explanation of the errors.
As an example from a course I taught on the programming language R:
>
> After running the following code, what will R return (answer without
> running)?
>
>
>
```
b<-2
a<-10
b<-20
function2<-function(){
a<-1
c(a,b)
}
c(function2(),a,b)
```
* 10,20,10,20
* 1,2,10,20
* R will produce an error - Error: object ‘b’ not found
* 1,20,10,20
Each of the answers has its own reason for being chosen: 1 shows a misunderstanding of using local scope, 2 shows a misunderstanding of reassignment, 3 shows a misunderstanding of scoping going to global, and 4 is correct.
This kind of multiple choice question is obviously more work, but is much superior to a free response. I would do these with a show of hands and ask students to argue their point - much more difficult to do without the red herring answers.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: There's nothing wrong with a healthy mix!
-----------------------------------------
Though your question is very broad and the answer changes depending on the age group of students and their abilities, there is nothing wrong with a good mix (suited specifically to both of the possibilities above,) though in my answer I've included some facts and provided the most conclusive answer that I could.
While an open-ended question allows for the teacher to see exactly where the student went wrong and how to correct it, and also prevents a bad habit of guessing that often happens on multiple-choice, multiple-choice often has it's advantages as well.
For one, it makes for a much less tedious and painful, frustrating test. Sometimes students with special learning needs or learning disabilities may not be open to such a long test in this way, and if you are working with younger elementary-aged students, they do not have the attention span and it is often noticed that the quality of work goes down the more questions that are being asked.
However, know the abilities of your students. For High School/College level, more open-ended responses may be the way to get the test that gives you valuable information as a teacher. If you are teaching elementary students with a low attention span, maybe use one or two open ended questions with the rest being multiple choice.
Again, it really depends on the overall ability of the students.
The starting ratio (for upper elementary students) should be about 50/50 (ex. 5 open-ended, 5 multiple choices) for a test with ten questions, but this ratio can be adjusted for the individual needs of your students or depending on the age.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/14
| 2,797
| 12,138
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am preparing my application for two job positions for the same university on different subjects, but they are highly related to each other. Based on my knowledge and experience (PhD in applied machine learning and statistics), I am capabale of teaching both. Suppose, one job position is for assistant professor on statistics and the other is on statistical programming. Two different subjects, but (very) interrelated.
The question is: will it be detrimnetal or in anyway seen as a counterintuitive, or negative to my chances if I apply for both these positions given that they are so close to each other and is for the same university?<issue_comment>username_1: In the absence of other factors, in my opinion, at least in mathematics, a free response is always the more valuable type of question. The educational value of getting shown, where precisely your argument went wrong is much higher than just being told if the final result was right or not. It also allows for a much finer grading, as I can both give partial points for an almost correct reasoning leading to a wrong answer as well as deduct points for incorrect reasoning leading to the correct answer.
That being said, a test question never happens in a vacuum and the problem usually is lack of time. This can occur in two forms, lack of working time to correct the test and lack of time during the test.
Personally, I believe the former is a bad excuse. Unless you have a 200+ people class without any TAs (in which case, clearly something else is wrong), it is always possible to correct a full-text exam in a reasonable amount of time.
This leaves the latter point. Any exam has a limited duration and it might not be possible to cover all topics in this time. My personal response would be to leave out some of the less important ones at random. As long as the topic selection is not announced to the students beforehand, they still have to study all of them and the results will be similar. But this is a point where a good argument can be made for turning part of the test into multiple-choice. In this case, the most important topics should still all be free-responses, but you could add a small multiple-choice section covering the rest. However as these are not the important part of the test and they are there to save time, I would keep them simple. (E.g. picking the right definition or "does A imply B?") After all, if marking the right answer is not substantially quicker than writing it out, then you are not saving time.
In any case I would always invert the original question. Don't take a concept and decide of it should be multiple choice, but instead decide how many multiple choice questions you have to make and then pick the questions that work best.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: There is a problem with multiple choice questions in general: They are very hard to design well. The time you "save" in grading isn't free. You need to spend a lot of time and thought on question design and you really need to find a way to verify the questions so that you don't get negative correlations between the answers and the knowledge of students. The latter has a statistical test, whose name I've forgotten after all these years. Sorry. Maybe someone can supply it. Some auto graders will supply that item analysis for you, actually.
In a free response question, the grader can apply judgement based on subtleties. In a MCQ, that all has to be designed into the question and the provided answers. And it isn't always easy. In a free response question, a small mistake in the question itself can sometimes be worked around if the student says something "sensible". There is no such chance in a MCQ.
Ideally, there is one correct answer, usually one clearly incorrect answer. But what of the others? Ideally, again, they should be designed to capture common student misconceptions so that feedback can be given to the student on why they chose the wrong answer and what they need to do to correct their thinking. Just an "incorrect" doesn't give any insight, especially if the incorrect answer are just chosen without *deep* thought.
If you aren't willing to spend an hour or more designing each question and if you aren't able to validate the test, then MCQs are very dangerous. The national level standardized tests do that sort of prior analysis and post validation. They also likely have a few surprises with new questions.
---
The statistical test I'm thinking of measures an individuals answer for each question compared to their overall score over all the questions and aggregates it over all the test takers. If the people answering question 1, say, do worse overall on that question than their overall score on the exam, then the question itself or its answers are likely misleading. Getting this feedback as the test creator can be quite humbling. Something is wrong, either in the teaching or the testing.
If you need to give MCQs for reasons of scale or otherwise, then expect problems. Try to build in some flexibility in the usage so that it doesn't punish people who actually understand things. This is very hard if good students "waste" time in considering weird questions when they should be doing something more productive. Students aren't always very good about picking the low hanging fruit first and then going back for the harder ones. Online testing might make that more difficult, actually as going back over skipped answers might not be well supported.
---
I assume it is still true, but at one time education degrees in the US required a course in test design. Given that, there must be text books devoted to it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I like multiple choice for Q's where you'd otherwise have to explain the sort of answer you want too much or you think they might misunderstand:
"What operation has the highest precedence? +, ^, \*, /". I'm looking for a binary operator, not () or unary minus. Limiting the answers is the easiest way to specify that. "What is the formal name for a folder? Directory, file-bucket, Organizer, ...". Students can spin out on a term like "formal" and "the formal term that would be in the manual" is long and not all that much better. "Why did Virginia object to the 1st constitution? A, B ... ". There were lots of reasons. Writing "the best reason" tends not to help much. Choosing from a list with one clearly best answer is safer.
Of course, it depends on what you want to ask and how much detail. We could just as easily have them show the order of operators in an equation; or ask "briefly list 3 reasons Virginia...".
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: True or False?
--------------
Since there's a lot of intersubjectivity here, and I agree that multiple choice is not optimal for assessment, I notice that one aspect of multiple choice has been left out, so I'll play Devil's advocate: **true/false questions**.
While it does depend on your content area, adding a few well-written T/F questions to make up a part of an evaluation can be useful. It can save students time of writing out full answers better devoted to FRQs while still showing that they retained certain facts. It is up to the author of the test (that's you) to decide what merits a free response in a given subject matter. For example, in teaching world language courses, it can be a simple way to evaluate if a student has retained key cultural, geographical, or historical topics. Keep the statements simple and to the point (even drawing attention to negative statements). Even then, **it can be better to ask a short free response question to eliminate guessing** or cheating. Take things like really big dates or facts that students either know or don't (i.e. What year was the Battle of Hastings?), which do not benefit from a multiple choice question. Asking it as T/F doesn't ward off guessing and statistically encourages it. One deterrent for this is to use a free response or short answer question to spot check a random T/F question; this also encourages differentiated learning and critical thinking. Unless you are trying to get a computer to grade the entirety of an exam (don't; people take the tests and people can grade them), there's no more work for you to read "1066" than to see true or false circled. It is a better example of the student's work and retention. I would go with the short answer question there.
Think way back to your earliest spelling tests and which was the better assessment: did you show what you were thinking and how you were learning when you wrote out the word your teacher said or when you saw four words with three spelled close but wrong?
Overall, free response is the best insight and evaluation of your students; it leaves more room for the individual and less for testing errors. Of course, some disciplines and depths can fit in multiple choice better than others, but reading FRQs is not as tedious as writing multiple choice and a gives a better demonstration of nuances. I suggest sprinkling in just a handful of T/F for differentiation and time management.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: A great use of multiple choice questions is in [formative assessments](https://www.edutopia.org/blog/5-fast-formative-assessment-tools-vicki-davis): you can test and quickly see which of your students have common misunderstandings. These questions don't work so well to assign grades, as then the student isn't interested in what they misunderstood, but are great for use in quizzes during teaching or between session to allow explanation of the errors.
As an example from a course I taught on the programming language R:
>
> After running the following code, what will R return (answer without
> running)?
>
>
>
```
b<-2
a<-10
b<-20
function2<-function(){
a<-1
c(a,b)
}
c(function2(),a,b)
```
* 10,20,10,20
* 1,2,10,20
* R will produce an error - Error: object ‘b’ not found
* 1,20,10,20
Each of the answers has its own reason for being chosen: 1 shows a misunderstanding of using local scope, 2 shows a misunderstanding of reassignment, 3 shows a misunderstanding of scoping going to global, and 4 is correct.
This kind of multiple choice question is obviously more work, but is much superior to a free response. I would do these with a show of hands and ask students to argue their point - much more difficult to do without the red herring answers.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: There's nothing wrong with a healthy mix!
-----------------------------------------
Though your question is very broad and the answer changes depending on the age group of students and their abilities, there is nothing wrong with a good mix (suited specifically to both of the possibilities above,) though in my answer I've included some facts and provided the most conclusive answer that I could.
While an open-ended question allows for the teacher to see exactly where the student went wrong and how to correct it, and also prevents a bad habit of guessing that often happens on multiple-choice, multiple-choice often has it's advantages as well.
For one, it makes for a much less tedious and painful, frustrating test. Sometimes students with special learning needs or learning disabilities may not be open to such a long test in this way, and if you are working with younger elementary-aged students, they do not have the attention span and it is often noticed that the quality of work goes down the more questions that are being asked.
However, know the abilities of your students. For High School/College level, more open-ended responses may be the way to get the test that gives you valuable information as a teacher. If you are teaching elementary students with a low attention span, maybe use one or two open ended questions with the rest being multiple choice.
Again, it really depends on the overall ability of the students.
The starting ratio (for upper elementary students) should be about 50/50 (ex. 5 open-ended, 5 multiple choices) for a test with ten questions, but this ratio can be adjusted for the individual needs of your students or depending on the age.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/14
| 1,013
| 4,620
|
<issue_start>username_0: I had been researching about what students dislike about studying, and found out two contradictory piece of reasons:
1. students cannot understand the concepts taught to them by the teachers;
2. they hate spoon feeding.
Most articles on the internet (I think almost all of them) talk about how spoon feeding is harmful in education. But if 1 were the reason why students dislike learning, isn't it an imperative to make acquiring knowledge easier? I know lots of sites on the internet which simplify and explain topics carefully. Is that a form of spoon feeding? Or is that of simplification? Are there differences between them?
Should spoon feeding be stopped? Or should sources be more simplified?<issue_comment>username_1: Simplifying is not all or nothing, but you can simplify to some degree. If the students don't get what you want to teach them, then you haven't simplified enough. If it is too easy, then you have simplified too much. So it is all about finding the right balance for your students. Keep in mind that there is quite a bit of variation within students, so that complicates that equation even more.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: It really depends on the topic. I guess with every class you need to find the balance, and it's ok to ask your students in the beginning (or throughout) what they need explained and what is clear.
If you cannot do that, e.g. online teaching makes it a bit harder to read their expressions and often also means that fewer people respond, make sure to explain all concepts that are needed for the basic understanding of the central topics. To not sound like you think they know nothing, you can try and say something along the lines of "as you probably know/may have learned in high school ... "
I real-life classes I find that engaging with the students is the best way of gauging how much they get and where their insecurities may lie. You can do that in conversation much better than by talking down to them. It feels like you're guiding them through a new topic using their knowledge and building new knowledge. This may also lead to better results because their knowledge is expanding in a network.
I feel like spoon feeding is different and students hatred of it revolves around something else. Based on my own undergrad experience, there were a few lecturers who would just give us factoid after factoid and explanation after explanation but I never felt like I got an understanding of the topic as a whole. Better lecturers, on the other hand, would give you a feel for the whole topic and individual classes would call back to each other. We would build upon previously discussed topics and they would link up in complex ways. So, as we progressed, our way of thinking about the topic also had to become more complex and less straight-forward.
This is hard to explain and a very large topic. I hope, some of theses thoughts help.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I think that these concepts don't really overlap that much:
Simplification is about how you explain something. When you explain a concept, you might leave out some details which make the concept more complicated to grasp. By focusing on the most essential parts (and possibly adding the details later), you don't overwhelm the students with information and allow them to understand a concept in a "step by step" way.
Spoon-feeding is about how you let students solve tasks, in classroom or homework assignments. The goal of such assignments is to let students practice the learned concepts by applying them in an independent way. Spoon-feeding means that the students don't need to think because you have already done the thinking for them and just let them execute some clearly defined, straightforward tasks.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: There are important differences between simplifying and spoon feeding:
* simplifying: leaving details out that are not important for the moment. For example: not mentioning exceptions to certain rules.
* spoon feeding: sharing knowledge slowly, small bits at a time, and not teaching students to think for themselves or understand the underlying concepts. A typical example of spoon-feeding is telling students what they need to memorize to pass the exam, but not teaching the (useful) underlying concepts that allow them to judge new situations (even though these new situations may not be part of the exam).
Of course we cannot tell if these interpretations are exactly what the students in your question mean. It would be best to ask them to clarify and provide examples.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/14
| 1,309
| 5,505
|
<issue_start>username_0: The reason I'm asking is because my PhD supervisor "collects" - for lack of a better word - PhD candidates. She has at least 15 PhD candidates. None of them is being hired, except for one - as her private secretary. She also does not mind stringing out PhD duration by giving no input whatsoever but insisting that the research is still "weak" (without explaining how), and would let them go only after >5 years have passed. This makes me wonder whether the department receives money for each PhD candidate to finance the department, so that the PhD candidates' number and years spent there are of essence. I'm in Germany. We find the situation not ideal, but we are afraid to take this matters higher up, as we don't know if this might backfire. Is there anything to be done to get out of such situation?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> This makes me wonder whether the department receives money for each PhD candidate to finance the department, so that the PhD candidates number and years spent there are of essence.
>
>
>
(Context: I'm familiar and have first-hand experience with the German system.) There is no direct flow of money for each PhD candidate. However, the number of graduated PhD students is seen as a performance metric for both departments and professors, and professors might receive a certain salary bonus for scoring well on that metric.
A rational reason for keeping around the candidates longer than necessary might be that she wants to squeeze more work out of them, including papers. There might also be other, non-rational reasons.
>
> Is there anything to be done to get out of such situation?
>
>
>
Walk away. The advisor seems to have little to offer except for the dangling carrot of an eventual PhD degree; however, for a person that values their time as an asset that could be used for other things, that's probably not worth it.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This is something that happens everywhere, and the extent of this depends goes beyond the funding model to cultural differences across disciplines and the personal style of the supervisor. Getting additional data points - is this a generic features in other groups around you or something specific to this supervisor ? - is important.
Beyond metrics valuable to the supervisor mentioned in another post, good students should be able to finish early and - if they have a constructive relation with their supervisor - will likely continue to work with the supervisor (at least in the short term) to finish papers. As a result, my experience is that it is rarely sign of a healthy group when students routinely overextend their degree.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: There is nothing wrong with asking the question in a neutral manner to your administration or student representative.
I am not sure about Germany, but in France for instance, having doctoral students graduate on time (3 years) is considered a positive indicator for the department/university, and it is complicated for students to be funded beyond that - which has its own drawbacks. Some information can be found in HCERES reports, eg p7 of <https://www.hceres.fr/sites/default/files/media/downloads/e2020-ev-0772710c-def-ped200021039-rd.pdf>.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Although I am not familiar with German system, I suppose this is the same as the other countries. Usually, not the departments nor the professors receive straight money per the time the Ph.D. candidates are there. (Although based on the rule of some universities the candidates are penalized after passing a certain time, this money usually is not paid to departments, it is mostly paid as university private revenue).
Anyway, Ph.D. candidates may have different indirect benefits: If they write more papers or receive more research grants from organizations it is beneficial; additionally, they may assist the professors to help other students; their longer education may show the professors' colleagues their seriousness and hardwork.
Another important reason can be the score that professors receive after educating each Ph.D. candidate. He may want to save this working score for his next year.
Or some professors just pass the times to get retired. They don't like to have more students and don't like to spend more time for their job. If their older students got educated, they might have to struggle with a new student.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: I work at a German university and I assure you that profs do not get money for every PhD candidate. And to be honest, I have never heard of a prof having 14 PhD students doing unpaid work for them.
Where I work, a prof usually gets the money for one or two young researchers - either a PhD student or a postdoc, or both. (This is why she is able to pay one of you.) If they want to have more, they themselves have to apply for third-party funded projects, e.g. from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft.
As competition is very high here, getting a third-party funded project is always a success, so profs that have a lot of PhD students are considered successful.
I think your prof does this to push her own career. If she has many PhD candidates, she can publish a lot with her name on it without having to do too much herself, and at the same time she at least *pretends* to be successful in getting funds. This is why she does not want to let you go.
If I were you, I would leave this prof as soon as possible.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/14
| 349
| 1,619
|
<issue_start>username_0: I studied for 3 years computer science at a relatively good university, and at the same time I have several years of experience with broad and deep knowledge in many fields on the subject. I am a creative person and I am interested in expressing my Innovative ideas by setting up a start-up from scratch which will bring a technological solution to many companies in high-tech.
I wanted to ask in general what it is recommended to study for a master's degree so that I can bring the product that I can build independently through my knowledge of computer science and experience to a successful start-up company?<issue_comment>username_1: Given that a start up is a business and your education is elsewhere, it would probably do you well to get some specific knowledge of business and the regulations that typically govern business. An MBA might be appropriate if it is focused on entrepreneurship. Economics is probably not what you want, being a more theoretical course of study. Marketing might be an alternative. But it would depend on the particulars.
You can hire business experience, of course, once you have some revenue or can talk people in to working for nearly nothing, but lack of knowledge yourself might mean you need to trust them more than is wise.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Master degrees vary from each university, so in general I would recommend Management. Management is a good basis for organizing and leading a company. Once you know that, you can employ other people to do the more specific jobs, like accounting/finance, marketing, etc.
In some
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/04/14
| 308
| 1,473
|
<issue_start>username_0: So recently there was a data science competition and we learned and made a good algorithm which can be published as a case study. So how can I cite the Data source and the really good score metric that was also given by the company which organiszed the competition? Yes the data has been made public and free to use but the scoring metric that was given was in a document given during the competition has no public document is available for it. Yes the link for the competition also exist.
Thanks this is my first paper and im super confused.<issue_comment>username_1: You can include an Acknowledgements section in which you thank the company for the data and the contest as appropriate. You can include, there, a link to the data, etc.
It is probably unnecessary to even mention the scoring metric for purposes of citation. It is possible that the company wants it kept private if they haven't published it.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You can cite websites and documents (even private ones) in the usual way. You should acknowledge the organiser for posing the question that your algorithm addresses (since it isn't a contribution of yours). The score is valuable when presented with the scoring metric (since readers can presumably only verify the score using the metric). That poses a problem, because the metric is private. Perhaps you can ask the organiser's permission to include the scoring metric.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/14
| 1,504
| 6,177
|
<issue_start>username_0: I applied to 16 graduate schools for this coming fall. I am a transfer student at a Top 10 Public US school. I had GPA 4.00 at the time I applied (Not yet took graduate course yet, but I wrote that I would have taken 8 graduate courses at the time I applied).
I didn't have the REU (but I was proceeded algebraic geometry research thesis), and a few experience of presentations. I am an international male applicant.
The person who wrote my letter of recommendation is famous/reputable (one Fields medallist and one very famous mathematician of algebraic geometry). But, I couldn't hit any of the graduate schools (including the Top 50-60 US math department schools). I am not sure what was the reason I can't get into any of the graduate schools to which other students in my school were admitted.
What can I do to improve my prospect of getting into any graduate schools?<issue_comment>username_1: I can suggest two possibilities and a possible solution.
First, your English writing seems awkward, so possibly you didn't express yourself well or made many misspellings. It is Fields Medal, by the way. This might have blown up your statement of purpose, which can be quite important.
Second, it is possible that the "famous mathematicians" wrote you mediocre letters of recommendation. I wonder how well they know you and your work. What they say about you is probably much more important than who they are for these purposes.
You can address both of those issues in various ways, but I also suggest that you simply broaden your search. Send a few applications, tailored to the individual institutions, but cover the full range of [R1 universities](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_research_universities_in_the_United_States) (and maybe even some R2 places), not just the top of the range.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: It is hard to to diagnose the problem from the information you provided. Like @username_1, I notice that your written communication is quite rough -- to a degree this is understandable because you are presumably not a native English speaker, but it also looks sloppy. (A non-native speaker should also know how to spell "Fields Medal.")
I will disagree a bit with username_1 and say that **very** eminent mathematicians giving only routinely supportive recommendations should be enough to get into a top 50 mathematics department given 16 tries. If the writer felt less than routinely supportive they should probably not have written the letter (and in most cases they wouldn't). So one idea is to talk to your letter writers. Don't even hint that you worry they wrote a less than strong letter: just express your concerns and ask how you can do better.
The only other thing I wonder is whether the answer is hidden in the details of being a "transfer student" -- how long have you been at your Top 10 Public School? At most such schools, a student with 4.0 GPA would likely take their first graduate course before their final undergraduate year.
Anyway, I agree that the outcome is surprising given the information given. I do suggest asking around for additional help, trying to improve the situation based on the feedback you get, and applying again next year. Good luck!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: To add a little further context to username_1's and <NAME>'s: in the U.S. in the current state of things, as I see in my own math R1 state univ (I'm on grad admissions), the total number of (EDIT: not admissions) applicants is perhaps 30% greater than usual. At the same time, economic constraints (partly due to uncertainty about the course of the pandemic) are reducing the number of offers we can make, and also reducing the volatility we can tolerate in the outcomes of offers made.
Further, the partly-good idea of the April 15 common date (in the U.S.) for commitment *to* grad programs tends to make us prefer to make offers to (good) people who've given some indication that they'd come to our program if we made the offer. E.g., at least *some* explicit mention of our university and some relevant people on our faculty. Otherwise, we figure we're just a back-up, and the April 15 thing has game-theoretic implications.
So there's a confluence of complications in this cycle.
EDIT: currently, as ever, contacting potentially relevant faculty by email is some evidence of your genuine interest. But/and this should be clear in your statement of purpose. If you don't get a first-round offer from a school, you can tell the Grad Office (in that dept) that you still are definitely interested in being on their "wait list" (or whatever they call it). And follow up again on April 14... :) Of course (!!!) if you send spammy-sounding emails, it won't help at all.
EDIT2: and, as <NAME> comments, international students may cost a department more in terms of the budget-games of tuition, and may create complications in terms of English fluency for functioning as teaching assistants. The other current features amplify these aspects in an unfortunate way.
I should also note that at my univ the math dept is *NOT* allowed to claim that we cannot cover all the math courses, due to reduced personnel (hiring freeze on faculty, for example). So we really need all new grad students (if not on fellowships or RA's) to be able to "hit the ground running" in terms of teaching. English problems are very unhelpful.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: A few things that may help.
1. Your written English is below average. There are several grammatical and spelling issues with your post. One thing that can set you apart from many other international students is excellent English skills.
2. While famous recommenders are important, more important is they have something great to say about you. You mention you didn't do REU's - this is probably the best way to make sure they can say something great about you. If possible do at least one semester of REU's.
3. While a 4.0 GPA is important, that isn't the only thing admissions committees will look for. They look at leadership position held in clubs (such as president of the ACM), and other extra extracurriculars.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/14
| 1,153
| 5,137
|
<issue_start>username_0: Can I ask my supervisor how long would it take to complete my PhD before beginning my PhD studies and after getting my acceptance letter? If so, what would be the best way to do so?
Country: US/Canada
Duration: It is not open ended like Europe. Depends on Professor here.<issue_comment>username_1: You can ask, of course, but don't expect to be able to hold anyone to a definite answer. You should probably just ask for a "typical" time to completion provided that you pass comprehensives. They can tell you with some accuracy how long it has taken other students of theirs, provided they have some supervising experience already.
But if they say three years (or seven), it is very tentative. There can be many delays along the way, which is why I mention comps. And, once you take on a research project, there is no real way to schedule a successful end. That is because research is inherently open ended. Some questions are "too easy" and have no substance and then need to be abandoned. Others are too hard and little progress can be made.
If the supervisor has a lot of experience they can make a better estimate than otherwise, and is probably better at helping you find the right project, but it is up to you to stay focused and make proper progress. But they can't predict with certainty how long you will take because there are too many indeterminate elements.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Definitely good to ask about typical times and what happens if you run over. Note in North America that some forms of funding run out after a certain duration; for instance the department might only guarantee full funding for the expected time of 4 years. Funding agencies may also not accept to pay students much after the expected time.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: In the US anyways, you are probably best off consulting the **program** first, rather than the supervisor. PhD programs will typically advertise some statistics on time to completion, like mean/median completion date, and possibly "% complete by \_\_\_\_ years". I would look for this information first.
In most cases PhD durations in the US **are indeed open-ended**, in contrast to what your question suggests; unless otherwise specified, there will be no strict duration either for an individual advisor or program. There may be upper limits, but most students will strive to graduate well within these limits.
If you do ask your prospective supervisor, I'd start by asking about *their past students* rather than a prediction (or promise) for *you*. As mentioned by others and in the comments, PhDs are not about putting a set number of years in and walking away with a degree, they're about taking the necessary time to grow as a researcher and write a suitable thesis. Different people complete the process at different rates. Time limits tend to come as funding runs out and although they can sometimes accelerate process towards a degree (and convince a committee/advisor to help you expedite things a bit) they also represent the point of failure, the date at which you no longer have support to continue and must leave without a PhD. This scenario is not really in *anyone's* interest: the advisor, the student, the committee, the graduate program all want you to succeed.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: This question doesn't really make sense, the supervisor has relatively little control over how long it takes for a student to produce a thesis. Questions you could ask which do make sense:
1. How long is funding guaranteed, and in practice what happens when students run out of guaranteed funding?
2. Do you have any additional standards or requirements for a thesis, such as requiring it to include an accepted paper, or requiring it to consist solely of singly-authored material?
3. How long have your students typically taken to graduate, and what factors played a role in that time?
4. How does a students career choices effect your advising process?
(The reason the last point is relevant is that if you want a research job it's quite simple, if you have good enough research to get a postdoc and you've actually written pages then you'll graduate. But for a student with teaching or industry career goals there's more flexibility in trying to get a student out more quickly with a more minimal thesis. Some advisors may be more understanding about a student's prioritizing getting out quickly for career reasons rather than produce the most compelling thesis.)
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_5: Yes, you can, but you can't trust him. That's my experience of professors. It takes just as long as he likes, and that depends on your personal qualities and the needs of the lab. Of course, this may be different in the US if the period is limited by the university. Then a good guess is that it takes just as long as it can.
College life is full of as\*\*\*les, and you should accept that fact, if you embark on this career. Later on, if you make sufficient friends and establish yourself, you can gain success pleasantly fast, but do not accept that in the start of your career.
Upvotes: -1
|
2021/04/14
| 762
| 3,346
|
<issue_start>username_0: The point of peer review is anonymity but since most authors upload their papers to arxiv long before the paper is published (at least for math, stats, computer science etc), the reviewers should see who wrote the script by simple googling right? Will this have an impact on the review process? That is, a famous scholar's article will more likely be accepted to top journal given similar quality.<issue_comment>username_1: It is in fact often easy for a reviewer to find out who an author is, unless the author is quite new to publishing and has not uploaded the paper to arXiv.
Sometimes it is hard not to know even without a search since the author may be building on their previous work so the list of references will be a giveaway even if the the text doesn't refer to "my previous work in [reference]".
That said, refraining from such a search is implicit in the unwritten contract between the reviewer and the editor.
I hope and suspect most reviewers honor that contract.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This is extremely field-dependent. I have never heard of double-blind reviews in mathematics: never got to referee a paper that had the author's name redacted, never seen a paper where the author made a point of hiding if cited work is indeed theirs (e.g. "X did [1], Y did [2]" instead of "X did [1], we did [2]"). But at least some psychology/sociology journals I know maintain the policy of double-blind review, and I read papers in these fields that were written in third person, as in the example, apparently to conceal themselves. I have my doubts if this can work at all - even if the bibliography doesn't give the author straight away, the reviewer is often expected to check if the prior work in the field is well represented and discussed, which leads to queries and googling, which again can give the reviewer a pretty clear picture who they are reading.
And to comment on the opening of your question: the main point of anonymity of the reviewer is always that they are protected from retaliation of a rejected author, and since the author I am reading may well be my own superior (how many experts on foo of bar are there?), I am glad that I enjoy that protection. This is fundamental for the confidence in the process, regardless of your field.
But the other way round, it is not as clear cut: we all accept end expect the reviewers to give their expert opinion. But in some subcommunities we have agreed that said expert opinion can or should take into account who the author of the paper is, of course your mileage may wary on whether you like it or not. You describe one hypothetical often given (but not as often observed in nature) as an example of corrupting effects of this situation. As a sometimes disgruntled author, completely sure that I would have been accepted for publication if only I had more recognition, I must admit that stories of top journals publishing long series of sub-par papers of famous mathematicians are exceedingly rare, and if happen, tend to end badly for the editors, authors, and sometimes reviewers. I think that for the most part we do believe this market regulates itself, or at least we don't think that the prevailing single-blind in mathematics is the main problem in urgent need to be corrected. But again, your mileage may vary.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/15
| 2,129
| 9,039
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a colleague (call them "Joe") in my PhD math program who told me that they approached a certain professor (call them "Dr. X") to ask them to be their advisor. Joe seemed very interested and capable to do research with Dr. X. However, Dr. X told Joe that they didn't want to do research with them because they had health issues. Namely, Joe delayed taking the qualifying exams because of a kidney stone surgery (a laser lithotripsy). Despite this, Joe took the qualifying exams and did very well. Dr. X still had a bias against Joe and did not want them in their research group because of their health problems.
Yes, this is an actual story that happened to a friend of mine.
Is there any basis in the professor not wanting to take Joe as their student? Or, are there legality issues? I know an employer cannot discriminate with regards to disabilities or health condition, but does this apply to prospective PhD supervisors?<issue_comment>username_1: In most cases, discrimination on the basis of disability or illness is wrong and in many places it is also illegal. This applies in places where PhD students are considered employees and in places where they are not.
However, there are certain exceptions. If the disability makes it impossible or unreasonably costly for the student to conduct their duties, discrimination might be permitted. If the student has a health problem that makes the research unsafe, then discrimination might be mandatory.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Unless the PhD is a demanding in-lab work where there is danger to the student or their colleagues via their health condition (which does not sound like it, but we do not know), there is no legal reason for the potential supervisor to reject. As much say the other responses.
Nonetheless, I would be wary of forcing myself on such a supervisor. Unlike a normal job, the supervisor-supervisee dynamics is very different from a normal employment and I do not see anything to be gained from pushing further. Joe could of course start a disciplinary process against this supervisor; the likely two consequences are that:
1. other supervisors will tread carefully around Joe, even if they have no discriminatory bone in their bodies and even if Joe is clearly perfectly in the right in starting proceedings against that prof. They do not know what else may trigger Joe, so those with cautious personalities probably will try to avoid having to supervise him.
2. the original supervisor may, if they get slapped with real sanctions (and not just a slap on the wrist), in future hide their discriminatory position without being fully truthful. So, they may end up accepting (and then mistreating) sickly PhD students in the future (there are questions about that on SE).
As much as one would want to punish this supervisor for their position (assuming there is no really good reason for the rejection), I do not think that one would either Joe nor future students of this professor any good to trigger an investigation; short of something that actually could get this prof fired.
I think it is better for students to know what a prof is like ahead of time rather than discover it underway.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: First of all, in the US it is unambiguously illegal to discriminate against a student with a disability, including a medical disability, as long as the student is able to meet academic standards with reasonable accommodation (such as delaying quals a few months). It is also illegal to discriminate against a student who had medical problems in the past on the grounds that those medical problems might recur in the future. So there's that.
Unfortunately, US caselaw allows extraordinary discretion about academic decisions, especially by graduate programs, making it almost impossible for a student to win this battle. So unless the university is 100% behind the student on this issue--which is a fool's bet--Joe can expect to have his academic reputation viciously trashed so that Dr. X can justify his illegal decision with impunity.
However, it's a good idea for Joe to keep detailed records of his own and at least report the situation to the disability services office and any equal opportunity/equity and inclusion office. It would be nice if we were living in a world where schools can't get away with this crap, but we don't. The only way this will change if the people who are victimized by it speak up.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: This appears to be more of a moral problem than anything else. I'm also assuming that Joe doesn't want to work with that supervisor, and now has another supervisor who he's working happily with.
With this in mind, if Joe wants the university to do something about this, I would suggest the formal process is probably not going to be effective. As other answers have said, all universities have a strong track record of concealing anything raised formally, even up to cases of assault and rape.
A better alternative might be to contact the student newspaper. It'll escalate the issue locally on campus and get attention for the problem, which will put pressure on the department to be seen to do something about it. It doesn't cost anything for Joe, unlike lawyering up. Of course Joe would be well advised to give his supervisor a heads up though, in case this will result in problems there.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Depends on the country. In the UK that is illegal discrimination under the 2010 equalities act, unless there is some reason the health condition makes it dangerous or impossible to do an essential task, e.g. a blind taxi driver or a deaf call center worker, where reasonable adjustments have been made, e.g. flexible hours or a desk that doesn't require them to walk up lots of stairs to get to it. It is as illegal as telling someone they will not work with them because they are black or female. I believe that is the case under similar laws in most of Europe and north America.
As others have said, the supervisor is obviously an arsehole and isn't worth working with. You need to inform the university, I would go to head of department first, if they don't take it seriously then go to academic registrar or equivalent. If they don't respond properly then the university are complicit in illegal discrimination then an email to the national regulator is in order.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: I'm somewhat surprised by the number of people trying to see this as a legal problem only. Don't forget that an advisor/advisee relationship is very special. Taking a PhD student under your wings is not entirely unlike adopting a child (if only temporarily), and rejecting an interested PhD student is sometimes the responsible thing to do, when there are warning signs flashing.
I don't think it is a wide spread practice that potential advisors have the obligation to take anyone meeting certain qualifications. In fact, I rather think the opposite is true.
* A potential advisor can reject such a request for very personal reasons. May be they have interacted with this grad student earlier and didn't like what they saw? May be they have work for just one grad student, and already have their eyes on someone else who they think could do a better job, and now came up with a lame excuse. May be Dr X recently lost a loved one to kidney problems, and cannot bear meeting with a living reminder daily?
* Another plausible scenario is that may be Dr X heard about Joe being late to take his quals, and therefore was predisposed negatively? When hearing about the true reason for the delay, they were simply unable to do a mental U-turn, and blurted out something that made them look like an ass. Not nice, definitely. But the kind of s\*\*t that can easily happen, when you are put on the spot and need to justify the decision to decline a particular grad student.
*We simply did not hear the whole story*.
This is math, meaning that the PhD students don't often get to work with teams. If there is an advisor/advisee chemistry problem, a rejection will save both Dr X and Joe a lof of pain further down the road.
* Joe can (should?) talk with the Director of Graduate Studies at the department (if such a resource exists). They know the local circumstances and can give advice. I don't think a DGS would do much, but if similar stories about Dr X pile up, then there may be something actionable, and the DGS will have the means to do something about it. The DGS is not likely to gossip and tell that Dr X has a reputation of being a difficult person to work with (other grad students are there for such things), but it is their job to listen.
* If Dr X discards talent left and right, they are shooting themselves in the foot, and may have difficulties recruiting in the future.
* Similarly, if Joe goes public, he has to live with the consequences. Bad advice IMHO.
>
> Joe should just continue shopping for an advisor unless he already has done so.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/15
| 1,401
| 5,999
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently trying to defend my second MA degree. I got my first one from the university of Warsaw (Poland), where I graduated summa cum laude, so I always thought, I had some idea of how to write a thesis. At this new university however (it's in Kazakhstan, but it follows a curriculum that's leaning towards that of what's considered to be a typical US university), I've been told that my thesis is no good, as it's in the wrong format, has not research question and is generally bad.
Now, I'm aware that this thesis is certainly not a masterpiece, it was written during a lockdown when I had little access to literature, so the literature review part of the thesis is merely 20 pages long.
However the most confusing part for me was that of this "research question" matter. I've been told that there isn't one, to which I replied "that's because I didn't ask any question".
My thesis is describing the lack of certain aspects of ESL education in Kazakhstan, including a survey in which teachers and students were asked whether those missing aspects should be included in the curriculum or whether they find them irrelevant.
I've written my first thesis in the exact same way, and I was told it was fine.
My question is, is there any way that I can get this though a defense without completely rewriting it?<issue_comment>username_1: In all situations that I am aware of (social sciences, Western Europe), almost every student paper and certainly every thesis needs a research question. Deciding on the research question is a crucial and early part of the project and should be done in close coordination with your supervisor. In fact, when I supervise BA and MA theses, I spend a lot of time and work with my supervisee on exploring and then narrowing and pinning down the exact research question.
It's not unlikely that your supervisor applies a similar standard, but only they can tell you for sure. I'm surprised that this topic hasn't come up much earlier in the supervision process. The fact that you don't have a supervisor (as you mention in a comment) is very bad and unusual. Get one now. You are entitled to at least formal supervision.
What you should do next is talk to your supervisor and ask them if you can introduce a research question *ex post*, and if so, how. In terms of efficiency this is much less desirable than starting with a clear research question right away. However, it is only natural that in the early, exploratory stage of your work, the research question will change somewhat and needs to be at least reframed. Moreover, your thesis most likely does not completely lack a research question, it's just implicit in your discussion and needs to be made explicit, placed up-front, and motivated by a rationale. After you've done this, you will have to make (probably many) adjustments to the text, so that every sentence is part of an answer to your research question. Thus, if your supervisor is on board with this approach, not all is lost. Of course, there is a lot of work ahead, but it's easier than starting from scratch.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Disclaimer: I'm in STEM, not the humanities, and I'm in the UK. But the idea of "research questions" (or, alternatively, research aims) comes up in all our student theses.
I usually define a project as having three parts:
1. Find a problem (or ask a question)
2. Propose (or find) a solution (or find an answer)
3. Evaluate your solution (how "correct" is the answer?)
But there is another way a thesis can be structured:
1. Find a solution
2. Propose a potential problem
3. Evaluate the extent of the problem and propose/highlight new research directions to solve it.
>
> My thesis is describing the lack of certain aspects of ESL education in Kazakhstan, including a survey in which teachers and students were asked whether those missing aspects should be included in the curriculum or whether they find them irrelevant.
>
>
>
This is good. It sounds like you've found a solution and have identified a potential problem with it. And it sounds like you've evaluated that problem, too. So, your research question might be something like "Is the lack of certain aspects of ESL education in Kazakhstan problematic for users of the educational services?". Or, if you want to avoid a closed question: "How problematic to service users is the lack of certain aspects of ESL education in Kazakhstan?". Defining it as a question makes your research suitably cautious. Maybe there isn't a problem at all, and your research saves someone else from proposing a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. Maybe the problem is massive and obvious and everyone knows about it but no one has written it down.
You have your research question at the start of your thesis, then at the end, you reflect on it. What is the answer to your research question? How well have you answered it? Everything in your thesis should be driven towards answering your research question (or questions), and that will help to avoid going off topic.
----- Edit -----
Just editing to add: it already sounds like you have a research question (even if you didn't know it), and it sounds like your thesis is written on topic to support your research question. A huge re-write is possibly not necessary, but at least top and tail the whole thing *and* each individual chapter with sections on what this means for your research question. At the start, say why this chapter relates to your question, at the end say how this partially answers your question. It'll give the document more focus and it'll keep the reader on track, too.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Sounds to me your research question is clear. You are attempting to quantify or qualify a deficiency and examine the attitude about that deficiency. Now finish it off with the possible consequences of that deficiency and wrap it up.
You are way ahead of many grad students, who will not even bother doing a lit review.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/04/15
| 534
| 2,300
|
<issue_start>username_0: Dears
I submitted a paper, after 4 months I received major revisions from 2 reviewers. I made all the required amendments and submit again. One reviewer suggested to accepts it as is, the second didn't give a response. The editor sent the manuscript to a third reviewer who suggested rejection with very negative comments in everything. The editor gave us a major revision again. We have revised the manuscript again responding to all the third reviewer highlighted points (some points are not responsible for that reason we submitted a rebuttal letter to the editor before sending the revision). Do you think the editor send it again to the same reviewer? if yes: do we have a chance to be accepted? if no: can the editor resend to another reviewer or can make a final decision by himself?
Do we have a chance to be accepted in all cases?
Thank you in advance.<issue_comment>username_1: An editor can overrule a reviewer. An editor can assign a paper to the same or different reviewers. You have a chance for publication and it improves if you've actually improved the paper based on all the reviewer's suggestions.
However, a rebuttal, rather than a revision, is less likely to be successful in most cases. The current situation may be different enough if your analysis is correct, but it is the editor who decides, probably with some internal consultation.
It is impossible to read the mind of the editor. I suggest you resubmit and then have some patience.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Will the editor send the manuscript to the same reviewer? Very likely yes. This is for a couple of reasons:
* The reviewer has already read your manuscript, so they can review again quickly.
* The reviewer had critical comments on the first paper, which the editor will (naturally) want to see addressed - or at least answered satisfactorily.
Yes your paper does have a chance to be accepted. If it didn't, you would not have gotten a major revision, but rather a rejection.
Note [the editor can choose to accept a paper even if the reviewers recommend rejection](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/32397/why-do-editors-sometimes-accept-a-paper-even-if-a-reviewer-recommends-rejection). It doesn't happen often, but it's possible.
Upvotes: 1 [selected_answer]
|
2021/04/16
| 625
| 2,586
|
<issue_start>username_0: Please can anybody reassure me that I am okay. I have been so distracted thesis that I’m behind in my revision for my finals.
Never once in my project did I take credit for something that wasn’t mine and I referenced all my sources of information and ideas.
However, instead of citing the same source over and over again I stated at the start of some chapters something like “the content of this chapter is mostly sourced from chapter X of book Y, but I add some details to proofs for clarity for the reader”.
I then go through my chapter and state the results and proofs I am interested in without further citation (unless I use a different source which I of course cite). I follow the proofs fairly closely and have my own extra details for clarity.
I submitted my project to TurnItIn which has highlighted in red a fairly substantial amount of material in some of the proofs. This is really freaking me out as I’m not trying to claim the proofs as mine or anything - I literally say at the start of the chapter where the material is sourced.<issue_comment>username_1: You are assuming that TurnItIn makes a decision on plagiarism. It just finds sub-strings of a submission in other publications. Their existence might be indicative of plagiarism, but it is subject to human interpretation.
I cannot guarantee that some instructor would not look beyond a TurnItIn score, but I with many other professors would not think such behavior to be reasonable. As usual, the best advise is to talk with your thesis advisor.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Is this level of citation acceptable in a dissertation?
>
>
>
>
> *the content of this chapter is mostly sourced from chapter X of book Y, but I add some details to proofs for clarity for the reader*
>
>
>
No, it is not.
But it seems unlikely that your paraphrase is an accurate reproduction of the type of your citations to which you refer.
If you want to know whether a style of citation is acceptable in a dissertation, then you need to show an exact, specific example of such a citation. To ask whether something is acceptable, and then not reveal the object of your query, is unlikely to lead you to a helpful answer.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: It sounds like the way you did the reference was fine and perfectly standard practice in mathematics. And I doubt Turnitin is remotely useful for mathematics anyway.
The more important question is whether what you did meets the expectations of your committee, and you'll have to ask them that.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2021/04/16
| 569
| 2,530
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm studying CS and this year I should obtain my bachelor's degree.
I'm required to do a mandatory internship, and I'm doing it with a professor that asked me if I would join his research project. Right now, my assignment is to search for a paper about a challenging task in computer vision and to implement it (prostate segmentation in TRUS images, without using supervised learning).
The problem is: I've only taken the first basic course in computer vision, and I don't understand at least 80% of every paper. What should I do? Should I tell my professor I'm not suited for this task? If I change the internship, and consequently, my thesis, I almost surely won't be able to get my degree this year.<issue_comment>username_1: You should definitely talk with your adviser about your concerns. Perhaps asking them to point you to the relevant material you should read before you start reading the papers, which in many cases are written for the experts in the field. Your adviser can estimate the level of knowledge you have according to your resume, so I doubt they will be surprised if you ask to help with finding out the right literature for you.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Clear and honest communication with your advisor is the key to complete your thesis. If you don't understand the papers you're reading, just honestly say this to him. He might be able to give you some hints or direct you towards the right direction. On the other hand, if graduating this year is not your first priority and you're really interested in other topics, you can switch to another internship.
During my Master's thesis in CS I learned the hard way that you won't look dumb to your supervisor if you just admit that you don't understand the papers, so don't be scared of that! Indeed, asking questions shows that you're actually doing something.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I had this problem when I first started in computer vision too - the solution ended up being to spend a month reading papers and textbooks until I understood how to implement the thing in question. It's a learning opportunity, just one that unfortunately comes with a high effort requirement. For what it's worth, if you don't understand the paper in question, work backwards via the references until you find something you do understand, and then try to figure it all out from the ground up. It's ok to tell the professor what you're doing to set expectations appropriately, incidentally.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/16
| 2,351
| 9,471
|
<issue_start>username_0: A high school fresh graduate was applying to undergraduate schools in the united states. He is a friend of a family acquaintance. Despite the fact that I did not even know his name, I was surprised when the family acquaintance asked me to write a letter of recommendation for him and for his friend. I do not know them at the slightest level. It seems that they were working on a research project, which looks completely silly to me (paranormal research related to the secrets of the pyramids, I did not bother to look carefully). I refused the requests to write the letter of recommendation. In the letter that the student sent me for me to submit, he says I worked with him on various things and I think that he is a genius. This was completely dishonest.
Now, I discovered that the student posted the said project on pyramid secrets (I think it is related to non-sensical theories on generating power from triangular structures) on a website, called academia.edu. In the acknowledgement section, he repeated the same claims that I worked with him on the project. I actually have never talked with him before. Now, I am a graduate student in science. This has been incredibly annoying to me. I wonder what is the best way to proceed. I have sent that person a message on academia.edu but he did not respond. I do not know how to contact him. I tried looking for a way to contact academia.edu to report this dishonest behaviour, but I do not know if there is a way to contact them. Any suggestions will be helpful.<issue_comment>username_1: Move on. There is little you can do about it: People can claim whatever they like on the internet and if they say that you worked with them, that's a nuisance but there is little you can do about it (in most jurisdictions) as long as they do so on websites that do not have strong ethics. academia.edu is not one of those websites with strong ethics.
Continue to do good work and build a reputation for yourself through your own publications. That's what you should focus on. The likelihood that anyone will find the pyramids publication is pretty small, and in the worst case if someone asks you about it, you can always explain the story (or just say that that must be someone else with the same name as you).
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Don't worry about it.
Even if people might wonder why you'd be involved with a crank, they should know/realize that cranks do entangle other people. Also that one has no practical power to *prevent* bogus "thanks", in any case.
This is one of those sorts of sad ironies, that the only way to keep distance from cranks is to keep distance from nearly everyone. If nothing else, "crank" is very relative. Many kids' judgement would make them be declared "cranks", if we forget that they're just kids, and have essentially no experience.
Yes, it is disquieting to be connected to dubious stuff... but, again, there's no reasonable way to avoid this, I think, without cutting oneself off from most *positive* social/professional connections.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: ### Talk to a lawyer about defamation/libel.
Regardless of where they've posted it, by alleging your support of their pseudoscientific claptrap, they're doing harm to your professional reputation by lying about you, and there's a term for that: [defamation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation).
So, I'd suggest talking to a lawyer about drafting a letter ordering them to retract their paper and refrain from publishing any further papers claiming your support, and stating that if they fail to comply, you'll sue them for defamation. If you're a grad student at a university, you might want to talk to one of your university's legal staff; most universities should maintain legal staff to assist their faculty with things like IP law.
You might not have the contact details of the website they've posted it on, but you do have the contact details of the crank who's posted it, right? You'd just need some means for your lawyer to deliver the letter to them.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: First, [as already answered](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/166404/128758), don't worry.
Then, some secondary action you may take.
"He is a friend of a family acquaintance"
Then explain the situation as clearly as possible, without giving details on the quality or kind of research (i.e., just focus on the part "we never worked together") to your family or directly to the family acquaintance to pass the message to the "writer".
If you find out your name is associated with that text on google, you can ask to google for removal of that results (and I suggest any results) associating your name with academia.edu .
If academia is not responsive, you may think about enrolling yourself in that site and publishing yourself a clarification text (as dry and short as possible) stating that you had no involvement whatsoever with the crank's text.
I am not familiar with academia.edu, I guess you can link different texts, so you can provide always a link to that text.
Hopefully, in short time you will build a bigger scientific profile than the "crank", so your document will appear first in search engines.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: If arguing about removal with a truthist outlet fails to work, another possibility is to use the webspace under your control to mention something like:
Please note that at least one contentious paper has been published online alleging my endorsement in the thank you section. While this is flattering, it is also untrue.
If you do this, keep it nuanced to avoid making it personal.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_6: ### Try contacting academia.edu .
From your question I gather you have not contacted the academia.edu site managers/editors/owners. Do so! They have a [Contact Form](https://support.academia.edu/hc/en-us/requests/new).
Explain the situation - making it clear how the paper is injurious (perhaps even libelous?) to you; explain how you tried to contact the author directly but were ignored; and ask that the paper be removed. I wouldn't threaten legal action.
Will this work? Frankly, I have no idea, but it's the obvious next thing to do, IMHO.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Talk to the boy's friend and his parents.
-----------------------------------------
You said that your malefactor is
>
> a high school fresh graduate
>
>
>
and that
>
> He is a friend of a family acquaintance.
>
>
>
Ok, so interact with him along those channels. Get in touch with your family member who is the guy's friend. Explain to him - not angrily - that his friend has done something inappropriate, which is inconveniencing you and is also inherently wrong. Try to get him to talk to his friend, and ask/tell his friend to take your name off of the acknowledgements.
In parallel to that, or following a failure of this approach, ask your family member for the contact information of your malefactor's parents. Then have the same conversation with them, but maybe throw in a sentence about how in academia, mis-attribution of claims this is considered a serious ethical violation - and of course you don't intend to pursue this in professional channels (i.e. "of course" but this is a hint that that's an option), so out of courtesy and respect for them and considering the boy's age you're suggesting that they talk with their son about this. You'll need to carefully balance friendliness, respectfulness, condescension and threat.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: tldr: It depends on how did he exactly acknowledge you and his intention.
Case 1. He wrote: "This project is supervised by Professor X". Then this is clearly unethical and he need to learn about it.
Case 2. He wrote something like "This project is inspired by/dedicated to Professor X; all mistakes are mine." Then I won't say he is cheating badly. We need to be a bit more tolerated and patient to young people, as they probably don't know the rules.
---
I am providing this alternative perspective which might not be the answer you wish to see. From what I can tell, you think that the kid is doing pseudo science.
I agree that he is somehow cheating; however, if your two families are very well connected, then I won't suggest you to fight against your parents and close relatives and friends.
You could write him an email, listing some literature showing that his research is pseudo science.
You require him to include your name in the acknowledgement only if he did the literature review. You require him to to list your name professionally, just like any other academic paper. You can provide him an exemplar acknowledgement, something like: I would like to thank gradstudent for helps; all errors are mine.
If he does this, you write him a fair letter.
This will be win-win for all parties.
1. The kid is happy that you did help.
2. The two families are happy because you helped; they will be indebt of you.
3. You will be gaining a good reputation of selflessly helping a perspective student, no matter how ignorant he was.
4. The university will have a fair reference letter.
All it costs is 30 min of your time: 15min for finding references and 15min for writing a generic, high-school level letter. Hell, writing a question on SE will take you more than 15 min.
Again, no one will look down upon you for helping the weak. Most people will be impressed with your selflessness.
Upvotes: -1
|
2021/04/16
| 2,374
| 9,661
|
<issue_start>username_0: Can a PhD student be paid simply for doing research?
If yes, is it applicable right from the beginning?
I am talking about UK and the US specifically.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, depending on the scholarship. When I was getting my PhD in the UK (finished a couple of years ago), everyone had a three-year scholarship (minimum wage), and all the teaching was paid separately. Of course, no one *had* to teach, but, at least in my own case, it was a sure way to get some additional money.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Can a PhD student be paid simply for doing research?
>
>
>
Yes, in the US, this is often called "being on fellowship," when the research is your own, and an "RAship" if you are paid to work on another project at a professor's discretion. Fellowships are often prominent national opportunities, but can be funded locally by the university, college, or department.
>
> If yes, is it applicable right from the beginning?
>
>
>
This is entirely dependent on what the program offers you. It may be, it might not be. Some departments offer first-year fellowships so that you can get settled in your program.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: To elaborate a bit on [username_1's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/166382/4249), a typical funded PhD position in the UK includes:
* tuition fee coverage x3 years (around £4500\* for UK students and over £10k\* for international students).
* stipend or bursary (the money the student gets) just above £15k\* a year (as this is not a salary, and PhD students in the UK are not employed, you get the whole amount in monthly instalments)
* typically, a travel and expenses budget of £2-3k a year
* sometimes a small "training" budget (£1k/year)
This is typically what is on offer when you see a PhD position in the UK advertised. (Some newer positions are integrated MSc (1 year) + PhD (3 years), in which case all four years are covered). In some cases, the PhD funding will cover only the tuition fees for home (UK) students (which will be specified in the advert), so an international student wishing to apply to such a position would be required to pay (a fairly steep) difference in tuition fees. As you may imagine, this does not happen often.
Additional teaching, which may or may not be required, and may or may not be an option (e.g. international students on certain types of visas might not be allowed to work in the UK), would actually make you an employee of the University, and would be paid as a salary.
I know you did not ask, but for completeness, a PhD position in some European countries (such as France) are regular work contracts for a specific time period (e.g. 3 years) -- you get a salary, and pay your taxes and pension contributions. A funded position would, again, include a travel budget, but not cover the tuition fees (however, in France the tuition is less than 500€, not over £4k).
\* Valid in 2021. These numbers get adjusted on a regular basis; the bursary amount at least yearly
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Asking about "the US and the UK" is probably not a great idea because the two countries have very different systems.
PhD student funding varies strongly between universities and areas of funding. A lot of departments have their own funds that they pay students from. These come from things like grants and donations so you can have one wealthy department and one destitute in the same university. Also expectations of prospective students differ across fields, for some it's seen as mandatory and others it may be extremely exceptional. It can even depend on the individual professors, as some may have special grants or other arrangements.
A lot of the time the "RA job" is just a "fake" job that represents the research you are already doing for your PhD (this includes classes and rotations in the beginning, so you do get paid from day one). It's not necessarily an additional job, rather a way for the paperwork (payroll, benefits, policies...) to fit a system. There may be programs where being an RA means actually doing some assistant work not directly-related to your PhD studies, but it is not the rule.
TA-ships are also not purely a way to make money. Teaching is a big part of a PhD's career ("doctor" means teacher) so many programs rightfully require you to complete some TA work in order to graduate even if you are funded. Sometimes the TA-based funding starts to phase in eg. after year 5, so it may be something that impacts you less (or not at all) depending on how fast you finish.
Lastly RA and TA are not the only option. At some universities you may have the option of doing other work like exam proctoring instead.
The short of it is that every individual university can have its own system, so you should ask each one individually.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: The ways PhD students in the US are funded can almost certainly fall under one of these categories, though occasionally you'll find them under a different name:
TA - Teaching assistant. Paid for teaching/helping with a course.
PA - Program/project assistant. Like an RA or TA but for something that's not really research or a course, yet there is funding available to pay a graduate student. Staff in a university writing center might be considered PAs, or administrative roles.
RA - Research assistant. Paid to do research on a faculty member's grant. In some fields, work done as an RA is pretty independent from a student's "own research". In my own field, neuroscience, basically everyone on an RA is effectively being paid "just to do research", provided they choose a research question within the general domain of a faculty member's research program. There is no functional distinction between their "job as an RA" and their progress towards a thesis/degree. How independently a student chooses their own path really depends on their advisor, but the funding itself is fairly open-ended. PIs write grants for specific projects but funding agencies and everyone else know that biology is messy and that directions change.
Fellowship - Individualized funding for a student. This is the category most fitting as "simply paid to do research". Fellowships are granted primarily on an individual student's "potential", however that is assessed, though they are also typically based on some individual research proposal. The difference with an RA is that the money is allocated for a specific student rather than a broader research program. Fellowships are prestigious and more difficult to obtain than other sources of funding, though not unheard of. Opportunities for fellowships originating in the US may be more severely limited for international students, though some countries offer scholarships for their own citizens to study in the US that act a bit like fellowships, though they often come with other strings attached (like a promise to return to the home country and work in a particular role for X years).
Traineeship - Some US funding agencies (I am most familiar with NIH) give grants to graduate programs to distribute to students. In a way they're a bit like a "block of fellowships". Often used to fund students for their first year/semester so that they can find a faculty member to work under, or obtain individual fellowship funding, but some students may be funded as a trainee for multiple years.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: In addition to the other answers, it should also be mentioned that, in case you go to the US or UK (or somewhere else) for your PhD, you might also be able to get a fellowship from your home country/country of origin in order to pursue your PhD.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: This question is mis-phrased. You're really asking:
>
> Can a junior researcher, who is not yet recognized as a doctor, be paid simply for doing his/her research?
>
>
>
Well the answer is:
**A researcher *must* be paid for doing their research - but we have to struggle to enforce that.**
The problem is, that in some world stats, including the US and the UK, junior researchers are not universally recognized as employees making a significant contribution, and instead of being paid by default, regularly, through transparent and negotiated collective arrangements - are paid partially, sometimes, on an individual basis, through transitory and unstable employment schemes, or through stipends/scholarships/gift mechanisms etc.
It is in the (narrow) interest of universities as employers to have a flexible and cheap workforce of PhD-candidate researchers, so the situation described above is actively maintained (and in some cases even established) through actions of the universities and their lobby powers. There are also government pressures downward in this respect, as part of their attempts to cut budgets, be they justified or not (IMNSHO mostly not).
The way to improve this situation is:
* self-organization into junior researcher / graduate researcher unions (or alternatively induction into general academic staff unions, if those are willing to fight for junior researchers' interests as well and allow for reasonable autonomy.
* Extensive educational activity to inculcate with PhD candidates about their actual place in the academic system, their being invaluable, their contribution, their similarities with senior staff members more than with students.
See also [this answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/68912/why-do-universities-fund-ph-d-students-in-the-sciences/68926#68926) of mine, which focuses more on the legal status and a relatively recent precednts.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/16
| 1,210
| 5,350
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm going to submit a paper with my name as the "corresponding author". **I am going to be using my personal email address instead of my university one.**
This is because I am an undergrad and my **institutional address will become invalid** after I graduate.
Questions:
1. Is this okay?
2. Will it cause any administrative issues?
3. Is this practice seen anywhere else?
If it makes any difference, this will be a journal paper.<issue_comment>username_1: **Use a long-term, personal email address, rather than a short-term institutional address.** This will not cause problems, it is common, and, as you've noted, it's better, because institutional email addresses expire.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: This should be fine in almost all cases. It is probably important that you, separately, list your university as your "affiliation" since they have in some ways at least provided support.
Using a personal email does, of course, give you some responsibility for maintaining that, so a company that can be expected to have a long life (Google...?) should be preferred.
You might also check to see if your university will provide a permanent forwarding service for you after you graduate. Some will do that. Actually, some universities consider student email addresses to be permanent and a valuable resource for future contact.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: It is ok to use e-mails other than institutional (academic) addresses in your publications, but there are some points to consider if you're planning to do so:
* Availability/reliability: you want other researchers/readers to be able to find you. The paper will hopefully be available for a long time (forever?), and it is impressive how much visibility and opportunities you can get years after a good publication;
* Keep a professional address: It may sound silly, but some people insist on having funny e-mails and use them professionally. It does not look good. Also, if you plan to have a professional e-mail for years to come, I recommend registering a domain and have control over the address, even if you plan to SMTP to Gmail or similar services;
* Some universities keep email accounts (or forwarding services) for alumni (McGill is one example). It is good for them (you feel more secure in using your institutional address) and for you (people can contact you long after you graduate). Of course, that means periodically check the account or make sure forwarding is properly configured.
* University policy: check your university policy. Some institutions require specific affiliation statements and using institutional emails for publications related to them, especially if the research is funded by the institution.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: I'd use the student email address. It looks more professional—while in an ideal world it wouldn't be like this, IMHO it's not worth the risk of someone judging you based on the @gmail.com.
And honestly, if your work is worthwhile enough that someone needs to contact you, when they try to contact your university email and it bounces, they'll know how to Google your name and find a new contact point. Just set up a personal home page if you care about this and you should be good.
P.S. **Be prepared to get spam.** You will receive a lot of academic spam where people will be "impressed" with your work and ask you to either submit it somewhere (maybe for a fee...) or review other work. (The latter happens for both legitimate publications and also dubious ones, and you'll need to learn to distinguish which ones are spam and which ones aren't.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: If you use your personal email address your contributions will be perceived as having much less vallue, than if you use your institutional email address.
By submitting with a personal email, you are identifying yourself as an independent scholar. You are an undergrad, and I presume that you have earned no post-graduate degrees. The work of an independent scholar has some authority, if that scholar has been awarded a PhD by an accredited institution. The work of someone off the street, with no credentials, has no merit.
Having worked at a university, I will add that use of the submitter's institutional email on submitted work is usually required by the receiving member of the faculty, and is always preferred by faculty.
Since you are submitting your work to an academic journal, and the relationship between this journal and any institution is unclear, then it is unknown whether those at the journal have the same expectations as those at an academic institution.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: If it were me, I would use the e-mail address affiliated with your institution, but I would also include an [ORCID](https://orcid.org/) or other researcher identifier.
This allows you to have a record separate from the published paper where you can change your preferred e-mail address should you change institutions. So should your current e-mail address stop working after you've graduated (or even for non-students who may change institutions), people who wish to contact you would have a way to get up-to-date contact information.
I would recommend checking with the journal if they have a preferred manner of including such identifiers.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/16
| 403
| 1,418
|
<issue_start>username_0: This is a question of pure curiosity: just like there exists polyglots who speak dozens of languages, are there any cases of people obtaining at least four PhDs? (It is okay if topics are fairly close, e.g. Maths, stats, cs, theor phys).
Note, I am specifically not asking about whether doing multiple PhDs is advisible.<issue_comment>username_1: In German-speaking countries, or at least in Austria, the abbreviation `DDr. mult.` is used to denote people who have more than two doctorates. [Googling for `DDr. mult.`](https://www.google.com/search?q=%22ddr%20mult%22) allows one to identify some persons, but I cannot quickly verify whether they received just three or even four+ such titles.
However, note that some of them should actually be labelled `DDr. h.c. mult.`, whereby `h.c.` (*honoris causa*) suggests that the doctorates are *honorary* titles. In other words, oftentimes they did not start PhD programs from the beginning to the final defense of their dissertation multiple times, but perhaps just once, whereafter they received some honorary titles for some public service.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: According to [this 2009 newspaper article](https://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/2009/dec/27/professors-kit-22-ma-degrees-5-phds-3-dlits-116621.html), there is at least one person, a retired professor from India, who holds five PhDs.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2021/04/17
| 2,704
| 11,549
|
<issue_start>username_0: In my primary research project (not coauthoring with advisor), I got two results, say result A and result B, back in 2020. I wanted to submit it in 2020, but my advisor says that I need a further result, say result C, to be considered for a top journal.
I agreed with him as I find the (hypothetical) result C way more exciting. Now I am half-way through getting result C.
A competing group tried to get result A (with mistakes) and submitted a paper in 2020. The referee rejected their paper because they made a fatal mistake. They corrected the mistake and submitted the corrected version of result A again. They got their paper accepted at a top journal in March 2021.
I don't know how to speak with my advisor about this without offending him. My advisor says it is a good thing as it proves that I was at the right direction and a super active subfield. I think he is just trying to sooth me by saying nice words.
Now I am submitting the results A and B by myself. I do have timestamps on public cloud services to prove that I did get the correct version of result A before them. However, the timestamp is just on a poorly written draft rather than a fully written paper, because my advisor asked me to work on C.
It is my first time dealing with this issue. Shall I also submit the timestamps to prove that I had the result A?
I am thinking about putting result A into appendix and emphasizing result B in my paper. Am I correct? Is it best to submit the paper to the same journal?
I will cite their paper of course. I want to say that I am a concurrent worker work in parallel. I am afraid that the everyone think I am the follower, who **falsely and unethically present myself as a concurrent worker.**
What shall I say to make clear in my paper what happened?
---
PS:
I was not worrying before March because I thought:
1. The competing group made mistakes so they are not competent competitors
2. Result A alone is not enough for top publications. Their paper still contains some technical mistakes and exaggerated claims.
However, facts proved that I underestimated the competing group. The hard lesson learnt.
The field is applied statistics. This is a primarily theoretical work that studies the properties of two widely-adopted statistical methods.
Related: [Pre-print service like arXiv but with private option, so I can correct my mistakes without publicly advertising my mistakes?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/158831/pre-print-service-like-arxiv-but-with-private-option-so-i-can-correct-my-mistak?noredirect=1#comment446452_158831)<issue_comment>username_1: I am assuming this is not experimental work.
>
> How to convince the referees that I got the results independently?
>
>
>
Don't. How you got the results is irrelevant to the fact that they have already been published.
>
> It is my first time dealing with this issue. Shall I also submit the timestamps to
> prove that I had the result A?
>
>
>
No.
>
> I am thinking about putting result A into appendix and emphasizing result B in my paper. Am I correct? What is best thing to do here?
>
>
>
That is reasonable. Cite the other paper.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: You've been *scooped*, I'd say it's common. You could write: *Further to publication of our preliminary results [1], X et al. showed ...* Or: *In parallel with this work, X et al. showed ...* (You could cite your technical report elsewhere in the latter instance.) You can then explain how your work improves on theirs, especially as your results are *way more exciting*.
Your approach to result A may be different to X et al., which may allow you to present the result in the main body. Also, your result A may be slightly different to their result A (i.e., you may have slightly different results). Speak to your advisor about how to approach this.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Good answers here already, but I feel some points are still missing:
How you will behave depends on your research area, but I've never seen someone trying to revert a scoop situation and succeeding. Try to establish that your work came first is irrelevant in my opinion. You had the result and didn't publish it, and frankly, it doesn't make a lot of sense academically. Some areas are more competitive, but I feel researchers often forget that replicate experiments (or, in your case, run them simultaneously) are as important as reaching new findings. And you can always add or expand on former findings based on slightly different methodology.
Two researchers (or teams) working on the same topic will eventually get results for the same questions. That doesn't mean your work is wasted. At the very minimum, you have your own independent results to corroborate (or contradict) the already published material. This will only strengthen your publication with possible *result C* as you can present your findings: "results A and B, published in XYZ, are confirmed in my independent experiment, and we further explored our research, reaching the astonishing result C." Simultaneously, you are in a position to evaluate the *competing group's* work in your future publication (that makes more sense in some areas than others).
I understand it would be nicer if the first findings (results A and B) were in your publication, but it seems the ship has sailed.
Finally, as stated in other answers, speak to your advisor about the situation. It depends on your relationship with your advisor, but stating the facts and discussing the next steps with no finger-pointing should not offending him.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I want to stress just a single point:
>
> Now I am submitting the results A and B by myself.
>
>
>
I would not do this. Your advisor is most probably part of the journey to reach A and B. Publishing the results without his name is very likely misconduct.
This might harm the relationship and trust between your advisor and you!
He told you, that A and B is not enough for a top journal. I guess he is right. He thinks you can also get C. So focus on achieving C. There is no point in regretting not having published A and now reclaiming you were first.
The price waiting for you is getting C published first. Without any scoop situation, without getting in conflict with your advisor.
If you insist, you can still put your proof for A und B into the paper containing C. It might not fit the paper and a reviewer might ask you to remove it. Difficult to say without knowing the whole story.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: To expand on earlier answers, the following is offered. One of the hardest things to do is to not worry about the primacy of one's research. That other researchers independently determined your answer A should not detract from your own independent work in the determination of answer A, or consequential answer B, or the culmination in your determining C. This can be easily dispensed with in publication of your own work within the explanation of the development of C (for instance) by stating that *independent to your development of answer A, researchers X and XW have subsequently published this result.* This does not detract from your own independent work. Nevertheless, the statement is factual and establishes your own work as original independent thinking on the problem, without overtly calling attention to who was first. Don't let establishing the primacy of your results distract from the importance and correctness of your work.
Many researchers are faced with the realization that other people are interested in the same research area and are capable in making the same determinations that one is able to make, or that one has already made. The total state of independent research is obviously unknown. Only what is published is known if not lost in obscurity. Consequently, people readily glean valuable insights from published research abstracts or grant applications. Beware, there is also research espionage where people glean information from conferences or prepublication sites, hidden ftp sites or through unauthorized electronic access, or even thru guest visitations to research offices and laboratories. Hidden information can be determined by casual observation and making mental notes; this happens all the time. Tacit information is sometimes inadvertently disclosed, and that can open the whole book on what one is doing or thinking.
So lets presume that one's thinking on a specific research problem is largely, or entirely, known only to one's self and closest colleagues in confidence, being in one's notebooks and hidden from view, not generally or openly discussed except in closed, confidential meetings in the direction of the work. Very few, if any, other people have reached one's state of thinking and development regarding this particular research problem. Deep thinking on particular technical aspects of this mathematical or statistical problem is not likely being done by many people independently, and simultaneously. And even if others are working in the same arena, they may not have achieved the same state or advanced position of one's own thinking. Tempered with self doubt, one may become overly concerned that the path to get to the current state of one's research was relatively easy and that others have achieved this and may be far ahead in their own advanced developments, or at least not far behind. *Yet realistically this may actually not be so.* Your work has been developed by your own applied critical reasoning to attain its current state. You have seen the result in care you have exercised, and the consequences in the work of others fraught with error who have not used that same care. As suggestions for thought: Persevere and publish your own complete work when its impeccability is certain. Be dedicated but not hurried or competitively driven by others. Don't be overly concerned with what has passed elsewhere in print, especially if of no ultimate consequence to the direction of your own work.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: If you look up most groundbreaking discoveries you'll find that many if not all\* end up in this situation: two completely independent researchers or research groups come up with pretty much the same result (be it a prediction, measurement, discovery...) around the same time\*\*. This is exactly the reason many Nobel Prizes are actually shared among multiple people, e.g. the Brout-Englert-Higgs boson.
If you're aware of the other publication, read it, digest it, and integrate its presence into your own work. As you say, they may have glanced over certain aspects. Highlight the differences (and reasons for these differences), and expose the similarities. Don't just think the others made "mistakes". Maybe it is you that made the "mistake", or both of you just approached it differently (e.g. disregard a specific class of influences, or chose to neglect certain parts of an interaction because you deemed them "small" for some reason, be it mathematical or just based on "a feeling"/experience/...).
\*This may be a small exaggeration from my part, but I do find this simultaneity occurs more than you'd first expect.
\*\*Time here is relative; while experimental progression is often fast (and simultaneously reported discoveries will lie close to each other in absolute time), more theoretical or more general discoveries can be spread over decades, only later to be "united" as really being the same thing all along.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/17
| 1,743
| 6,453
|
<issue_start>username_0: I hear (and use) the phrase 'getting scooped' to refer to an instance where researcher A uses the ideas of researcher B and publishes before B can publish.
Is this strictly correct, and does it necessarily connote bad faith? Alternatively, is it still 'getting scooped' if researcher A came up with the idea on their own and just happened to publish first?
Any history or etymology of this phrase would be much appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: There's no suggestion of dishonesty in the word.
>
> scoop:
>
>
> Informal:
> Publish a news story before (a rival reporter, newspaper,
> or radio or television station).
>
>
> "time and again we have scooped our rivals with the top stories and pictures"
>
>
>
<https://languages.oup.com/google-dictionary-en/>
But do listen to <NAME>er's [Lobachevsky](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXlfXirQF3A).
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think your first statement is not the common understanding. That would be misconduct and "getting scooped" is really just negative serendipity.
Suppose two researchers start out trying to answer the same research question, each without knowing of the other person. One of them is likely to get a suitable answer first and submits it for publication. The other person is said to be "scooped". It is just an unfortunate consequence that occurs fairly often in "hot" areas with a lot of people looking for answers at the same time.
The term, when properly applied, doesn't imply any kind of bad faith at all. If there is misconduct, then it is plagiarism, not "scooping".
There is a somewhat related case in CS, for which I know all of the principals. Two students at different universities were working on the same question at the same time. Because of the importance of conferences in CS, they knew one another and their advisors knew each other, but the research topic both students were working on never came up within this group, though many others were also interested in the answer to the question.
Both students then finished at about the same time and submitted papers to the same conference. This raised the question of whether there was any impropriety on the part of anyone involved. It took a year of investigation to determine that it was truly independent work and both students received their doctorates, though late. They both moved on to good positions, as the question they independently answered was important and valuable.
But, a few months difference in coming up with the answer and a paper to present it would have meant, possibly, that only one of them would get the degree and a publication. The other would have been scooped. In many cases, both degrees would be awarded, but it would depend, perhaps, on how independent the second person's work remained after publication by the first.
For any important but tractable question in a hot area of research, there are probably several people working independently. Someone will probably be first over the line. The others get "scooped".
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: ### Apart from lifting ice cream, "scooping" means to "collect information"
A 1912 book by [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Conan_Doyle) called "The Lost World" which is available electronically [here](http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/139/pg139.txt), uses the word "scoop" to describe the collection of not ice cream, but information:
>
> "We may get a scoop, if we are lucky. You'll be there in any case, so you'll just give us a pretty full report."
>
>
>
**As pointed out in a comment to this answer, "scoop" in the publishing sense this way (referring to "a scoop of information") [has been used since at least 1874 and as a verb since at least 1884](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scoop_(news)#Word_origin).**
Growing up, I heard the word "scoop" used in the following three metaphotical (not ice-cream-related) ways. **Here I'm giving the exact quotes that people said**:
* "They scoop people up like that?" This was asked to me by a youth co-worker in 2006 when I was working at an amusement park, and the context was about "picking people up", which is [definition #1 here](https://www.bustle.com/articles/105668-what-does-it-mean-to-get-scooped-here-are-4-things-the-slang-term-could-mean). It's also [the top definition on Urban Dictionary](https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=scoop). I only remember hearing the word being used once this way (in Toronto, Ontario), but it was etched in my mind, and the above two links indicate that it's not so uncommon among urban youth.
* "What's the scoop on the reply?" This was asked to me by a friend in 2005 (also in Toronto, Ontario) after I wrote something about him online, and he was asking for more details from me privately. This is [definition #3 on the same webpage I referenced earlier](https://www.bustle.com/articles/105668-what-does-it-mean-to-get-scooped-here-are-4-things-the-slang-term-could-mean).
* **"I think you have results to compare against. You may also have been
scooped?" This is an exact quote from a professor in a December 2013 email.** Context: He was helping me with some calculations for a forthcoming publication I was planning to submit, and while I was in the middle of this project, I found that a paper popped up online in which calculations of the same thing were published using a very similar (but not identical) method. I sent him the paper, and he replied saying that now there's something I can compare my calculations against, but also that I may have been scooped. This is [definition #2 on the same webpage I referenced earlier](https://www.bustle.com/articles/105668-what-does-it-mean-to-get-scooped-here-are-4-things-the-slang-term-could-mean).
**In all three of the above "non-standard" definitions of "scoop", you can *imagine* a metaphorical ice cream scoop:** (1) picking people up, (2) delivering information, (3) taking someone else's ideas with a metaphorical scoop.
This is the most likely **etymology** of the word. However, in academia the word has started to be used more and more frequently, and as you (the asker of this question) have stated that you do: people are now using the word without knowing where it came from, so it does get used to mean "publishing before someone else" without actually using a metaphorical scoop to take someone's ideas and deposit them elsewhere.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/17
| 561
| 2,184
|
<issue_start>username_0: I had a postdoc (field is computer science) interview 2 weeks ago. The HR team told me that the panel is willing to offer me the position and want to discuss the details in a 30mins Zoom meeting. This is a first one for me, I really don't know what can I expect during this meeting and what can I bring into the discussion. I am also a coming from outside the UK (need a visa).
* Salary negotiation
* Benefits
* other elements?
Since I need a visa sponsorship
* Visa procedure
* Will the university cover immigration fees?
Basically, what are the key elements that form the *typical start-up package* for a postdoc job offer?
PS: I am having the meeting with one HR member and not the PIs.<issue_comment>username_1: Congrats! On top of what you already mentioned, my list contained:
* Is there an assistant who can help with settling down? Like, helping with housing, taxes, reading payslips. etc.
* Healthcare. How does it work? When will be available? And everything related.
* Are there any links to the international community of the university members?
Don't over plan, everything always can be handled at the place, the main focus is the research.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: 1. Read the agreement between your university and the union (presumably UCU) if applicable. It's boring. This defines what you can request.
2. Read benefits information on the HR website.
3. Read visa rules on the government website.
4. Figure out your preferred start date.
5. Estimate your relocation costs.
6. Find out what local taxes are.
7. Find out local housing costs from a regional housing website. (In the UK they are often unreasonably high.)
8. Make a list of questions to ask. Questions should demonstrate that you are genuinely interested in the position. They are not negotiation.
9. Reread the job ad. Some places will try to offer you a job you didn't apply for.
For a postdoc, it is not called a startup package. If you ask for "startup", people will think you don't understand what a postdoc is.
Unless you are an experienced negotiator, do not try to negotiate during a meeting. Negotiate by email. Get everything in writing.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/18
| 1,346
| 5,975
|
<issue_start>username_0: A university bookstore, which is operated by a well known bookseller, is selling subscriptions to a "homework help and textbook solutions" website. The subscriptions appear beneath the university logo and the words "University Official Bookstore." If you select a course, the required books appear. Below that, it says "Optional" and the subscription is listed.
This seems to imply the subscription is endorsed by the instructor, very probably without the instructor's knowledge.
Is this marketing by the bookstore ethically acceptable?
This bookseller operates over 700 campus bookstores.
Update: The bookseller has changed the page to read "Bookstore Recommended" which seems more appropriate.<issue_comment>username_1: It seems that if they are really **homework** helps (designed based on the instructor or the course homework) and it is without the consent of instructor, or without the aim of the students' knowledge improvement (consciously), it seems unethical.
But in other cases, even sometimes the book writers write the solution or a guidebook for their book exercises. Although, normally they are not used as homework questions, or in case they are, just some of them are used to warm up or giving insight to students (after their try to solve the problems).
Besides, not always all students take all the points of a class. Their knowledge and mind level is different and they take advantage based on their levels. Sometimes it is ok if the students learn the solution of some specific questions after reading one example. Although they are not at the same level as the ones who solve the problems by itself, they are not at the level of the students who don't learn even after that. The first group lay in the top students of the class and the later lay in the middle ones. (But the instructor should be aware while gives the marks, although the advantages of learning is beyond the marks)
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: It’s helpful to approach the question starting from the following general guiding principle:
**It is not acceptable for a university bookstore to engage in misleading marketing practices of any sort.**
If the way the subscription link is presented creates an appearance of endorsement by an instructor, and such endorsement was not given, then the marketing is misleading. If this was done intentionally, then that is unethical.
If the link suggests the service is endorsed by the university but not by the instructor (or is simply offered as an optional purchase without the implication of any endorsement), it seems hard to argue that it is unethical, or at least hard to argue it is more unethical than any other link to a product that anyone puts on their website. It’s mainly creating the appearance of an endorsement by a specific instructor who didn’t give their approval that would be problematic.
I cannot be sure from your description that I would agree with your assessment that the way the information is presented creates such a misleading impression. But I might, or perhaps I’d agree that it’s sufficiently ambiguous as to risk misleading at least some students.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Without more information, it is hard to make any ethical judgement. The instructor might have a say in what appears, for example.
But the more serious issue I see is that, if such things are published and available to some students, even just the ones that are more diligent in taking shortcuts than in learning, then it might actually be essential to make them publicly available to all. This "levels the playing field", so to speak, so that everyone has easy access to the same materials.
The instructor should, somehow, be made aware of such things so that the course can be designed in such a way that they don't interfere.
But, if they exist, and can be found, then they should be open to everyone. It is much more problematic if they exist but are only known to a few and unknown to the instructor.
---
And, knowing about this, the instructor can respond, perhaps in the syllabus. Anything from "This is a valuable/essential resource" to "You will be wasting your money with a subscription". The professor could also, perhaps, buy a subscription and make credentials open to the entire class. It would be a pretty cheap TA, I think.
And the faculty can, if necessary, respond as a whole, though I doubt that banning such a practice will make education better. It is the existence of these resources that have issues, not the fact that they are known to all.
---
I would, of course, prefer to be the sole source of hints to my students, so that I can give minimal hints (letting them have "insights") and also assure that a question/answer from/to any student is seen by all (if a question is asked by one, it is probably one others have as well). But I have no way to guarantee that. I did, for several years, run a mailing list for each course that had those desirable properties, making other things moot.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: This sounds worse than unethical, but depending. Required/Optional are official names for textbooks selected *by the instructor*. This may not be the current instructor, but it will be someone involved with the course. The bookstore does not get to just throw their own recommendations into the Optional list. Unilaterally adding something as Optional is in the same ballpark as listing Optional as Required, or just adding a book out of nowhere to Required. It's not underhanded -- it's simply lying.
But it's so bad that it's hard to imagine the bookstore doing it on their own initiative. I'd imagine the University has some relationship with that website and has authorized it. Most instructors are probably not amused, but no harm done since they know students never buy anything marked Optional until asking in class; and that all non-Freshmen know it's just an advertisement for the Homework Help site.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/18
| 567
| 2,303
|
<issue_start>username_0: I interviewed ~1 month ago for a PhD position at Institution A. The first email contacts went very well - really quick and nice replies from the PI. I had the interview which went well - as the PI told at the end of the interview and he gave me a comparison with other candidates he had already interviewed.
He told me to expect news from him at the end of the week but unfortunately, I did not get any. So I sent a follow-up email 1 week after the interview, with no reply (~3 weeks ago)
I received another offer from Institution B - a really good one but I still prefer the one at institution A. I need to give my decision ASAP (paperwork, relocation etc). So I sent another email to ask for any outcome to PI from insitution A and to tell that I have received an offer elsewhere.
It's been several days with no news again.
I am quite disappointed. It's okay if I am rejected but well, I think it is important to end things in a good way.
Anyone has an idea of what's happening ?
Thank you !<issue_comment>username_1: It's fairly common in academia that you don't hear back after an interview if they won't hire you, more so if the PI appears to be acting unprofessionally as a rule: they shouldn't compare you to your face to other candidates.
One could go over why that is so, but it's best to simply shrug and accept the offer that is definite.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It is impossible to tell what is happening unless you get feedback or can read the mind of the professor. It could be anything (thinking of only one dimension, though there others) from "the professor is a jerk" to "they are fighting desperately to get you accepted but it hasn't happened.
You've told them that you have other offers, which is good. It would be better to tell them about your decision timelines if you have one. Perhaps you can still do that. If they are no longer considering you, then there is no downside to persistence as long as you remain polite.
If the decision point on the other offer isn't close, then you can afford to wait, otherwise choose the best offer you have at the moment a decision is necessary.
---
One thing that "might be happening" is just the scale. Perhaps there are a lot of candidates with a lot of competition. Good luck.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/04/18
| 1,256
| 5,377
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've looked at many of the answers on this site to questions similar to mine, and I've seen a huge variety of answers. My situation is a bit more specific, so I decided to finally make a post and ask about it.
I applied to Pure Math PhD programs this year (for Fall 2021). I was accepted into two, neither of which were my top choices (they were on the safer side). My partner applied to PhD programs in a different field (not math) but we were not accepted anywhere together. We want to reapply to eachothers institutions this fall in order to be closer. In particular there is one school (call it Y) who is strong in my research area and is close to my partner.
Furthermore, the university whose offer I accepted (call it X) is not strong in my research area - there is at most 1 person who I could maybe work with, but even they are not really super in line with my research interests.
To summarize, I have accepted an offer at University X, and am entering the Phd program there this fall. I really want to reapply to school Y both in order to be close to my partner and because the research there is more in line with what I want to study. I also want to apply to some other top programs in my field, since, if I don't get accepted to Y, I would want to at least be somewhere with strong research in my field. My application for this fall will be notably stronger than my application last cycle due to more research and graduate coursework at my undergrad institution. Is re-applying this fall acceptable, or will it be viewed poorly (although I believe I have solid reasons)?
I am seeking advice on how viable this is since there are mixed responses for other questions. Any input is appreciated, but especially if you've experience this yourself or are perhaps a professor somewhere. Thank you!
EDIT: It's worth also nothing that X is "strong enough" in my area and I love the location, so I could be happy there. Just not ideal, really. In particular I came more into my professional interests a bit later in my undergrad, so at the time of applying I wasn't firmly in one area of research (hence, I'm realizing a bit late that it's a little bit of an awkward fit at X).<issue_comment>username_1: There is really no answer to the "viability" question. The only thing to do is to apply and make your best effort to be accepted.
But, as you probably already know, getting accepted to a single institution, considering no others, has a pretty low probability of success generally, due to the competition.
But there is really no reason that you should't apply. If you are turned down you are no worse off than now. Most people will, I hope, understand your reasons.
But there may be another path open, if your partner is in a place with several universities in reasonable distance. You might apply to several universities within, say a 50 mile radius. In some places that is a pretty large set of universities. Not everywhere, obviously.
Your partner can take similar action. Maybe you'll get lucky.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: username_1's answer probably covers most of it, but what you are coming across is also known as the two body problem of academia. And I know there are some places that are starting to try to accommodate for this problem (though probably more at the post-doc/professor levels rather than the PhD level).
An alternative that you and your partner could look into is doing a PhD at both the universities (known as a dual PhD). This would make sense for you to also look since there are other universities that are better suited to your field (plus the two body problem). Though keep in mind that you'll probably have to jump through a lot of hoops (though you might be able to motivate your university since having these programs can look good, especially if someone else happens to sort it out for you). This may also be harder during the coursework component of your work but since COVID probably means your courses are already online so ironically you might have had perfect timing.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: If you (and your partner, for that matter) want to have options available, apply and shoot your shots at multiple institutions that you are both interested in as far as research goes. If University X is the best fit of the ones where you accepted, no harm in starting there and exploring the field that that advisor researches in. Maybe a few months in you'll have a better idea of whether that field is really a fit for you (and you may want to even stay there), or not. This, ultimately, however, will boil down to whether you and your partner find it worth the time to try transferring to another PhD program (i.e., you *NEED* to know that where you are now is not a good fit both in the short-term and the long-term)
Another point worth mentioning, is even if you don't feel this field is the perfect fit for your PhD thesis, if it is still in line enough, is maybe master out of this program (if it is an option at institution X, of course) after exploring the field a little bit. This way you don't burn so many bridges abruptly, and you get to explore multiple different fields right before committing to one. (A good amount of people do this, after a year or two in a PhD program they realize that devoting 5+ years into academia isn't the right fit for them)
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/04/19
| 511
| 1,845
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am referencing someone else's work, specifically an Appendix which contains ~100 news article URLs. For example, "bla bla bla (Author, Appendix A, article 5)". The reason I do this, is simply to avoid duplication. If someone needs to know the article URL, they can simply check the appendix in the reference work.
However, at the same time, one should generally try to cite primary sources in academia, and also the article was not written by the Author but by a news site, so from this point of view it would be better to include the article URLs in my own appendix, would it not ?<issue_comment>username_1: What if the reference work is unavailable to your future readers? You should always cite the primary source if you have it.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: This depends on the level of abstraction. If you reference a more general claim (a synthesis of parts of the appendix), it might be better to reference the appendix as a whole. If you reference a very specific claim, you should reference the primary source (after double-checking its pertinence). An example hopefully makes this clear:
*Specific claim*:
>
> In mid-April 2021, the Danish government decided to stop the rollout
> of AstraZeneca vaccines (bbc.com 2021).
>
>
> bbc.com, 15 April 2021, "AstraZeneca vaccine: Denmark stops rollout
> completely", <https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56744474>, accessed
> 19 April 2021.
>
>
>
*General claim*, assuming that the appendix contains various relevant sources related to Covid-19 vaccination policy, on which the following can be based:
>
> Reports of rare blood-clots subsequent to vaccinations with
> AstraZeneca triggered discussions in various countries about the risks
> and benefits of suspending the use of the vaccine (see Smith 2021,
> Appendix A).
>
>
>
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/04/19
| 923
| 3,735
|
<issue_start>username_0: As it's mentioned in the title. I am going to receive a formal letter this week. During my meeting with HR, they told me the visa will take 12 weeks so we can agree on the start-date at the point. My question is this: I really want to be successful in my postdoc and I want to do research as soon as possible, can I email tell the PI about this? (to get information about their current research step, etc.) or I should keep doing research and reading on my own and wait until everything is official?<issue_comment>username_1: You can act active and send an email with suggestions to start working remotely. What does that mean in terms of the salary? Do you expect to get paid for that work? That point perhaps should be clarified.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: A visa allows you to *live* in a country and (for the visa I assume you are getting) to be *gainfully employed* in that country -- that is, to draw a salary.
You do not need a visa to work on things while you are in your home country (working in your spare time, or in fact in a paid position). In other words, you can work on whatever project you'd like even before you get the visa. You just can't move to the target country yet, and you would have a separate conversion with your PI about getting paid if that's what you'd like.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: [Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice]
As Thomas mentioned in his [comment](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/166497/visa-preparation-for-the-postdoc-will-take-weeks-can-i-start-research-with-the#comment447805_166507), generally, without a visa you cannot be legally employed in the country of the university, this includes remote work from abroad. In addition to that, at least in some countries, it is **illegal** to do work that is normally paid, **even if you are not getting paid** for it, unless you have a proper work permit. I guess, the logic is that you enter the labour market by doing work and not by getting paid.
So be careful and precise in your requests. Starting working on the project remotely, before your visa is ready and valid, is probably against the law (and your future boss will share some responsibility for this). However, simply asking for suggested reading *before* you started working on the project itself is probably okay. I suppose your PI would be happy to give those suggestions even if your visa fell through or you hadn't signed the contract to begin with.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Please note one point: a visa is required to perform work (paid or not is not that relevant) in a certain location in the world.
Contrary to what the majority seems to think, if you are working remotely, you still need a visa, depending on where you are based and ***NOT*** on where your employer / client is located.
In other words, you can work remotely from the US for a Chinese company, as long as you have an US visa.
Similarly, you can work from India for an US company, as long as you have an indian visa ... come on guys (&girls), the whole outsourcing business is based on this cornerstone!
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: This sounds like a case where **legally** and **officially**, you cannot be working as a postdoc before you receive the visa. **Unofficially**, no one is stopping you from working on a specific topic, or with unpaid collaboration, assuming you want to do this. If your aim is to continue research, such as to boost your publication record, most PIs would be willing to offer advice for getting started.
However, any work you do should be purely voluntary on your side (you can always say no to work until you are officially employed).
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/19
| 1,244
| 4,370
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is there a raw dataset, database or API as large as WorldCat that allows for search by library of congress call number?
As far as possible I need to query all the works in the world. At least every book or monograph, or title that has been given an LOC call number. As for journals, congresses, journal articles, fresh research etc., I can exclude them. I don't need 100% everything, but something as large Worldcat. Hence, a single university library, as large as it may be, may not be sufficient.
I need to input some call number eg. Q179, and get all the titles under that call number. Is there such a thing? Preferably free also, but if really no choice, I am ok with subscription needed or need to purchase<issue_comment>username_1: Yes but no.
Yes: You can search the LC catalog by LC Classification number (e.g. Q179).
No: However, the LC catalog reminds one: "Please note: The Library of Congress does not keep a copy of every title ever published."
How to search the LC catalog by LC Classification number:
1. Navigate to the catalog at <https://catalog.loc.gov/>
2. To the right of the search box, click "Search options" > "Keyword Search"
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/kRQAW.png)
3. In the next page, to the right of the search box, click "ALL" and change this to "EXPERT (use index codes and operators)"
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/SW9V0.png)
4. Note the Keyword Search Tips below the search box.
a. The tips tell you that the wildcard for one or more characters is the question mark.
b. The tips also include a link to a help page describing the [special index codes](https://catalog.loc.gov/vwebv/ui/en_US/htdocs/help/indexDesc.html#names).
c. The [list of index codes](https://catalog.loc.gov/vwebv/ui/en_US/htdocs/help/index_code.html) is on a separate help page.
5. Using the tips and the help pages, you can form this query: `0500 Q179?` which will return any items in the LC catalog where the LC Classification number starts with Q179, e.g. `Q179.98 .S53 1985 FT MEADE`. If you want Q179 (or any other class) exactly, then don't use the `?`. You can also use `050A` instead of `0500`.
You can get even fancier by combining additional index codes, but this should get you started.
*Caveat: LC call numbers may vary from library to library. Usually the variance is in the details at the end of the number that doesn't affect your use case (e.g. a different year, or a local shelving notation), but some libraries that do original cataloging (vs. copy cataloging) may have arrived at a different classification entirely (by choosing a different main subject), or the cuttering (the .S53 in the example above) may be different. This is increasingly rare as most libraries now just copy the call number they're given and possibly add some local information, but it's a possibility to be aware of.*
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_1: WorldCat has two different interfaces. One allows you to search by LC Classification and one does not.
The first interface is the public one you get from <https://www.worldcat.org/> :
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/d32tMm.png)
This interface's Advanced Search does not have an option to search LC Classification or call numbers:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/rWX7Lm.png)
The second interface, OCLC FirstSearch, is available through subscription via your local academic or public library. You will need to access it from your academic institution or public library and log in with your institutional credentials or your library card:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/OvoZ3m.png)
This interface's Expert Search has an option to search the Library of Congress Call No.:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/uPMMTm.png)
Type `Q179` into the "Search for" box, select `Library of Congress Call No.` from the "Indexed in" dropdown, and click Search.
Results:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/m2xaDm.png)
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/19
| 1,561
| 6,659
|
<issue_start>username_0: **Background**
I have done my PhD (Computer Science) at a university (in a third world country) with very limited resources. My research was not funded, my previous lab didn't provide any research support at all (except a desk, internet access and access to some research databases). No training, no equipment, no projects.. they didn't even reimburse students for conferences/travel, etc. As a result, I was **very limited** in my research (experiments, submission to conferences/journals, etc.). I really had to work a lot and sacrifice a lot so I can defend my thesis in good time and with very good results.
Now I received an offer from a very prestigious university in the world. It's quite the opposite of my previous lab in terms of research support, funded projects, etc. So this is a completely new work environment for me. I know that the key mindset to have is *research is research*, but sometimes I feel that my pace will be slower than previous postdocs and for that I need to adapt and adjust quickly. What advice can you give to a researcher with my background?<issue_comment>username_1: Along with research, work hard to make a lot of connections. Certainly connections at the new university, but beyond that through conference meetings and collaborations. Build a circle around yourself. Join the circle of other, more senior people.
Get a sense of all of the research trends around you, even if it shallow outside your specialty.
And, keep connections back "home". In the future you may have an opportunity to do something good for students there as well.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Understand what you have available to you, new assets, and learn how to take advantage of them. I expect you'll be competing with others who take for granted, and benefit from, kinds of support you would only have dreamed of.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Everybody comes from a different background.
Whatever your experience was so far, it got you to where you are now.
Take advantage of the new opportunities you have, but also take advantage of your previous experience as well.
Being able to do so much with such limited resources means you have become good at exploiting those resources, nothing was served to you on a silver plate. You have worked hard to make all of that happen.
Many of the new people you are going to meet do not have that experience and maybe things were easier for them. At the same time you may be surprised to find people who come from a similar background to yours or even more difficult places.
Don't overestimate and don't underestimate. Just make the most out of your personal experience.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Don't care about anyone judgement or the "pressure" to be on par with the others. You are already on par with them, since you got the offer.
Do your own job, at your own pace, use as much as you can from the "prestigious" university, don't play down your requests, ask top of the notch resources/informatics/library access/attending and organizing conferences and workshops. Especially about the last point, be reckless in your requests.
The following applies especially for "top" universities in the US&UK, less for Germany&France.
The prestigious university hired you because you showed the potential to deliver great results, but the prestigious university wants the results to be published under their affiliation to prove they do the best work possible. For their own gain/prestige/interest.
Remember: you are working for them, it is not like they are being compassionate in providing you an opportunity to collaborate with them.
Then do networking with your peers and the levels above, but ignore their paternalism, ignore their compassion, ignore their suggestions how to work for the first 2 years. I mean, try to get involved in as many social activities with your peers from your department and from other departments, avoid like the plague the PhDs from your department (for reasons that will be clearer to you with time), avoid talking too much of work ... try to network with people that have some interest in life, apart from work.
And keep having fun in your work/research!
Disclaimer and Off-Topic: I did this, I had great fun, I had an easy transition to the company of my dream when the option to continue in the academia was, at the time, unfortunately limited to moving to one of the most dangerous place in the semi-civilized world, Detroit, or to the Central United States (no offense to the people living and working there, but they are wrong on so many levels: wrong history of exploitation, wrong environment, wrong urban development, wrong social welfare ... at least the soil is very fertile, but they are working on screwing that as well).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Ask early enough. So if you do not understand something it is ok to think about it, do own literature research, but don't take too long. (Like sitting in the lab for 2 month, and when you are asked 'how is it going', 'oh I didn't know how to start the measurement' or whatever). Usually people do not ask enough but try to also avoid things you could find out quickly (like 1+1).
Take notes. Also, take notes. And don't forget to take notes. People are getting annoyed if you ask the same question more than twice. (Best to only ask once, which is possible if you ... take notes ...). About any question, like technical and administrative.
When you are asked to write a paper, for e.g. a conference, check out the other papers by your group, to see how the presentation of content is preferred. Also have your draft ready *early*. Nothing more annoying if somebody sends a paper round with 'dateline today, please have a look'). If you are asked to correct a document (like a paper draft), use the Word 'track changes' function.
When you get a result in your research, talk to your supervisor where to go from there. If your supervisor suggests a problem, ask which method you should start first (if there are different methods to attack the problem).
If a PhD student (which you will supervise) has a question and you don't know, don't give a wrong answer. Let him/her explain the problem in more detail to you, and either figure out a solution together or refer with the question to somebody else.
Usually prestigious universities focus on results and high output (yours might be different, so check); so focus on results and high output.
Edit: I forgot. How long is the contract? Usually if it is a 2 year contract, look for the next post-doc after year one (so publish often, publish early).
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/19
| 1,444
| 6,199
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am undergrad who will be doing a research internship this summer in Physics. The professor I will be working under is from another country, so there is no possibility of working in-person. I have never met the professor beyond a few Zoom meetings.
I am worried that not being in that environment of working with other students and the professor, but instead from home, may encourage me to slack off or become demotivated. Since there are many academics here who have probably experienced online research and probably have some valuable tips, I would like to know:
**How do I make the most out of this opportunity?**<issue_comment>username_1: Along with research, work hard to make a lot of connections. Certainly connections at the new university, but beyond that through conference meetings and collaborations. Build a circle around yourself. Join the circle of other, more senior people.
Get a sense of all of the research trends around you, even if it shallow outside your specialty.
And, keep connections back "home". In the future you may have an opportunity to do something good for students there as well.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Understand what you have available to you, new assets, and learn how to take advantage of them. I expect you'll be competing with others who take for granted, and benefit from, kinds of support you would only have dreamed of.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Everybody comes from a different background.
Whatever your experience was so far, it got you to where you are now.
Take advantage of the new opportunities you have, but also take advantage of your previous experience as well.
Being able to do so much with such limited resources means you have become good at exploiting those resources, nothing was served to you on a silver plate. You have worked hard to make all of that happen.
Many of the new people you are going to meet do not have that experience and maybe things were easier for them. At the same time you may be surprised to find people who come from a similar background to yours or even more difficult places.
Don't overestimate and don't underestimate. Just make the most out of your personal experience.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Don't care about anyone judgement or the "pressure" to be on par with the others. You are already on par with them, since you got the offer.
Do your own job, at your own pace, use as much as you can from the "prestigious" university, don't play down your requests, ask top of the notch resources/informatics/library access/attending and organizing conferences and workshops. Especially about the last point, be reckless in your requests.
The following applies especially for "top" universities in the US&UK, less for Germany&France.
The prestigious university hired you because you showed the potential to deliver great results, but the prestigious university wants the results to be published under their affiliation to prove they do the best work possible. For their own gain/prestige/interest.
Remember: you are working for them, it is not like they are being compassionate in providing you an opportunity to collaborate with them.
Then do networking with your peers and the levels above, but ignore their paternalism, ignore their compassion, ignore their suggestions how to work for the first 2 years. I mean, try to get involved in as many social activities with your peers from your department and from other departments, avoid like the plague the PhDs from your department (for reasons that will be clearer to you with time), avoid talking too much of work ... try to network with people that have some interest in life, apart from work.
And keep having fun in your work/research!
Disclaimer and Off-Topic: I did this, I had great fun, I had an easy transition to the company of my dream when the option to continue in the academia was, at the time, unfortunately limited to moving to one of the most dangerous place in the semi-civilized world, Detroit, or to the Central United States (no offense to the people living and working there, but they are wrong on so many levels: wrong history of exploitation, wrong environment, wrong urban development, wrong social welfare ... at least the soil is very fertile, but they are working on screwing that as well).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Ask early enough. So if you do not understand something it is ok to think about it, do own literature research, but don't take too long. (Like sitting in the lab for 2 month, and when you are asked 'how is it going', 'oh I didn't know how to start the measurement' or whatever). Usually people do not ask enough but try to also avoid things you could find out quickly (like 1+1).
Take notes. Also, take notes. And don't forget to take notes. People are getting annoyed if you ask the same question more than twice. (Best to only ask once, which is possible if you ... take notes ...). About any question, like technical and administrative.
When you are asked to write a paper, for e.g. a conference, check out the other papers by your group, to see how the presentation of content is preferred. Also have your draft ready *early*. Nothing more annoying if somebody sends a paper round with 'dateline today, please have a look'). If you are asked to correct a document (like a paper draft), use the Word 'track changes' function.
When you get a result in your research, talk to your supervisor where to go from there. If your supervisor suggests a problem, ask which method you should start first (if there are different methods to attack the problem).
If a PhD student (which you will supervise) has a question and you don't know, don't give a wrong answer. Let him/her explain the problem in more detail to you, and either figure out a solution together or refer with the question to somebody else.
Usually prestigious universities focus on results and high output (yours might be different, so check); so focus on results and high output.
Edit: I forgot. How long is the contract? Usually if it is a 2 year contract, look for the next post-doc after year one (so publish often, publish early).
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/19
| 2,068
| 8,922
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a simple question to which I was unable to find a simple answer. I was hired by a university as a "representative of industry" to deliver some courses. In my groups I have several promising students to whom I would like to offer a job after the course ends.
I think this would be OK from students' point of view (the job comes to them, instead of requiring them to spend time in job fairs etc). I think this would also be great from a company's point of view (they can get a student whose abilities and skills they can be reasonably confident in). However, this looks almost too good to be true and I have a feeling that there's some conflict of interest here.
Is such an arrangement common (i.e., hiring *your* students) or is it inappropriate and I should avoid it?
Edit to provide more details: the students are about half-way through their degree and the summer break is slowly appearing on the horizon, so the job would be a limited-term apprenticeship while they do not have any university obligations. The country in question is Poland.<issue_comment>username_1: You should talk to the university. What they think about it is more important than what "random" people on the internet think.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree completely with the others that you should check with your university and your company. Their opinions are the ones that matter. Still, it is quite possible that your institutions will not provide guidance in either direction, so I will not end the answer there.
The only conflict of interest I can see is if you are grading (or otherwise holding authority over) students while simultaneously encouraging them to apply for a job. In this case, students could feel coerced into applying for or accepting a job (or could construe this as a reason if they don't like their grade, etc.). The simplest solution would be to wait until the course ends (and some would say this is your only ethical option). But given that a successful hire is a huge win for all involved, and that hiring is often time-sensitive, you could consider other mitigations, such as having someone else from your company handle the recruitment process, and making it clear to the student that you will intentionally be kept "out of the loop" until the course ends. And of course, be transparent about what you are doing by proactively informing your department chair of your plans (preferably in writing).
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: The University likes it when their students get jobs, and invites industry representatives precisely for that purpose (but usually less directly -- "we'd like your grads to know more X" or "we definitely want to send people to their job faire"). They won't get mad you hired their grads too quickly.
But you want to avoid the *appearance* of impropriety. You don't want other students saying some people only got A's because they were working for you, or that you spent too much class time looking for hires. You don't want your University contact person to get a bad impression. So simply encourage those students to apply at your company, listing you as a reference. Keeps it at arms length. And sure, sure, ask your contact person at the U, or maybe an advisor.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: A point missed by the other answers:
The university will be very upset if you hire students into permanent, full time jobs before they graduate. *Inducing students to leave the university without a degree is irresponsible.* It is bad for the finances of both the student and the university. Students with incomplete degrees are usually paid less (correlation, probable causation).
You will probably find that hiring graduates, nondegree students, summer interns, and part-time employees is encouraged.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: You should not worry about the university so much as worry about your organization's personnel manager and your own record for hiring good staff.
Most EU countries have employment law stating that positions (part- or full-time) must be fairly advertised internally, locally and nationally prior to their being offered internationally - though in exceptional cases like rare skills they may be advertised nationally (e.g. national newspaper) and internationally (e.g. *New Scientist*) simultaneously.
The jobs at issue here are either summer/sandwich internships or else graduate-level trainee positions. It's possible existing staff at the employer organization may have sons/daughters who would be candidates for such jobs - you cannot afford to vex these staff by denying their children their right to apply. Then there are student/graduate candidates from other local or national colleges who also have a right to apply - though naturally the non-locals would be disadvantaged if they have to live away from home.
Now, there's nothing wrong with inviting students to apply for jobs at your organization as long as they are aware that they are not the sole candidates and appointments are made on broad merit grounds.
But the dilemma you face is here. On the one hand, if you do right educationally and not mention jobs till the end of the course/exams then you stand to miss some of the students you'd like to hire - they may have committed to working elsewhere, going abroad, etc in the meantime. On the other hand, if you advise all (and it must be **all** to avoid accusations of "creaming" being made to university management) students of possible internships/jobs, then this will affect both student motivation and cooperation between students - some students will cut the professional/social throats of others just for a job, it's a fact.
Personally, I think the best thing is for you to keep silent on jobs till after your educational commitment is complete but occasionally (at suitable points of lectures or in discussing course work) making the point that **employers generally** like certain virtues in candidates like cooperation with people you may not like socially, willingness to give some extra time to a sticky problem, initiative, honest endeavour, thinking outside the box, good design, clear communication, appreciation of human diversity, etc, etc. The real good ones will take some of this aboard, the what's-in-it-for-me types will turn a deaf ear.
I think that this approach - despite the risk of losing an occasional coveted candidate - is fairest to the employing organization, the student candidates, the university's reputation and - eventually in the long run - your own judgement and reputation.
Note too that those who shine in a university environment may not stand out so much in other working environments: they may be less motivated in an all-ages situation, or may find the stop/start tempo hard to take or may not be motivated by working for the company's reputation instead than their own. Were you to proceed hastily and unilaterally "book" a student for an internship where he/she disappoints then some people in your own company will note this - formally and informally.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_6: I'm a (former) student who was hired by the company of my adjunct professor. I was taking a PHP web design course at a community college in the US. He informed the entire class that his company was hiring and encouraged us to apply. He didn't single me out specifically, and he also didn't have any outward say in the recruitment, like telling people they'd be great for the job or that they'd get hired for sure.
I interviewed with people completely unrelated to him and was offered the job independent of any grading, etc that would have happened for the course. It was the semester that I was supposed to graduate from the college, so I was allowed to finish all my courses and work full time around that.
Once I was hired, my professor stayed slightly distant at the job until I had finished his course, at which point we became good friends and he's now my personnel manager. As long as there's a clear distinction between the company and the professor and they aren't involved in the hiring process, I think it's a great opportunity for students.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: I've done this in New Zealand. I was a guest lecturer at a university and a representative of industry (government actually.)
What happened was that I had a good student who was looking for a job, and I encouraged him to apply for a job in my company (government department) after the course ended.
Perhaps I should note that he was actually a postdoc who was taking courses because he was finding it hard to get a job and considering a transition to industry, so he was a bit more mature than the average student.
(The New Zealand situation is maybe a bit different though, since we have an extreme nepotism problem, so everyone is happy that we hired someone good rather than the boss's nephew!)
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/19
| 649
| 2,805
|
<issue_start>username_0: A colleague of mine in a US institution included letters from some of his (undergraduate) research assistants in his tenure package / dossier.
I was wondering
* If such practice was common,
* What should the letter contains,
* When was the optimal time to ask for it (e.g., as soon as the collaboration terminates, as close to the submission of said packet as possible).
This site has numerous (good) questions about *student asking professor,* but I couldn't find any about *professor asking student*.<issue_comment>username_1: If a university highly values teaching then such letters can be helpful and can be solicited ethically as long as there are certain considerations met.
A former student, with whom you no longer have any supervisory (or grading) relationship is fine. Such letters should be sent independently and their sender's identity and content not revealed to you. Both conditions should be met.
Alternatively, simply announcing that you are up for tenure and any student who wants to comment can send a letter to the committee is welcome to would be fine, as long as student anonymity is maintained.
A student who has graduated and with whom you will no longer have any possibility of a supervisory relationship is fine, even if not anonymous.
But everyone needs to be assured that there was (and can be) no pressure applied, nor any bribery possible.
And, yes, I think it is common enough in teaching colleges and some others. Probably more common is for a candidate to supply a list of names of students that the committee can contact independently.
However, if you contemplate doing this, I suggest that you discuss it with the department head and/or the dean before you act to assure that it is acceptable at your place as well as any additional restrictions. In particular, including letters that you have actually seen might not be allowed, or even proper.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: * If such practice was common,
I don't know that it is common, but I would say that it is not rare for any kind of academic promotion in the US.
* What should the letter contains,
The student gets to decide. It should comment on your teaching.
* When was the optimal time to ask for it (e.g., as soon as the collaboration terminates, as close to the submission of said packet as possible).
In my experience, you do not. The dean's office requests it for you, at some time before the evaluation of the promotion portfolio.
Avoiding conflicts of interest is not relevant to you; the letter will be read with the assumption that the student selected is one who thinks highly of you and will probably ask you for a letter of recommendation. In other words, the conflict is inevitable. The dean's office should keep the letter confidential.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/20
| 1,001
| 4,157
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a third-year Ph.D. student in computer science. I have finished all course requirements and I work full-time as a software engineer at a [FAANG](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/FANG#Noun) company. I am doing my best trying to balance time between work and school. But today I had a meeting with my advisor and he said by the end of summer he expects me to wrap up all my thesis work.
Basically, I did
* One year of study the research material and taking graduate-level courses to study the problem
* One year of research to understand the problem and come up with the solution
* One year of solving the problem, coding, and showing my method worked
What is remaining is writing a paper and defense.
My advisor is very strict and I am kind of surprised he said that. I don't feel like I have accomplished anything yet and there is more to the problem. Should I try to explain the work is not finished yet? Or maybe he is getting tired of me and wants to focus on other problems.<issue_comment>username_1: Working full-time as both a software engineer *and* a Ph.D. student is unsustainable. If writing a thesis based upon the results you have is likely to suffice (speak to fellow students, read theses of prior students, speak to your advisor), I'd suggest you take that route. Reduce your workload to something more sustainable. Your thesis needn't be your best work; your thesis need only get you a PhD. Graduate, pursue the next step.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Perhaps you are forgetting that the goal of earning a PhD is to get it finished and move on. Well, no, there are other goals, of course, but you seem to have completed them. But certainly the goal is not to make a career of being a student.
I think that the professor is giving you good advice and that you have done enough by their standards, and that of the institution, that you should just write it up and move on. Your third bullet point certainly suggest that.
As for "work yet to do", it is really a good thing to leave a PhD program with ideas for future research and publications. You don't have to stop, assuming that your employment permits it. And your life will probably get a bit simpler for a while if you have only one "job".
I think you should take the advice and move on in your career. I'd have given the same advice as your advisor in this situation. And it wouldn't be that I was "tired of you". Not at all.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: While I'm from a different field, the situation of handling work with PhD is similar. I'm making some assumptions based on that similarity, feel free to reject them if they are invalid.
Possibly you feel that the PhD is your last chance to tackle an important research problem and make significant contributions. Possibly you enjoy the academic nature of the course and would like it to go on a little longer. As others have shared, these need not end with the program. Rather, the program is aimed at giving you some tools and directions to further refine the work that you'll do subsequently (whether that includes basic, applied or developmental research).
An advisor who wants you to finish early is arguably better than one who wants you to finish later than you would like to. It may be a good idea to discuss your progress and immediate work plan with the advisor, get their suggestions and perspectives and make an honest assessment of whether you have enough results to defend the thesis.
If you do, you're in an excellent position, good luck!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Yah, been there, done that. Write the thesis (BTW, that is NOT trivial and much good additional work comes from the writing), defend and then get onto doing more good work, <NAME>.
If you were planning on an academic career, I might agree with holding off. In academia, your productivity is measured in papers after you earn your Ph.D so getting in more research first allows you to blitz articles as soon as you defend.
But in industry, you use your credentials as a lever. "AB.D" is not a credential and too easily bestowed while you are working.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/20
| 3,072
| 13,241
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently had an experience while overseeing student presentations in a course I am teaching. While the concrete situation could be handled without much ado due to some special circumstances, I thought the general problem interesting enough to ask for opinions here.
The case is the following: In a course for first year students, all participants are tasked with presentations of a course relevant topic. As part of the preparations, students are encouraged to make the presentations as lively as possible. One student had included a couple of biographical slides (encouraged), but one of the cartoon figures of a key person was drawn in the unmistakable style of *["Der Ewige Jude"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Eternal_Jew_(film))* from national socialistic propaganda. From context, it was clearly unintended. The student had just googled for images, and this came up. The presentation as such had absolutely nothing to with history, and this was just a biographical introduction slide.
Obviously there is a learning opportunity here, but how should I handle such a problem? In particular since the course as such has nothing to do with European history. Some potential issues I already considered:
* Having such a figure on a slide could be quite offensive to other students, and as such, the mistake should be addressed.
* But by addressing the issue, I risk derailing the discussion about the course topic in question completely.
* By addressing the issue in plenary, I risk discouraging the student from making lively presentations in the future.
* By addressing the issue in private, I risk giving the impression that I don't care about such issues.
Let me stress that I am talking only about unintended use. Had the student started regurgitating anti-Semitic propaganda, I would have engaged immediately.
How can I turn such a situation into a positive learning opportunity, without discouraging the student, and without drawing too much attention from the main topic?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Having such a figure on a slide could be quite offensive to other students, and as such, the mistake should be addressed.
>
>
>
Yes.
>
> But by addressing the issue, I risk de-railing the discussion about the course topic in question completely.
>
>
>
You are also teaching the students to give presentations. Choosing your illustrations is an important skill in preparing a presentation. Choosing an illustration that isn't nazi propaganda is a vital skill, even if it's rarely taught explicitly. You would not be derailing the discussion, you would be doing your role as a teacher.
If you are worried about derailing, and you are certain that the student made a mistake rather than a fascist statement, then you can talk about it during a feedback/questions time at the end of the presentation, rather than addressing it on the spot. Do not necessarily assume malice, but be firm in that showing such an image is not acceptable.
You can make this into a general point about choosing sources carefully, which is undoubtedly worthwhile. This will also help taking the "pressure" away from the specific student, as you will not be talking about the specific mistake but rather the general mistake of choosing a wrong source.
>
> By addressing the issue in plenary, I risk discouraging the student from making lively presentations in the future.
>
>
>
I don't see how. Asking a student to be careful in choosing illustrations is rather unlikely to discourage the student from choosing illustration at all. And if that's the case, well, it's better to have no illustration than to have nazi propaganda.
Students make mistakes. If they did everything perfectly, they wouldn't be students, they would be masters. We, as teachers, correct these mistakes. A student who takes a well-meaning correction personally and stops trying has a completely wrong attitude. While you can certainly try steering students away from that attitude, at some point it ends being your responsibility. You can bring a horse to water...
>
> By addressing the issue in private, I risk giving the impression that I don't care about such issues.
>
>
>
Sure. But the important point isn't your own personal image that you project to your students, it's what your students actually learn.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: **Derail the discussion, then re-rail it afterwards.**
Keeping the class on topic is useless if students are too uncomfortable to learn. You are obligated to intervene, once you have learned how to do it. Here's the method I was taught:
1. Interrupt. Example: "Sorry, I'm interrupting."
2. Question. Example: "Do you know what stereotype does this image represents?"
The purpose of questioning is to allow someone to indicate that they are ignorant, or to allow themselves to correct an error. In my experience, students usually realize they did something wrong and correct themselves.
3. Educate. Explain why something is offensive/discriminatory/whatever. Example: "This image is in a style that was used to depict [identity group] as having [trait]. It is a dishonest message and disrespectful."
Once the issue is addressed, direct students back to the usual learning activity.
>
> without discouraging the student
>
>
>
Prejudice is inherently discouraging. Your students can't learn ethical behavior without being discouraged by awareness of unethical behavior. Hopefully, the "Question" step will at least reduce the hostility of the interaction.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: One strategy for the future: try to head this off before it happens. You can do that in a context that does not call attention to the particular infelicity.
When you assign the presentations, devote some class time to describing what makes a good one. Along with the standard advice (pacing, make it lively, no slides dense with text, not too many slides, ...) you can talk about making sure clip-art images are appropriate. Perhaps tell this story about what happened in a previous class.
If time permits, you could arrange to see previews of the presentations. Critiques of drafts are more useful than critiques of the actual presentations. (That's true for written projects too.)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Maybe you could interrupt and say something like "So Bloggins, sorry to interrupt, but can I just ask where you found the image possibly please? Just asking because although I'm pretty sure you didn't realise, it's in a style that used to be found in Nazi propaganda, so it's definitely not something that's appropriate in a presentation. Where on earth did you find it?" And then go from there, and explain how to find appropriate images in future.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Consider asking students to go back and create a brief bibliography of source for items used in the presentation...if it is appropriate for the course work. Be sure to ask for a second or third order search to determine the original source of the material.
Then, consider if the addressing of original source can be done in a way to enhance the original instructional intent WHILE addressing the ethical and useful sourcing of material used.
Hopefully this can be done without singling out anyone...as that could push a person from casual indifference to a reaction of alignment against the perceived insult....especially if their home-life or social circle is bent to accepting the unethical dogma.
Shine light without creating what we fear. Give haven to those who are not committed to the shadow so they can reflect the light you offer...though more aggressive tactics can be argued with great validity.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: I agree with the procedure indicated in [username_2's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/166544/97687), but do not think that is the question you should ask. You did not share the exact image but I'm going to assume here that to someone not aware of the historical context, the image could be considered a nondescript cartoon drawing or something (obviously if the image was a whole nazi propaganda poster it's a different story).
You have to realize what the likely effect the question you ask is going to have on the rest of the class: If you, as the instructor, ask a question and the student is forced to respond with "I don't know," that student and all the others in the room are going to going to interpret that as "this is a thing you should have known." This makes "what stereotype does this image represent?" the wrong question to ask, since now students will go and look at their presentations and try and find out if any of their images represent any stereotypes, real or imagined.
Instead, you should ask a question more directly linked to the student's actual mistake: "Do you know the historical background of this image?" It forces the student to answer no to a question that they *actually should have known the answer to*, and at the same time will make sure everyone else in the class goes back and checks whether their images have unfortunate historical background.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_7: Another potential issue you didn't mention is the principles of Free Speech and Freedom of Belief. Some people consider Free Speech to be an important human right, and the idea that there are 'things you cannot say' to be extremely offensive and dangerous, in precisely the same sort of way that National Socialist propaganda against Jews was dangerous. Authoritarian regimes enforce a set of social norms on what people are allowed to say and believe, what is socially acceptable, what is moral and ethical according to the regime's definitions of morality and ethics. Those who don't share their norms are considered dangerous influences on society, and need to be silenced, suppressed, driven out, and eventually destroyed. The target for the National Socialists happened to be the Jews, but other groups can and have been targets too. The danger in such propaganda is not about any specific oppressor or target (e.g. National Socialists versus Jews specifically), but in the general phenomenon of *any* groups, viewpoints, beliefs, etc. being held 'unacceptable' and excluded by society, and Freedom of Speech being persecuted and punished. (Note there is a critical difference between opinion and action. *Acting* on beliefs where that harms others may indeed be punishable.)
Given that in this case the student was unaware of the context, there can be no suspicion that this was an attempt to marginalise a particular group, and it should therefore be made very clear that the student is not under any moral cloud for having done what they did. It would certainly be appropriate to explain to everyone the historical context of this image and the effect this is likely to have on people who recognise it, but Free Speech includes even offensive speech. (We *all* hold beliefs that some other people find offensive or wrong.) There may be circumstances where evoking such a reaction is the intention, and appropriate. (For example, in an essay warning against the dangers of totalitarianism...) But it is *even more* important to explain the point that Academic Freedom requires that there be no forbidden ideas.
Full treatment of such an important topic shouldn't be inserted into the middle of another discussion as a digression. That does neither subject justice. It should certainly be dealt with as a topic in itself, and its importance emphasised. But assuming it has already been presented previously, it would be pedagogically beneficial to briefly link back to it when the issue arises elsewhere, as here.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_8: It might be good to reflect on what would have happened if the same mixup happened in a job context. Say, if the official twitter representative for say MoonBucks Coffee tweeted such an image (by mistake).
I do not think real life would be as forgiving as the university setting, so highlighting that this is a learning opportunity where honest mistakes are treated as such, and not cause for termination. If the discussion is uncomfortable, then this is a very mild consequence, compared to what the hypothetical MoonBucks person above would experience.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_9: ### Slide pre-submission
Consider discovering the problem early:
* Have the students submit their presentation slides some period of time *before* they present.
* Give the presentations a once-over.
* Mail each student (or group of presenting students) some high-level comments; and in extraordinary cases, like this one, point out something that would be inappropriate to include.
**Pros:**
* No need to improvise and act at a moment's thought.
* Student is spared the unpleasant experience of being chided, or being associated with the Nazis (however indirect the association may be).
* You are spared possible corridor talk about the Nazi presentation in Prof. Nabla's class (rumors don't need much grounding in facts after all).
* The students get to fix other potential issues in their presentations, which is useful for first-time presentors.
**Cons:**
* It's a lot of extra work :-(
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/20
| 445
| 2,004
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am reading some papers from Arxiv which were advised by a professor. Also the papers are published by a professors. My question is as follows: How to prove the professor that I have read the paper (advised by him)? Actually, I don't want to say just "sir, I have read the paper advised by you". If I truly read the papers then I might get a chance to be research student under him.
Please advise me.<issue_comment>username_1: If you want to prove that you read a paper, you should read it carefully by analyzing the main results and identify the contribution. You should also understand why a hypothesis is made and whether if it is optimal or not. Sometimes you might find some errors or improve some results. In this way, you can prove that you truly read a research paper.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Understand the motivation for the paper, how it contributes to its particular research community, and note any clever twists or innovations it introduced.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Write a short (one page) summary of the paper, giving key results. Include any important insights you obtained by reading the paper. End your summary with questions you might have that the professor might be able to answer. Send a copy to the professor.
Note that in some fields like mathematics, the "key results" might include things not stated as such. An interesting and unique proof technique or methodology might be the most important contribution.
The insights and questions are just as important as the summary, actually.
If you have periodic meetings with the professor, bring the summaries along with you.
Bonus: If you can think of some logical extension to the paper that might require research, mention that also.
Going beyond your question, it would be useful personally if you add the paper to a personal bibliographic list along with your summary. Perhaps include things referenced in that paper that you think would be worth exploring.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/04/20
| 1,553
| 6,590
|
<issue_start>username_0: While using Researchgate platform for a while, I could not understand how the change of the RG score is carried out. For example, after my first paper RG=1. Afterwards, it became 0.99. Then, after the second paper, RG=1.13. Few days after it became 1.12.
Do you have any idea how this change is carried out? What is the issue behind the score decrease?<issue_comment>username_1: **Update**: From July 2022, ResearchGate will remove the RG score. They put out an [announcement](https://www.researchgate.net/researchgate-updates/removing-the-rg-score) in which they give their motivation for doing so, which shares many of the arguments from the critical article I cite below.
---
While ResearchGate provides some rough hints on their support pages (see @GoodDeeds's comment), the details of how the RG score is computed are not publicly disclosed.
Relevant article from the London School of Economic's Impact Blog: [The ResearchGate Score: a good example of a bad metric](https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2015/12/09/the-researchgate-score-a-good-example-of-a-bad-metric/)
>
> One of the most apparent issues of the RG Score is that it is in-transparent. ResearchGate does present its users with a breakdown of the individual parts of the score, i.e., publications, questions, answers, followers (also shown as a pie-chart), and to what extent these parts contribute to your score. Unfortunately, that is not enough information to reproduce one’s own score. For that you would need to know the exact measures being used as well as the algorithm used for calculating the score. These elements are, however, unknown.
>
>
> ResearchGate thus creates a sort of black-box evaluation machine that keeps researchers guessing, which actions are taken into account when their reputation is measured. This is exemplified by the many questions in ResearchGate’s own question and answering system pertaining to the exact calculation of the RG Score. There is a prevalent view in the bibliometrics community that transparency and openness are important features of any metric. One of the principles of the Leiden Manifesto states for example: “Keep data collection and analytical processes open, transparent and simple”, and it continues: “Recent commercial entrants should be held to the same standards; no one should accept a black-box evaluation machine.” Transparency is the only way measures can be put into context and the only way biases – which are inherent in all socially created metrics – can be uncovered.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It is a mysterious metric. When I looked into it at some point, it seemed that for most researchers (i.e., those that either don't use research gate or simply use it to store copies of their articles), it was roughly as follows:
Something like a log (or similar transformation) of the sum of the research gate calculated impact factors of your published journal articles.
The general logic is clear:
* Research gate has its own version of impact factor for each journal based on its own citation database. This is presumably highly correlated with similar journal metrics that estimate average citations per article in a journal over 2/3/4/5 year period (e.g., Web Of Science impact factor; Scopus Cite Score, etc)
* Thus, each time a researcher gets a publication, the "impact factor" gets added to the total impact factor of their publications.
* However, the raw sum of impact factors would lead to a highly skewed distribution. E.g., someone with one paper in a low impact factor journal might have a score of 1, but a prolific researcher with hundreds of papers in high impact journals might have a score in the thousands. Instead, research gate scores tended to range from 0 to about 60 or 70 or something. So, there was some kind of order-preserving transformation going on (e.g., something like a log).
Assuming the above is all correct **what would cause scores to fluctuate?** First, if you published a new journal article, then your score would go up. The higher the research gate impact factor of the journal, the more your score would go up. Also, because of the transformation, scores rise more rapidly at the low end of the scale. Second, if the journals you published in rose or fell in calculated impact, then your score would also fluctuate. Presumably, over time, if you have a lot of publications in a lot of different journals, this variation could be quite subtle.
**Is this a good metric?**
Assuming the above stated understanding of the metric is correct, is it a good metric?
In general, it should correlate quite highly with h-index in the sense that (a) it is a measure of career-level research output rather than a measure of annual productivity, and (b) it also has the built in log-style scaling of total output whereby each additional increase takes progressively more output.
That said, it is more immediate than h-index and other metrics based on citations to a researchers articles. Citation-based metrics such as h-index and total citations measure citation impact, which also simply increase with the passage of time since publication. The sum of impact factors is more likely to align with annual researcher citations as the sum of the impact factors is roughly equivalent to sum of expected citations per year (albeit over longer periods of time articles can enter the citation decline phase, and this would no longer hold).
I'm also not sure how it dealt with research output that lacks a research gate impact factor (e.g., books, book chapters).
In focussing on the impact factor of the journals, it does not reward researchers who write highly cited works that in some sense out-perform (from a citation perspective) the journals that they appear in.
Both h-index and sum of impact factors ignore various confounds including (a) articles with fewer authors are not weighted more in the metric, (b) authorial position (e.g., first, second, last) is not incorporated into the metric, and (c) discipline variation in citation practices is not considered.
And finally, there is the standard critique of all citation based metrics. I.e., quality and importance are not equivalent to article or journal-level metrics of citations.
Of specific relevance to Research Gate Score, they also appeared to have a bunch of other ways of increasing the metric (e.g., by answering questions on the site and so on). These are irrelevant and just add noise from the perspective of evaluating a researcher's career research output.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/20
| 649
| 2,512
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was editing a friend's manuscript and I noticed that they do something similar to what I have been told **not** to do when referring to previous work done in the field of interest being discussed. I would often refer to the citation i.e. the study and then go on to say what they found in the study For example, I would sometimes say:
>
> Smith *et al.* (2020) modeled how the life history of *species x* was affected by environmental pressure, they concluded that increased pressure would also lead to earlier maturation.
>
>
>
I have been told by different advisors that this is considered "bad writing", in that it is generally preferred to refer to the work at the end of a sentence as opposed to the beginning. However, no-one has explained why this is the case. I passed this information onto my friend as well, but I am curious as to why?
An example of how my advisors edited the above sentence:
>
> Modelling of the life history of *species x* showed that increased environmental pressure would also lead to earlier maturation (Smith *et al.* 2020)
>
>
>
I understand that technically the edited version sounds better, my question is why specifically it is considered bad form to mention your citation/reference at the beginning of the sentence?<issue_comment>username_1: I see nothing wrong with putting the reference at the beginning, and in fact I see some situations where that placement would be necessary. Putting the reference at the beginning or the end makes no difference provided you agree with the statement you're citing. But if you disagree (or even if you're undecided), then putting the reference at the end doesn't work. For example, it's OK to write "Smith (2020) wrote that the moon is made of green cheese, but the evidence doesn't justify that assertion." It's not OK (in my opinion) to write "The moon is made of green cheese (Smith 2020), but the evidence doesn't justify that assertion."
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Neither alternative is good or bad.
I would put the citation first if the author or the history is important:
>
> Darwin [*On the Origin of Species*, 1859] argued that natural selection ...
>
>
>
but the citation last if you just want to tell your reader where they can look to check your facts:
>
> Darwin's finches continue to evolve [<NAME>, *The Beak of the Finch*,
> 1995 (reprint)].
>
>
>
So it's a case by case choice. In this case I think your advisor is right.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2021/04/21
| 5,342
| 23,764
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a first year math grad student. As an undergrad, all my professors followed the given text book closely, making lecture easy to prepare for and very predictable. As a grad student, my professors seem to cover material mostly in the book, but in a different order, with different notation, or different content entirely.
The result is that I have essentially no way to prepare for classes. I can only show up to lecture and hope I can keep up. If I want to review, I can only read their handwritten notes. My understanding is really suffering because I can't reinforce the content by seeing it repeatedly and clearly. I know it's unreasonable to expect professors to merely regurgitate a textbook, but this is how I'm accustomed to learning. What can I do to learn material better in these situations?
**Edit:** Thank you for the replies. The consensus seems to be that lectures *shouldn't* reinforce the text. They should provide a bigger picture, a linking of ideas from the expert's point of view, and understanding details is the job of the student on their own time. This makes total sense.
I think my issue comes from spending valuable time studying the book, then having the professor totally skip that topic and go to another, never to mention the thing I spent hours studying. My effort is wasted, and I have to expend double the effort to understand what *is* covered. It seems like the answer is to just learn what I can and not see that effort as wasted.<issue_comment>username_1: If your undergraduate lectures were perfectly predictable, following the book exactly, and you showed up perfectly prepared to each one, then they were actually completely useless. You could have just stayed home and read the book yourself!
At the graduate level, the best practice is to ask the professor for good references, both at the start of the course, and whenever unfamiliar topics come up. You shouldn't expect immediate full understanding from going to lecture; graduate subjects are too deep for that. Treat lecture as an informal invitation to the subject. It's your job to turn that into understanding, by reading from references, doing problems, and asking questions.
Of course, this isn't an excuse for lazy or disorganized teaching. When a professor doesn't follow a book, they could be doing you a great service, by presenting a carefully thought out, alternative view of the subject which will complement existing books. (That's where many textbooks come from in the first place!) But in other cases, they could simply not care much about teaching, and not have any direction in mind.
I've been in classes of both types, and if you're stuck in the latter, it's absolutely essential to get good references to solidify your understanding. In these cases, don't count on the professor to supply them -- if they aren't paying much attention, they're likely to recommend books they used decades ago which are well out of date, or subpar books that they've only heard of, not read. Ask other students, and try resources like StackExchange. You can find good resources for any graduate course in any subject in this way.
>
> I think my issue comes from spending valuable time studying the book, then having the professor totally skip that topic and go to another, never to mention the thing I spent hours studying. My effort is wasted, and I have to expend double the effort to understand what is covered.
>
>
>
If you're planning on doing research later, then effort spent learning core material in standard graduate-level books is *never* wasted. You can't know in advance what's going to be useful for your research, and often it will turn out to be the core material -- which is why it's the core in the first place. Many times, I've been stuck on a research problem only to find that the right way of thinking about it was in a book chapter I skipped long ago.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_2: If the problem is a lack of repetition of the material, because your lecturers are not repeating the contents of a book verbatim, then you could consider repeating the material by yourself before attending the lecture. Also consider different ways of learning the material; doing exercises, playing around with examples, and playing around with the conditions for theorems to hold.
If anything, I would say it's a good thing that the lectures are teaching you things that are not literally in the book. Be it different but related theory, or just different connections between parts of the book. Instead of 'just' dry material, you are getting some insight into how an expert views and uses the material.
Of course in order to take advantage of such lectures it is very helpful to get familiar with the material *before* attending the lecture. I can also recommend to let go of the idea that every detail of the lecture should be clear to you before proceeding. Instead, focus on the general ideas and how they relate, and take careful notes so you can figure out the details in your own time. Then you can always ask your classmates, or otherwise your professor, about any details that you aren't able to figure out.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I am a retired lecturer, so here is my perspective.
As an undergrad, you were part of a sausage machine, taking kids from school and running them through a training process where the competent ones could earn a Degree that said they were competent to ply a given "trade".
Grad School is different. In many Unis it is a lead in to research, or if it's a coursework Postgrad, it's studying advanced materials *where there may not even be a published textbook*. Either way, a student has to show resourcefulness, independent thinking, and determination.
Often the lectures are led by people talking about their own research area. Sometimes the lectures are actually a selection tool. Students who do well may become preferred candidates for research places, assistant roles, and the like. If there is a tutor or assistant then they may be a student who is supervised by that member of faculty.
I think it's reasonable to request lecture notes, but don't be surprised if they consist of "Discuss Chebyshev Polynomials of the first kind, second kind, multipole expansion, and applications". It's also reasonable to request references, but again, don't be surprised if you're told to find them yourself.
After all, after this you should be able to do independent research. And publish it.
To return to the question, my advice is basic student stuff. Sit at the front. Take notes by hand in the lectures. Use a recording device to capture the words. Ask if video is available or permitted. Followup with those handwritten notes. Connect with the other students. Do any problems that are set. Attend every class.
And speak to the lecturer, asking questions *about the material*, not about learning issues. You may get the brush-off, but maybe you'll be rewarded by the academic seeing you as a serious and interested student. Everybody likes it when somebody is interested in their work.
[ Edit ]
Thanks to @BillNace and @ElizabethHenning for pointing out improvements to this answer.
In my experience there are two kinds of academic: those who care about teaching and those who only care about their research. I suggest the OP broach only questions on the material, so that they can get a sense of the academic's approach to students. If it seems positive then that is the time to broach these concerns.
If not, then the Faculty Office may provide a service, after that the University student support service or student union are the next ports of call. Every University that I have had anything to do with, even just to visit, has had a student support service. Student unions or associations are ubiquitous, and a good source of help, at least in finding where to go.
The final suggestion is library staff. They are generally independent sources of advice.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: I'll guess that this is fairly common, actually. Some things you can do:
Ask a lot of questions during lecture if possible. In a class of 20 or so, it is possible. In particular, ask at the very end of a lecture what will be the topic of the next lecture. This might give you a heads up to look in the text book.
But, and this is actually independent of the question, take a lot of notes. In the notes indicate where you have issues and unanswered questions. Immediately after the lecture, summarize the notes very briefly - just an index card or two. In particular, make a specific note of what the most important ideas are in that lecture.
You can then, annotate those notes with textbook page numbers for later study.
At the start of the next lecture, if possible, ask any questions that you haven't been able to answer yourself from your notes and the book.
For some topics you can use wikipedia, which is pretty reliable for many things (math, for example) and it is organized by topic, not as a course.
If in class questions are impossible, try to find a way to ask questions outside class. Do some work so that you avoid being a bother, but if you have a question, it is very likely that many other students have the same question.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I'd like to offer my perspective as a second year mathematics graduate student.
I have found that the courses I learnt the most from were those in which the instructor did *not* follow the prescribed textbook(s) very closely. In such courses, the instructor would usually spend a large portion of the lecture hours drawing connections and nudging our intuition in the "right" direction. I found this to be very valuable. It is precisely these insights that the instructors offered that made the courses valuable, since I could easily read and follow a textbook line-by-line yet struggle to see the big picture.
Even in the courses where the instructor chose to follow the textbook closely, the standout lectures for me were those in which the instructor went off script and chose to delve a little deeper into the subject, offering their own insights into the theory.
I should add that not all of my classmates share my perception. Some of them did struggle because there was no textbook whose contents matched the lectures close enough, and not knowing exactly which topic will be covered next meant that preparing for a lecture by browsing the material beforehand was not possible. This seems very close to your experience, based on the details in your question.
Without being judgemental, I think this is because my classmates were unused to processing new material on the fly; that is, they were more used to participating in a lecture passively and wrestling with the material privately by reading and re-reading the textbooks or class notes, than wrestling with the material right then and there as the lecture is being delivered. In the former style, the instructor may come into class with well-prepared notes and the students may be expected to jot them down as the instructor delivers the lecture at the blackboard. In the latter style, the instructor may instead choose to develop the theory more organically, often speaking out loud their thoughts and intuitions, often stumbling, and may expect the students to raise questions of their own along similar lines.
Another reason the latter style works for me is that the pace of the lecture becomes slow enough that I can follow comfortably and sometimes also offer my own suggestions for how to get out of a hole. It doesn't work for others because they are unused to being taken for a bumpy ride.
While I don't have many concrete suggestions for how to handle such lectures, I would highly recommend that you try and get used to thinking and responding to the content as it is being delivered. In my experience, such a style of lecturing is closer to how research is done; at least, I see the similarities between the interactions in such lectures with the interactions I have with my guide during our weekly meetings.
One thing that you could try is to form a study group with similar students and discuss the lecture material together. Even try lecturing the same material back to each other. Some of my classmates find it easier to respond actively to a peer lecturing to them as compared to a faculty. The principles remain the same, so I expect this to help, if you can find like-minded classmates.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: I certainly grant in advance that tastes vary...
Based on my own student days' attendance in various lectures, and on my own preferences for teaching, I try to think in terms of "added value" that my lectures/classes may provide, beyond any text.
Yes, I do also try to provide my own notes that fill in details that might be tedious to discuss "live". Are more careful about all details.
My lectures, even by Zoom, are meant to be "live performances", rather than reciting notes by myself or anyone else. Live talking and typeset notes are significantly different mediums/media.
I do recall some cases of very nice people, excellent mathematicians, just silently copying their nicely written-out notes onto the blackboard... as opposed to distributing the notes. (Pre-internet, so there were complicating issues...) Worse, to my mind, were the people who thought their job was to recite a chosen text. I could read it myself, at times and at rates chosen by myself, rather than having to show up at random/inconvenient times and sit in uncomfortable chairs ...
Yes, certainly, some improvisational instructors may be a bit irresponsible, in the sense of not providing any written record of their (possibly very nice) lecture material. I myself do aim to provide more-formal typeset PDFs reflecting what I talk about "live".
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: Your problem isn't that the professor doesn't follow the text. Your real problem (as clarified in your edit) is an unusual aspect of your question that nobody has addressed. It is your need to "prepare for class" on your own.
In all the courses I can recall, the professor either assigns a specific reading before class, or not. Then the professor designs the lecture to be understood by a student with that specific preparation as the case may be. I've never encountered an expectation that students should guess the lecture content and prepare for it using their own unspecified resources.
It seems that your real problem is that you are struggling to follow class material in real time:
>
> I can only show up to lecture and hope I can keep up.
>
>
>
Your homebrewed solution to this problem is to prepare for lecture by studying the material in advance. So you are asking us how to continue applying this strategy in a new environment. Perhaps you should ask directly about different approaches to this problem instead.
A common answer is that lecture is not guaranteed to make perfect sense the first time. After the lecture, students may need to read or think or review notes, and possibly find additional resources or presentations of the material to understand it better.
But you may have a different learning style than most of your classmates, and you may feel this common approach is not working for you. People on this site may be able to help better if you give more information about why this approach to learning (the usual/expected approach) doesn't work well for you.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: Depending on the technology available in your classroom, a couple of resources that might be available are video recordings of the lecture (so you can go back over the lecture later to make sense of things that weren't immediately clear) or screen capture recordings of things that the lecturer wrote on a stylus and projected on a screen during the lecture (here, you can see what was written but not hear what was said.) The lecturer might also agree to allow you to make an audio recording of the class. If this technology is availabe in the room but your instructor isn't making use of it, then it would be reasonable to ask the instructor to consider using it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: The typical professor will possess many bits of insight into their field that cannot be found in *any* textbook. So you are simply asking for the wrong thing. Asking for a professor who teaches only what’s in the textbook makes sense if your goal is to *feel like* you’ve mastered the topic of the course. If your goal is to *actually* master the topic at a level a graduate student needs to in order to be prepared for doing research, your best bet is a professor who will curate for you the best knowledge on the topic that they can find, not only from the primary textbook but also from other textbooks and research papers they are familiar with, and from their own personal knowledge.
Do not confuse actual mastery with the illusory feeling of it that you might get by studying in advance the content of a lecture precisely parroting a written source. The latter might feel good and can be acquired in a more systematic and less anxiety-inducing way, but the former is what you should be after.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_10: I know it sounds confrontional, but did you ever consider the notion that this class might be too advanced for you? Not everybody is able to deal with a grad course, nor should everyone be.
The fact that you already struggled to deal with the undergrad courses and could only cope by extensive preparation and a very predictable class, might be a good sign that the next step up could be too advanced for you.
It's never bad to discover one's limitations. If you never encounter your limits, you're not trying hard enough. And maybe, with lots of additional time and dedication, you can push your limit beyond what this grade expects of you.
But consider this a sign that you may have reached the limit of your abilities.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: A perspective of an ex-student, then ex-lecturer and now a parent.
I usually taught math/physics the way I ended up understanding it. I was not a particularly brilliant student so I had to think a lot when learning, trying to keep everything more or less in a coherent state. This meant simplifications, analogies - and then understanding why the simplifications and analogies were only good to a given point.
My students usually found this useful because they had the "wandering around" part and then another approach, usually more formal, in the textbooks.
This is also how I was explaining math and physics to my children: by going with them through a journey to understand (and not only learn) what they were supposed to know.
Only in movies this works fine: they were vigorously protesting because they wanted "just the facts, and not again going through a whole story". I insisted, they protested but eventually gave up. My biggest pride was for them to ask me once to go my way because they understood that they will understand.
This was greatly helped by the fact that French mid- and high-school math textbooks are not particularly good. They love to explain to you what the derivative of a function is by starting with "*Given x in the domain R ...*" - at which point the children are lost. By discussing with them how to avoid a speed ticket when one sees a "50" road sign it was much easier (in other words: describe a physical context they can relate to, and then walk them through the process of though to get (in that case) to derivatives).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_12: In my opinion, lecture is not the proper vehicle for providing direct answers or application of formulae – the kinds of things that you'd find in the textbook, and thus a "regurgitation"; rather, this would best be achieved at some recitation or office hours with TAs (who are often extremely helpful in helping students understand course content!). Rather, the purpose of the lecture sessions is to explore important ideas in the subject and link them to profound implications for society, institutions (such as public policy, law, and financial systems), technology, and the natural universe, as well as the human condition. In this way, you may find yourself mired in quite some degree of abstraction, formal proofs, and derivations of central theories, which can seem disorienting without tangible practice; this is normal. Everything may seem strangely uncorrelated or not coalescing correctly in your mind upon first sight, but most of the time there are relevant and meaningful connections that you'll discover after, say, repeated exposure from various places (the lecture, the textbook, the academic literature, slides from other university programs).
As an aside, why should we spend significant moneys or get into unreasonable levels of un-bankruptcy-able debt to hear a lecturer spout the same thing as the textbook? JUST BUY THE TEXTBOOK INSTEAD AND CALL IT A DAY, THEN! (unless your goal is to enter industry, that is, in which case the piece of paper that says you know some such stuff may be prized).
Notably, courses usually indicate how many hours you should be spending outside of lecture by the number of "units" or "course credits" in which they are advertised. Of course, this is only a suggestion. These hours should be spent, ideally, in optimized fashion reinforcing the key takeaways from lecture, and then identifying connections between these and the detailed computations and material particulars contained within the texts. This is the stage in which you should be playing around by making hypothesis about what the fundamental theorems say the output should be given certain use cases and input conditions, including edge cases or otherwise interesting or unusual scenarios, and conducting the analysis to verify that the results match your expectation. If not, what was your faulty reasoning? This practice will prepare you for any upcoming assignment.
As a personal test, determine if you can finish an assignment with little to no notes or other references. After seeing the concept multiple times at this point, it should be easier to compute answers or solve related proofs. It may take time and thought, but shouldn't require the textbook if you understand it "to a reasonable level". You don't need to know everything *deeply* yet, but rather a *moderate* comprehension, which is enough at this stage.
In going one step further than expected by the professor, you may locate the most influential publications in the field and other primary source content and read those to achieve an even deeper contextual understanding of the field. They are often free and accessible when using your .edu account, or found in the library. This isn't required, if you have time constraints, but it demonstrates initiative and you learn directly from the originators of the theories in question.
Lastly, there's often a project component, typically towards the end. This is an opportunity for you to see the content in application, and it might be the most important part, allowing you to bring together everything you've learned and use it to build something or conduct an experiment, expressing your creativity in the process. This is when I found that I learned the most, as long as I put forward significant time; if you half-ass it you won't learn anything additional, but if you focus, you may actually come away from the course realizing that you understand the core of that area much more than how well you "know" or "learned" information from a textbook for your previous classes. You'll also find that you have a new-found appreciation for the topic, beyond your initial interest during the first lecture.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/04/21
| 1,181
| 5,169
|
<issue_start>username_0: This is a question that has been in my mind for a long time. Now I am a M.Sc. first year student in mathematics and planning to apply for graduate school next year in Europe. But for applying to graduate schools, it is written that first I have to write an email to a supervisor along with a idea of a research project and I have to convince him that I am well prepared to work under him as a PhD student. Also, it is recommended that you should study the papers of professors to whom you are applying.
Now, I am interested in a topic. My college does not offer that topic. So, I have learned the topics on my own. Also, at this moment I do not participate in an internship program because of this pandemic situation all over the world. That is why I have decided that I will read some papers of the professor to convince him that I am well prepared to work under him.
My question is as follows: How do I demonstrate that I read and understood a professor's paper to the professor?
Please advise me. Thanking in advance.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> That is why I have decided that I will read some papers of the professors to convince him that I am well prepared to work under him.
>
>
>
I disagree with this advice. I would rather see applicants (especially those with an MS) demonstrate their ability to do *research*, usually through a publication or a strong thesis. As long as their topic is somewhat related to my research, that would be a stronger demonstration of their potential to succeed in a PhD program. Being familiar with specific papers that I have written is not necessary or expected (you can always read such papers if you are accepted).
If your only option is to study the papers of professors, my advice is to implement the methods discussed in those papers numerically, i.e. repeating the results, or possibly even conducting some trivial yet new extensions (like repeating the experiments on a different dataset). That would be far more impressive than simply reading a paper (where your depth of understanding is not clear).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I believe I have a good answer here, from experience. Two things you should do to communicate to a professor that you understand a paper you read:
1. Ask good questions
2. Add on to it, even if it's trivial, like you said
Asking questions, while it would seem like the opposite thing to do, is a fantastic way to let a professor know that you put the time and effort into reading. You don't always have to understand every little detail- that's what advisors are for. Asking a good question or two about a paper, and possibly relating it to other ideas, starts a great discussion.
Saying something like "I thought it was really interesting how you did \_\_\_\_ instead of the more well known method of \_\_\_\_. What made you choose \_\_\_\_\_ ? I tried to improve some results using \_\_\_\_\_ and came up with \_\_\_\_\_." is admirable, in my opinion.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> How do I demonstrate that I read and understood a professor's paper to the professor?
>
>
>
The most obvious requirement here is the ability to be able to summarise the essence of the paper (and its contribution to the literature) in simple and understandable terms. If you can explain the parts of the paper that you found interesting, that also helps show your understanding. Ideally, you should be able to talk intelligently about the paper at an abstract "heuristic" level, but then get down dirty and discuss the technical details of parts of it if required. Your question here is really "How can you tell if someone understands something you understand", so think about all the things that cause you to believe that other people understand things you understand.
One thing to bear in mind here is that one reason to read a prospective supervisor's papers is to see if there are any aspects of the research that you would like to try to extend in your own research work. If you can find some aspect of the paper that you are interested in, and think you could take further, then that will give you a possible avenue of research on a research question where the professor is obviously qualified to assist you. If you find something like this, take the opportunity to discuss it with the professor to get their opinion on whether your idea is fruitful. This may show your understanding of the paper, but just as importantly, it will give you feedback on a research idea.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: You probably should not handle this like an assignment "I have to read a paper and proof that I have understood it", but see the broader context.
Would you have been interested in being a coauthor for the paper? Do you have ideas for follow up papers? Would you like to work on similar projects? Do you have own ideas? Do you get the impression that you will be able to work in the same field?
Answer these questions to yourself, then talk to the professor about what you want to do and why. Being informed about their department's work will help you and having own ideas will help them to find good topics for you.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/21
| 1,607
| 7,147
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am pursuing PhD in materials engineering. My advisor is an expert in molecular dynamics (MD) simulations and density functional theory. She works with nanomaterials and batteries. However, for my research, she wants me to work with finite element analysis (FEA) and smoothed particle hydrodynamics as I will work in simulating additive manufacturing process. She doesn't have knowledge or past experience on these methodologies.
I tried to argue about using MD for my research as there are groups who use the method in similar research work as mine. But she says that those groups are not doing good work and MD can't be applicable for my research. She says, just because they can publish papers doesn't mean that they are doing good work.
Now, I am worried that how I will get proper guidance if she doesn't know about my research methods. How should I proceed? I don't have a co-supervisor.<issue_comment>username_1: A PhD is a learning experience, so don't worry about stepping out into a new domain. It's also not uncommon for the supervisor to not be familiar with all the research methods you use, since the field has changed a lot since they were engaged in active research.
I understand that this seems daunting, but try to find a support ecosystem where you can get practical tips on day-to-day technical support. There are good resources available online, and very often you are expected to find those out by yourself.
If the supervisor is otherwise good and has a good track record, I suggest you continue with her and give it a shot with an open mind.
Finally, having dabbled in all the areas/tools you mentioned, I have to say I strongly agree with your supervisor, especially from an applied research perspective. In the long run, the effort will probably be well worth it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Adding to the excellent answer from @username_1
Your advisor may have less experience in the particular field you are moving into, but she has more experience conducting research. That's how she reached a position where she can teach new scientists how science works.
She may be wrong in this instance. If she is, I hope she can acknowledge that. But you will have to convince her. Your argument should be along the lines of "FEA is better than MD for this particular project because ...", listing the pros and cons of each method. Just saying "Other groups use MD in work like this" is not going to convince her - particularly if she has reservations about the quality of their work. You might want to ask her why she thinks that work is substandard - not to argue with her, but to learn from her.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I found myself in a very similar situation where my work was carving out new territory for my PI. You will spend a lot of time in jungle navigating the dense foliage. I would suggest establishing relationships with faculty who are familiar with that new direction. You could add them to your committee and establish a good resource when you are stuck. A good way for initiating such a connection is through a class.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I would echo everything that the @username_3 said (I would upvote but I don't have enough reputation). When I was in graduate school I also found myself exploring many areas that were less familiar to my advisor. This tended to not cause me problems so long as I communicated clearly and frequently. However, I would say that you are much more likely to have publications come graduation if you work with techniques or on a problem that your advisor is familiar with. With that said, you should internally evaluate your career goals. Do you eventually want to pursue a career in academics? How much do you value your independence? Are you able to thrive while working independently?
If you want to pursue a career in academics then you will need publications. While you can collect more publications as a post-doc, it can be incredibly advantageous to publish 2-4 articles while in graduate school, and it is usually much easier to do this if you work on things that your advisor has expertise in. If you aren't locked in with your advisor decision (i.e. haven't gone through quals or candidacy) then you may want consider a different advisor.
Reflecting back on my experiences, I would say that my situation was not exactly "ideal".
However I did end up graduating with a fair amount of success. A large part of this success was me being mentored by a different faculty member that was more interested in my project. I initiated that connection after taking one of their classes. I would recommend that you also find a faculty member that is knowledgeable about FEA/SPH. You can develop a relationship with them, possibly publish with them, and they can be a powerful voice on your committee. These relationships can often be very productive since neither the student nor this second faculty member have direct skin in the game (i.e. they are not paying your stipend). If you do choose to use FEA/SPH then it is of paramount importance that the problem you are studying is very well defined. It is much harder to simultaneously learn about new computational methods and come up with an interesting research problem that the method can be used to solve. When I was working on things outside of my advisor's scope of expertise I often felt as though I didn't know how to progress the "field" that I was investigating. Part of this was because I didn't have a well defined research problem and so I spent lots of time trying to see if I could improve various computational methods. However part of this can also be the primary advisor's fault, as what is currently "state of the art" in a field is usually only learned by attending conferences. My advisor would not send me to conferences and so I had to rely on reading books and talking with other faculty to make progress.
(As an aside)
I studied similar things that you are talking about including SPH, DPD, SDPD, and FEM. When I was looking into SPH I found the book, "Fluid Mechanics and the SPH Method: Theory and Applications" to be helpful although it did contain a few errors in various places. I was working on a few different colloidal/active matter hydrodynamics problems and eventually settled on using the boundary element method (BEM) to simulate and explore several problems.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: It really depends whether your supervisor is willing to go through that learning process with you. I had a very similar issue in one project and I was only able to get a good result because I knew some people from a previous project who had experience with this technique.
While the other answers mentioned that it is good to have someone with expertise I would add that you should have someone to discuss technical details with! Otherwise your work will get a bit lonely. Also your results will be less trustworthy if you only work for yourself and only present high level results to your supervisor.
Often faculty does not have time for this, especially if they would have to invest time learning it.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/21
| 1,863
| 8,034
|
<issue_start>username_0: Project based assessments are advocated by some as an alternative to oral exams and written exams for assessing students' knowledge at the end of a course, for example here: [How to detect cheating when students take online quizzes or exams from home?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/145102/how-to-detect-cheating-when-students-take-online-quizzes-or-exams-from-home)
Some ways of cheating that are available during exams are not available for project work, for example looking up solutions online during a take home exam.
On the other hand, some other ways of cheating are still available, for example paying someone else to complete the course for them.
Therefore the question:
1. **How should project based assessments be implemented in order to prevent cheating?**
One example mentioned in *<NAME>: Are Universities Using the Right Assessment Tools During the Pandemic and Crisis Times?* had the instructor oversee group discussion meetings and ask each student questions about their project after submission.
This seems to be just effective as oral exams when it comes to preventing cheating, but seems to be more labour intensive than holding an oral exam for each student which would be prohibitive in big lectures with 500 students or more.
In light of this, I am also interested in answers to the following second question:
2. **How should project based assessments for lectures with 500 students or more be implemented in order to prevent cheating?**
For context, the lecture I have in mind is an Analysis lecture with around 500 students, one professor, six PhD student teaching assistants who each hold two weekly tutorials, and eight graders (mostly Master's students) who work 10 hours per week each.<issue_comment>username_1: I can, perhaps, give you a few ideas, but note that I've never had to deal with this scale. Many of my courses (CS) were project based.
First, make it very explicit what you expect of them. Have some sort of honor code that they agree to by taking your course. Don't assume that the already know what is right and what is wrong. University wide honor codes are effective in some places. And also make it clear that the purpose of the exercises is less to "get answers" (which you already have) than to "get learning". Shortcuts are a form of self-defeating behavior.
Next, is that if you want to *prevent* cheating you won't be able to do it. You can, at best, reduce it, unless you are willing to run the course in a way in which cheating can't happen because it is irrelevant. I don't think that a first course in math analysis is especially amenable to this, but the idea is that students are allowed to use any source that they cite, just as if they were actual researchers. But to make learning, not just copying, happen, the questions you ask of them need to be a bit deeper and require some reflection beyond what they are likely to find in print or online. It is difficult, of course, to create such exercises.
The next idea has two parts. The first is to make all of the projects team (or at least *pair*) based so that the scope is reduced a bit. For 500 students you have 250 pairs or 100 teams. My preference with pairing would be to have a lot of small exercises where the pairs switch for each exercise. This may be easier now, in the zoom era, that it was when people mostly got together physically.
The second part of that is to use some form of *peer assessment* with the pairs/teams. Search this site for that or for *peer evaluation* to get a better idea of how to do that. Note that it isn't *peer grading*, but each member of a team can give you some idea of who the best players are and what those people contributed as well as listing their own primary contribution. Over many projects you will get an idea of who is doing a good job and you will sometimes be surprised.
One alternative you might be able to do is to partially "flip the classroom" so that the "tutorials" become work sessions and the projects are then done under the eye of someone with some skills. If the instructor can also do this twice a week then you have seven smaller groups, to which the "graders" might also contribute. Having students work in pairs in such a situation reduces the number of questions that must be answered by faculty and TAs, since partners will have the answers to some questions. If they work alone, then there will probably be too many questions and people will get stalled waiting for help. It might, however, be necessary to make the "tutorial sessions" longer and to move some of the content to videos and other online resources. And having students to their graded work under the eye of staff reduces the opportunity for cheating (but doesn't eliminate it in large groups).
One of the big problems with huge classes is that you have such a variety of ability, but also a huge variety of student goals and expectations. One way to make it possible for students to define and meet their own goals is to use *cumulative grading* rather than percentage grading. See this [answer to a different question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/137246/75368) for a description. Not every student needs to reach for top marks. And this grading scheme lets every student know exactly where they stand in the course and what needs to be done to meet their goals. With a lot of smaller projects, every team member gets the same grade for a given project. In bigger projects you may need to make occasional exceptions.
---
Notes: I will probably add to this over the next day or so.
1. Spreading the grading out over many projects also means that no single project is "high stakes". This means that there is less incentive to cheat on a given project and to "cheat your way to success" means you need to do it repeatedly, increasing the chance of being caught.
2. Requiring writing projects rather than computational ones makes some kinds of auto checking for cheating a bit more reliable, reducing false positives (at least). For a mathematician, learning how to write is a valuable skill of its own. But this is admittedly difficult for an analysis course.
3. Permitting students to resubmit work is very useful for learning, though the scale is probably out of whack here. In fact, I think the scale and the ratio of students to staff in this scenario makes any sort of learning difficult. It is very difficult to give feedback to individuals to permit re-work to have a valid effect.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Projects are to be done by students on their own. They have to make a file and write all the stuff that is needed for the topic as told by the teacher. These kind of projects can be done by students from home. Therefore, students are able to cheat. But there are several ways by which you can decrease this amount of cheating.
What you need is to prevent them from asking their classmates, asking someone else to do it for them or looking it up online.
I would suggest that you ask them to do their project in class. Here, what you can do is not give them the entire topic at once but only in bits. You can tell them to prepare the specific chapter needed for the project and then ask them to do it in the class only.
If you are afraid that students may copy each other’s work, you can announce that students who copy from online sources or use someone else’s project can be suspended, get a negative marking or a 0, parents could be called or they get taken to principal. This should reduce the chances of cheating drastically. You can also tell them that the school uses a device for plagiarism checking.
3rd point I think is to encourage the students. Tell them about the benefits of not cheating:
1. You become independent which is a very big factor. It can be used for interviews, job work and in many other fields.
2. It gives you confidence and makes you proud of yourself.
You can think of things like this. These methods should definitely reduce the amount of cheating.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/21
| 1,912
| 7,982
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently a postdoc, leaving my position in ~1 month. I am departing my contract a few months early after receiving an offer for a job in industry, about which my advisor is very upset. It is policy at my institution to pay departing postdocs for un-used vacation days.
My advisor has asked that I "use" my leftover vacation days, i.e. take them on paper, but actually use that "time off" to finish a few papers. His argument for this is that he "cannot afford" to pay me for them (this sounds bogus to me; how was he going to pay my salary, if he is so broke?). It seems to me he just doesn't want to participate in this policy.
Obviously, this would be shafting me first and foremost, since I would be losing out on this money, but I am not all that upset about that. I'm worried that the university, or our funding agency would object to this maneuver. Would it even be legal? Most importantly, could *I* be held responsible, for facilitating this?<issue_comment>username_1: You've earned the days as paid vacation, you don't have to work during them. The money it costs to pay you for those days is part of your compensation for the work you've already done and the stretches of time that you came to work instead of taking the day off.
If you do decide to take the time to work on finishing up some papers, that could be good for both your advisor and you. All your work is basically a waste of time if it never makes it into a paper. Maybe you're fine with that if you're all done with academia, but if you ever did want to return then any papers you can publish will be to your benefit. I think there's also a strong sense of personal accomplishment in publishing papers (why are you doing research if not to share it with the research community??), and as a post doc (or any other level of academia) your role is a bit different from a standard employee in that you're typically doing research not just as a job but as *your personal work*.
As far as "not being able to afford" to pay for those days, I think you can mostly ignore that statement, it's not connected to what you do next in any real way. However, it's probably not motivated by your advisor literally being that broke, but rather that they expected that the grant money they spent on your position would result in some output that they can use to get more money for future projects - that's how the academic funding cycle works. If they've paid you for a spot and you've failed to complete projects, that's in many ways wasted money for them. Maybe they can pick up your work where you left off but often there is a lot of cost of time and effort in starting from someone else's partial work.
I won't comment on legal issues according to any letter of the law, but it's extraordinarily unlikely that you would see any legal consequences for spending time off working to complete a project. It's also unlikely your advisor would see any consequences for making the request. It also doesn't seem that your advisor is seeking to cause you to lose out on any money but rather they're hoping that you see enough value in completing work to spend your earned vacation time working. Like I said in the start, you've already earned this time and don't need to work for it, but it's a bit different from trying to pull money out of your pockets.
---
@GoodDeeds in a comment pointed out that OP's advisor may be asking them to "quit early" and count the end of their work as vacation time. I was thinking more along the lines of OP determining their own end date but their advisor asking that they keep working to finish up projects. Also in a comment, OP indicates that they are willing to work to finish up the incomplete papers on their own time.
Based on those pieces of information, my advice would be to:
A) Assure the advisor that you are willing and intending to finish up these projects. I think that's their main concern, whatever conflicts there have been between you. **Everything you've said in this post could be a completely honest, non-exploitative effort towards this goal.** Maybe that's overly charitable towards them, but I think it's a good mindset to start from.
B) Come to agreement on an official end date, when your regular salary ends. You should be committed to work full time through this date, like you've been doing until now. This shouldn't have any relation to the vacation hours you are owed. Pretend they don't exist. After that date, you're committing to finishing the projects, but not to working any set hours. If your advisor wants this to be sooner, you can say that if you aren't an employee during those hours there are other things you'd like to do during that time.
C) If your advisor insists on involving the vacation hour pay, reiterate your commitment to finishing up the work. If it helps your advisor to think about it, those volunteer hours you plan to put in on these projects in your nights and weekends are effectively "working for those vacation hours", you're just not willing to have those be "full time" hours on a schedule, or to substitute for your normal work.
If they aren't okay with this arrangement, then they aren't being reasonable. You can hope they come around, but remember that *you have some power here*. Your advisor is going to want you to finish your projects. You have a new job and aren't compelled to work for them. So, if these papers are going to actually get out, the two of you have to work on mutually acceptable terms. Good luck!
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Your advisor's request is definitely unethical. Don't do it. There can be no benefit to your relationship because he has already burned the metaphorical bridges.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Not fraud, simply a request he or she knows you’re adult enough to accept or decline. I’ve had colleagues who’d looked forward to vacation time in order to dig in and wrap up a project. I’ve had those times too.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: The advisor is asking you to officially take the days off before the contract finishes, but to work during these days, so you get the work done and he/she does not have to pay these days off, as per the policy of your institution is "to pay departing postdocs for un-used vacation days".
So yes, he is asking you to do something unethical. With him/her you can confirm you will work toward the finishing the projects/reports/papers. But as long as you work, don't take your holidays. They were already in the budget, your advisor is trying to create money out of thin air, probably to be used to (under)pay another student/colleague to work "just a couple of weeks" on a thing that will last months.
If you accept your advisor's terms, you can be statistically sure you will contribute to underpaying someone for his/her work (yourself :) , and most likely someone else).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: This is most likely a budgeting issue. Unused vacation is something HR doesn't like, because it means they must accrue liabilities. Employees are for this reason expected to and usually reminded to consume vacation before employment ends. But now it's too late, so there's no point to argue.They can either pay you out or you take your vacation, of course without having to work.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Those vacation days have a monetary value. It never makes sense to work through them. If you have X days of labor to get to a good ending point with your work, then labor for those X days and then take a paid vacation, and terminate employment at the end of the vacation. Alternatively, if you will be compensated for the days without "taking them", just terminate employment effective after X days and get the payout.
I do not see any circumstance where taking the vacation days and working through them makes sense for you. Asking that you do so is unethical: he is asking you to give up money which is owed to you.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/22
| 1,044
| 4,637
|
<issue_start>username_0: When I joined my current PhD program I talked to my advisor about wanting to work on a different research topic than the one I was to work on initially and he said yes. I made clear I wasn't interested in working on the initial topic long term.
A year has past and I talked to him about switching over to the topics I am interested in - he says "OK" but wants to continue funding from the initial project which is a large multi-university research project with frequent meetings. He wants me to continue to go to meetings associated with the first project and basically told me that we can jerry rig the funding into supporting what ever we want. This sounds good except the rest of the people on the initial project continue to think I am working on the initial topic full time and are expecting results. I'm not really sure how to handle this.
The outcomes I can see are.
1. The advisor starts complaining to me about not working on the "funded" research topic when the rest of the team starts complaining. If this is an issue, I will find a different advisor or exit with MS and enter into industry since I have no interest in working on the initial topic long term and I made that clear upon entering.
2. The rest of the team starts complaining to me about not making enough progress on the topic under the idea that I am working on it, when the reality is I have no intention to work on it and the advisor knows this.
Basically, I feel I am put into a difficult situation where my advisor wants to keep funding under the guise of working on this project while not working on it and I feel I will take the brunt of the inevitable blowup that will come eventually.
This wouldn't be a problem if the topic was broad in the funding documentation but the writing for my advisors role in the grant is very specific.<issue_comment>username_1: It sounds bad, it is bad, it is reality: if the multi-university research project is an european funded project, you need only to formally deliver the deliverables and respect the milestones on time. There are no other duties. Then every partner in the project will do its own research, publications and so on, which may or may not aligneate 100% with the project.
So yes, your advisor is setting to sail along course 2, if the other partners get very loud then switching to course 1.
Take fundings for granted, do research on your theme, ask directly your advisor what to do with the multi-university project.
From the way your advisor is acting, it looks like they are not really waiting for your results to progress in the project, but the results will be needed at the end to present a nicely done project.
However, results in science are publications and papers, not some figures in some report sent to the bureaucrats evaluating the goodness of the project (hint: they cannot, they can only evaluate the form, not the substance).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If the supposed contribution is very specific there might be problems, but they should concern your supervisor rather than you.
This is valid assuming a coherent behavior from its part.
It might be unpleasant go to meetings with no updates but this happen to some of the participants nevertheless. Trust your supervisor. S/he is the one responsible and the one potentially loosing collaboration or future funding. Not you. Just try to be as brilliant as you can during the international meetings, so that people have a good impression of you.
Edit: of course you and supervisor must still play. A situation in which you go to meetings just saying "we are not interested and do nothing on this" is almost untenable. I experienced such situations, just they were natural outcomes of projects. They were not cold planned as in your case. Indeed my answer has nothing to do with the overall correctness of this choice.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: This might be field-specific, but nonetheless: in my field (cond-mat), it is very, VERY common that people (phd students and postdocs) officially employed withing certain funding schemes bound to specific projects spend most of their time working on other stuff. In the end, what counts is that your supervisor is happy with your performance and your results, and lack of progress on the "funded" research topic is going to be his problem, not yours. It is very unlikely to hear a supervisor complaining about their students not progressing well on one topic while doing really well on the other. Of course, a certain level of mutual trust between you and your supervisor is necessary, but that is good to have in any case.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/04/20
| 1,005
| 4,307
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have recently been given a 0 for one of my online exams at university due to technical difficulties that meant I was unable to submit the exam before the end of exam time. Unfortunately this was quite an important exam and will likely have a big effect on my grade this year.
I think that although I was partly to blame, the university is also partly at fault. So currently I'm trying to dispute the issue with them, hoping they will do something to make this a bit more fair such as not weighting the exam towards my grade or allowing me to resit but they don't seem too keen to do much right now.
So if it comes down to it, given that the university was partly responsible for the fault that happened, would I be able to take legal action to get my university to do something to make this more fair?<issue_comment>username_1: It sounds like you are referring to a public university in the U.S., but it isn't particular clear from the question. Universities will generally have some formal or informal means by which one can "appeal" a grading decision (usually by raising an issue with a department chair or a dean), but have extremely broad discretion.
If internal universities remedies don't provide you relief, your odds of having a remedy legally enforceable in court are extremely low. Public universities also often have "sovereign immunity" from lawsuits of this kind.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes
---
But "fair" doesn't mean what you think it means.
From a legal point of view "fair" usually means that you were afforded what in the USA would be called "due process" and in most other Anglophone countries "natural justice" and/or "procedural fairness".
Whatever you call it, what it means is that your university must follow its rules and processes. If you have a right to appeal, then you have been afforded "fairness" when the university has followed the rules of that appeals process to the end.
The actual decision as to what academic grade/mark to give you is a matter within the discretion of the university. That is, it's their decision to make and so long as they followed the rules in reaching that decision, the court will not interfere.
For your particular issue, if the rules state that late submitted exams will be scored at 0; then you have been afforded "fairness" - they followed the rules that they set.
There is a lot of case law that amounts to: “We’re judges - we don’t get involved in the evaluation of academic merit or marking systems that are rightly the province of academia. All we will do is tell the institution to follow the rules it set for itself.”
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: The procedure for complaints and appeals against the decisions of UK Universities is managed by the [Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education](https://www.oiahe.org.uk/) (known as the OIA).
They will only consider your case when you have completed any formal internal processes of the institution and the institution is required to issue you with a "completion of process" letter confirming your complaint or appeal is at an end.
To make a formal complaint or appeal within your institution you will certainly be able to get advice, help, support and representation from the Students Union and their respective Education or Welfare officer. It is highly likely that there are also University staff who can assist students with this process, perhaps called Senior Tutors, or some such title.
Before going to the formal process you should also see if an informal resolution can be made, as is often the case when it is a simple error or system fault. You might need to contact the departmental Director of Studies, Programme Director or Head of Department. You are also likely to have your own "student reps" within your class or programme that also can raise a case for you within the department. They often raise such matters of quality within a framework of a "staff student committee". The [UK Office for students](https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/) would likely expect such student representation to be present within a UK institution.
There will be information about this on the web page of the university and the web pages of your students union or student association.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2021/04/22
| 656
| 2,828
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have recently been selected as a tutor on Chegg for the subject of advanced physics and have recently also been applying to various internship opportunities as I am in my final year of undergrad. I have the experience of being an educator at an Indian organisation, and was wondering whether I can add this new part time tutoring job to my CV. The problem is that I have the opinion that professors don't look at Chegg as something good, so is there any way it could look bad on my resume?<issue_comment>username_1: I would probably interpret "tutor on Chegg" to mean "paid to help students cheat". Maybe this isn't a fair assessment of your job there, but it's certainly the impression I get out of Chegg.
I am only willing to answer student questions on StackExchange and on other sites here like Biology.SE because of strict moderation policies that prevent students from using the site as a homework cheating tool rather than an educational aid. Other sites without these controls, especially those that seem to have a business model based on helping students cheat, leave a bad taste in my mouth.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: **Keep your resume to what is relevant, and highlight how your experience has been for positive learning rather than cheating, or leave it out**.
Chegg is notorious for student cheating - we actually had instructors scouring Chegg **during the exam** this year to search for real-time cheating. It was surreal. But that being said, Chegg in and of itself is not bad, and tutors on Chegg can't be held responsible for cheating just because they post on Chegg.
So, if the job requires you to show experience as someone who can handle remote learning, remotely communicating with students, that sort of thing, Chegg could be relevant experience. Now, if the person doing the hiring has reasonable knowledge of Chegg they'll also know that it is used a lot for cheating, so you will have to do some work on your resume to show how you specifically did not contribute to student cheating. This is a big hill to climb and I doubt you'd be able to do it. On the other hand, if it is for a job where the hiring person doesn't really know what Chegg is for you won't have this issue.
If the job doesn't require you to show any of this, I'd leave it off for two reasons. First, Chegg is sketchy and is obviously a cheating mill. Second, it is not worth it to waste the hiring person's time with irrelevant experience. Unless you can swing your Chegg experience to be relevant to the job you are applying for, it doesn't really do much for you to leave it on.
Now, since you asked this question it's pretty obvious that you knew you were likely helping students cheat. Perhaps use that to guide your choices of what goes on your resume...
Upvotes: 5
|
2021/04/22
| 1,624
| 6,498
|
<issue_start>username_0: I will be starting a PhD in computer science in the UK this year, but have to decide between two offers that I'm pretty torn about. I've communicated with the supervisors from both universities in detail and contacted current graduate students there, and feel I have all the information I need, but am still struggling to decide.
University A has a very reputable department with a lot of academic staff and graduate students in it. The academic community here seems bigger and more vibrant than I am used to, which would be a big learning experience. At University A, I would be funded to work with a younger supervisor who's pretty early in their career and who can offer me more office hours due to less academic duties. However, our research interests don't align as closely.
University B's department is also of a very good standard, but is less prestigious than University A's. It is also significantly smaller, both in terms of staff and students. I have previously spent 1 year at University B and know that the research being conducted there is a closer match to what I want to work on. The supervisor here is more established and is well-liked by the community, but has more academic duties.
Funding from both places is comparable and I believe both supervisors would be good mentors both academically and personally, so the two options seem to be equal on these points. Even though the student community is very important to me, I would be willing to sacrifice the better community at University A in favour of working on my preferred research at University B. What I am more hesitant about is whether choosing the less prestigious option now will hurt me in the future when looking for jobs (ideally, I want to stay in academia). I'm under the impression that going to the more well-known institution would put me in a better position and provide me with more options when applying for postdocs.
I appreciate that I'm very privileged to be in this position in the first place, and am thankful for the opportunities in front of me, but I've been thinking this over for weeks and still haven't made up my mind. What I find the most scary is that it feels as though *where* and *with whom* I do my PhD will stay with me for the rest of my academic career. I would appreciate any feedback from people who have been in similar positions in the past, and/or tips on what I should prioritise when making my final decision.
Thank you!<issue_comment>username_1: If you want to stay in academia, your top priority should be producing excellent research. From your post, it sounds like this will be possible at either university. Another helpful factor is your academic advisor. Ideally, you can study under a very famous/well-respected/talented person. Again it sounds like you have two good options in this regard.
If I may, it sounds like you have two good options. This is a positive to me in that you cannot 'screw it up' and make the wrong choice. One piece of advice is to consider the process of obtaining your degree rather than what happens when you're done. You're looking at years of effort, so why not try to enjoy/maximize it instead of fretting about ultimate placement? Live 'in the moment', as the millennials like to say.
A last cliche bit of advice is to flip a coin. Heads = A, Tails = B. Once you see the coin land, you'll either feel a quick sense of glee or sting of disappointment. Then ignore the coin result and pick based on this feeling. Good luck!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: When in doubt, go to the more prestigious university.
The reason is simply because it's less likely to change. A university that's highly prestigious today is likely to be highly prestigious 5 years in the future. Comparatively, what you are interested in can change quite quickly, especially since as a new graduate student you don't have much experience with research. For example, in physics, one thing undergraduates are often interested in is MOND (modified Newtonian Dynamics) because it's "cool". However, once one actually starts to examine the evidence against MOND, it's not uncommon to realize that there are good reasons most people don't work on it. At that point if one joined X university because they worked on MOND, it's too late. There are other ways things can change as well: for example if you like Y topic, then find that working on Y actually involves doing things you don't enjoy (e.g. figuring out how to make code run more efficiently).
Furthermore:
* More prestigious university is likely to have better students, and as the Chinese idiom goes, 近朱者赤，近墨者黑 (roughly translated as "[People are easily influenced by their surroundings and the companions they hang around with](https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-poetic-translation-of-the-Chinese-phrase-%E8%BF%91%E6%9C%B1%E8%80%85%E8%B5%A4%EF%BC%8C%E8%BF%91%E5%A2%A8%E8%80%85%E9%BB%91-in-English)")
* More prestigious university is also likely to have more/better-known visitors coming to give seminars and such, in turn allowing for better networking.
* If you work in industry after you graduate, nobody is going to care about your research topic, but they will care about the name of your university.
See also: [University rank/stature - How much does it affect one's career post-Ph.D?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/90/university-rank-stature-how-much-does-it-affect-ones-career-post-ph-d)
One more thing: you'll be staying at that university for several years. If you find you dislike the city / country / etc that the university is located in, this might override all other considerations.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Questions:
1. Is it a sole PhD or MPhil (MS) +PhD? If it is a sole PhD, then I suppose that you are already in touch with your advisor. Have you discussed your research perspectives in details with professors at each university? Do you find them helpful in providing you research advices?
2. Is the research group you are interested also super interested in you, and have they invited you to their regular group meetings?
My suggestion:
1. If you not yet have a firm direction to do you research, go to the better university because your interests are likely to change. A better university is far more likely to have better professors who meet your needs.
2. You can do you degree at the better university, while visiting the other university and collaborate with the research team that interests you for now.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/23
| 1,322
| 5,543
|
<issue_start>username_0: I did in a PhD in mechanical engineering from a Canadian university on simulation of shot peening process. I collaborated with experimental groups from my department.
After graduating in January 2020, I joined my PhD lab as a postdoc for few months while I applied for positions. I published 4 papers (first authored), 2 co-authored.
It has been 12+ months and I am still working with my PhD advisor and on a related topic. I have submitted 2 papers (2 first authored).
Now, after renewing my contract for another year, I am about to work on a different topic and in collaboration with experimental groups from other university and industry but same advisor.
As I am open for a life in both academia and industry, I have been applying for other postdoc positions and industrial positions. I apply to positions like 3D printing and simulations of selective laser melting process which is different than my research experience so far but I work with same numerical method (Finite element method).
Also, I apply for industry jobs as finite element researcher, engineer.
Till now, I have contacted 30 professors and 20 industrial positions. I received just 1 response from professor saying he will contact me if gets a grant approved. And I got 2 response from industry, one rejected after first interview and second position with an invitation for C++ coding assessment test. I am not proficient with C++ as I work with Matlab and a bit with python. I would fail the test.
Apart from these, I don't have any other leads. I have to continuie with my current postdoc, but am afraid that I won't get any other positions in the future due to lack of openings.
Where do I go from here? I like my research field, but I don't think I am cut out for it as proved by the lack of job offers. Is this the end of the road?
Please advise.<issue_comment>username_1: In short: not knowing you or your life's goals, it is hard to make an assessment, and it is surely impossible to give an objective assessment. So the answers will be opinion-based, even from people claiming to be absoulutely objective.
It looks you are still comfortable with your time in the academia, you are open to both worlds ("life in both academia and industry"), which is *not* a good thing, in terms of employment in the private world, it is often perceived from the other side as "the candidate does not know what he/she wants, he is just waiting for an opening in the academia" and therefore your application ends quickly in the "let's get back to this later, i.e. never" folder.
This even if you do not express it explicitly, the fact that you are still employed by the uni usually raises red flag for many recruiting.
Formally, it looks like you have a strong academic CV, but it is time to be independent, which means to gather your own funds (for example this Canadian fellowship <https://banting.fellowships-bourses.gc.ca/> ) and to perform some research without the influence/guidance/support/involvement of your advisor.
Please note that the +-4 years contract (and associated safety of your position) you had during your PhD is the most stable position you could have had in Academia, apart from being a full professor, which may happen at the earliest some 15 years from now.
So the insecure feeling you have about academic positions, fundings etcetc in the Academia is quite common (not that I approve, but it is beyond the individual possibilities to change this). Either you:
* embrace it, looking for academic/research opportunities all over the world, both in terms of open positions and grants applications;
* you escape it by working independently as a consultant, or finding an industry position you like.
Final note regarding academic applications: professors are not answering to you. Why? you are very expensive, with the funding of a postdoc they can have 2 PhDs, so PostDocs positions are rare, and if they are available there is not much time to be spent thinking on it, there will be an (official) opening and it will be filled as fast as possible and with as less efforts as possible. But professor will welcome the opportunity to have more fundings, so if you ask support in writing applications for grants and external fundings you will see a better response ratio.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This is a long comment rather than an answer. TL DR: you should not be pessimistic about your ability. Probably your job-search strategy need some improvements.
I am not so familiar with your field but your publication record sounds promising. So it is definitely not an end of road for you. People don't hire you for many reasons unrelated with your ability, for example, the funding are cut during COVID.
Many students and posdoc find a good job because of the connection of their advisor or their department. So if I am you, I will ask my advisor or current supervisor to introduce me to other groups.
In many cases, joining a group is not a jump, but a smooth transition. First you might want to discuss some general research ideas with the PIs or senior posdocs in another group. Then, if mutual interests are there, you could start some mild, informal collaboration, and then do a presentation in their group. If the is interested in your idea, you might be joining their regular group meeting, and a job offer might soon follow.
Same ideas hold for an industrial job. You advisor introduces you to a company for an internship. And if the company likes you, you will have a job offer later.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/04/23
| 481
| 2,010
|
<issue_start>username_0: I got my Master about 4 years ago from Iran. Since then, I have been working in a research group and published 4 papers in journals with IF between 1.767 to 4.594, including a paper related to my dissertation, and still working on 2 other research projects with my former supervisor in the university in Iran, based in Tehran. I was about to apply for pursuing my Ph.D. in New Zealand in the fields of Mathematics and Industrial Engineering when the pandemic emerged. I am a bit worried that the educational gap affects my plan negatively. Plus, I am at the age of 44 with 18 years of practical experience in industries and research, and I cannot fall asleep because of my worrieness.<issue_comment>username_1: A general answer, whether encouraging or discouraging won't really help you. What you need to do is apply to a few places, making your best case in the application materials. Don't neglect any aspect of it.
Your applications will succeed or not, based on what your background is and, perhaps, how much support you get in letters of recommendation.
I'd guess, and they say, that your age isn't an issue. As for the rest, it is what it is. You might get some advice from an admissions committee or professor about any gaps you need to fill and then you can address those.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: It sounds like you have still being doing research and publishing since your masters. If you have still been keeping your skills fresh, that means you haven't really had a gap, regardless of whether or not you were registered as a student. Just explain this when applying and your gap will not be a concern. Your recommendation letters and publications can attest to that fact.
Age should not be a concern from the university's perspective. Although, a prospective supervisor may wonder about your perspective -- why do you want to do a PhD now? why not earlier? If you can give a good answer about your aspirations, then that will allay any concerns.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/23
| 778
| 3,349
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently in the job market and due to personal issues I am geographically limited and cannot relocate. I was wondering what would be a good strategy to go about the job search. There are only 3 institutions that I could potentially work on. Realistically I know that it might take a while for opening to come in my field but I was wondering if there is anything I can do in the mean time. I know this is not common in academia, and we go where the jobs are. I really want to continue in academia but I am unsure how to move forward.<issue_comment>username_1: If you intend to stay on the job market (whether for those 3 institutions or in general), the best thing you can do is stay competitive in terms of research productivity. That usually means taking a postdoc or other full-time research position where you can publish as much as possible.
However, there is a "shelf life" to postdocs. If you are a postdoc for too long, hiring committees start to wonder why you haven't been hired, and may reject you thinking there's something wrong. For instance, in my field it is common to have 0-2 years of postdoc, so someone who has been a postdoc for 5 years may find it more difficult to get interviews.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Many institutions hire "Adjunct Instructors". Unfortunately the pay is terrible, but most don't object if you so something similar at another university. You might be able to cobble together a modest income for a while, though you would need to work long hours and deal with commuting/scheduling, etc.
If you visit an appropriate department and let them know of your needs you might find something. If you tell them you hope for a long term job if it comes up, they might be able to "keep you in mind".
Such a position might also let you develop some relationships with the local faculty, leading to research opportunities.
You could also explore research opportunities with local firms that require your skills.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: There may be organisations in your city which, although they're not universities, nevertheless have academia-like activities: think-tanks; government (local, national, EU, UN...) research institutes; third-sector research institutes; pressure groups that like to apply their pressure in an evidence-based, scholarly way; research labs belonging to industry associations; public examination boards; even some for-profit companies. You could try broadening your search to include those.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: ### Do what you need to do to "get your foot in the door"
Since you are limited to only three universities, this is a situation where it may be worthwhile to make some sacrifices in order to get your foot in the door at one of them. For example, it might be worth applying for positions that are at a lower level than what you would ideally like (and are qualified for) elsewhere. Universities are sometimes suspicious of applicants that apply at a lower level than their qualifications appear to suit, so make it clear that you are especially interested in remaining in this city and you are willing to start at any level to do so. Obviously the other thing to do is just to produce as much good research output as you can and remain as competitive as you can for when positions arise.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/04/23
| 1,306
| 5,656
|
<issue_start>username_0: As someone who conducts research that is unlikely to be of any relevance to the common man, I would like a little perspective on the impact that pure research plays in society, and how I can, in some sense, feel *better* about my research contributions.
In a field such as pure mathematics, one can argue that most people are unlikely to understand, or even be interested in recent results. In my opinion, pure mathematicians are attracted to the unhindered joy of research and the challenges it brings, and this is a major factor in the field being active today. (For the record, I am not a pure mathematician.)
In contrast, research in fields such as medicine and environmental science seem to have a larger impact on the common man. A simple example would be the Covid-19 vaccines that will play a major role in bringing the world back to a semblance of normality. Even if it can be argued that today's mathematical results will shape the science and engineering of tomorrow, I continue to feel that these will not have as large an impact as medical research will continue to.
My question is simple: Though I am someone who conducts research motivated simply by the challenges it brings and the joy of achieving a solution, I do occasionally feel that I would like my research to have a larger impact on society (which it really does not). I would like to know if there are others that feel the same way, particularly from a field such as mathematics, and if so, how I can obtain a new perspective on this.<issue_comment>username_1: You need to think longer term. Decades, and perhaps centuries. Research done today may seem to have little immediate impact, and that is true. But over time, it contributes to the general knowledge that makes things possible. Think of any scientist from the past whose name is known today, even, say, Euclid. Some of what they did may have had some immediate effect, but much of it laid the groundwork for later advances.
In pure mathematics and theoretical physics, for example, an interesting question today may be vital in the future. <NAME>'s calculus work was so unimportant that he put it in a drawer for years. Leibniz did "interesting" things in understanding real functions, but without their work, and what came after, much of engineering in the past 150 or so years would be impossible.
Think Mendel or Darwin. They studied and thought because certain questions were "interesting" to them. They laid the foundation of modern understanding and that led to "useful" things.
Note that Einstein's work took years to be accepted because the "great minds" of the day were focused on a different theory that turned out to have no basis - the aether.
Moreover, many of the advances of the "great minds" of science were only possible because of a general advancement in understanding, much of which was contributed by those whose names we no longer remember. The current state of understanding the world can be thought of as an advancing front with many contributors, some of whose contributions we remember specifically, but it is the front itself that makes them possible. All of us push against that frontier in our small, perhaps, ways.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think username_1's answer hits an important point to reconsider your time horizon in evaluating the social impact of research.
I'm writing here to suggest how it is the cumulative sum and multiplicative effect of the entire body of researchers working towards expanding knowledge that has a profound effect, even if a single researcher makes a minimal individual impact. In other words, to suggest individual research is not worth the effort is similar to suggesting that voting is not worth the effort. Sure, one missing vote does not matter too much, but if no one voted? It's the same with acts of kindness, littering, eating right, etc.
In sum, we research because of the virtue of the act of pursuing research. We are the truth seekers. We gradually illuminate the darkness, even if it is little by little. "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants", as it were. (and things like combustion engines, penicillin, plastic, indoor plumbing, etc. are nice bonuses, too).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I want to put a new perspective on it. As scientists we are in some term the modern 'magicians'. We take matter and transform it into all kinds of different forms and shapes.
Whereas the mathematicians find new principles in the world of numbers and of geometry the theoretical physicist binds these findings to the physical world.
Of course, the laws found herein can be used by chemists and material scientists to create new kinds of materials (but taken into account your elaborated question, you know all of this already).
The important point I want to make here is that I don't think it is important *what* we actually do in science. It is more important *how* we do it and how we can learn to use our mind. Because in the end, we cannot say if the things we invent or discover will actually serve humanity or not. For this, the world is far too complex.
This is why I think in academia it is much more important that students learn how to think as much as they learn that thinking is not everything.
Science is just embedded into the society and in humanity as a whole. And hoping to contribute to the advancement of humanity by doing inventions might be a dead end.
Once this is realized we can see that our main purpose in academia is to raise students that can shape their world and their future in a meaningful way.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/23
| 958
| 3,889
|
<issue_start>username_0: I found that my former PhD advisor was still listing me as his student and he was the chair of my committee. I changed advisors a few years ago and left him. He didn't remain in my committee. It is true that he was my advisor to that point. But I feel it's not fair to my current advisor, who actually supported me and guided me to dissertation and graduation. Since I didn't graduate under the former one, my name doesn't have graduation year in his CV, which looks like I dropped out. If a professor was an advisor of a student at some point, can he list the student as his student forever?<issue_comment>username_1: TL;DR: Yes, he can.
He can list you; probably he'll hide that you left him, but who cares?
You graduated and whenever you apply, your CV will show that. Nobody will check *his* CV for *your* graduation.
The<NAME> (a German novelist) famously said, "Happiness is a good stomach and a bad memory." Forget about him and care about your future.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: This just isn't a situation you need to worry about at all. No one is going to notice or care that you're listed on this CV, and if they do they'll just assume the CV is out-of-date. Your former advisor isn't getting any meaningful benefits from listing you, so fairness isn't an issue. One extra student isn't a big deal, and furthermore during serious evaluation more detail would be given. For example, when I'm evaluated for raises there's separate sections for current Ph.D. candidates, for graduated students, and for reading courses supervised. A former student who switched advisors would "count" under that last category but not the former ones.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> If a professor was an advisor of a student at some point, can he list the student as his student forever?
>
>
>
Depends what you mean by “list”. If he does it in a way that creates a misleading impression that you graduated under his supervision, then no, that’s dishonest and obviously unacceptable.
If he just lists you in a section titled “Students” or “Students mentored” and you are mentioned there with no specifics, then it’s fine, that is a factually correct representation and I don’t see why you should complain or care. Be thankful for the mentorship you received from him, and be even more thankful you ended up with someone who was a better fit for you and who isn’t so insecure that they need to pad their CV with pointless fluff about people they helped in some not very significant way.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I am not sure what you want. From the title, it seems like you want to know that if a professor can list in his CV his former student who left him. In this case, I find nothing wrong with listing you as a "former PhD student".
However, from your text, you think the way he list you damages your reputation (I might be interpreting this wrongly). This is because listing you without an graduation year could implies that you are a "drop-out".
I feel what you felt. If I was you, I would email my previous advisor's assistant asking him to either **add a graduation year**, or remove me from his student list, or **specify that I transferred to another group**. I think all of these three requests are reasonable.
Any comments, long or short, are welcome if you find my interpretation or my suggestion wrong.
---
So in sum, I think listing previous student is a grey area: to list and to not list, both are reasonable. There are a lot of professors list no student on his website or CV. One similar case is can you list someone who commented your paper or your idea in the acknowledgement list? I think by default, you could always acknowledge him, but not necessarily unless he did help you a lot or he asked you. Even if he contributed a lot, he still has the right to ask you to remove his name.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/23
| 1,336
| 5,422
|
<issue_start>username_0: My current strategy when seeing unpleasant, toxic academics in conferences is to ignore them, but I'm wondering if people have other suggestions.
When I was a grad student, I spent a few months at a research institution. I was in the computer room trying to print something, but it wasn't printing. Then a senior academic (mathematician) came in and I told him that the printer wasn't working. It turned out that he just wanted to make a photocopy, and that was fine. He told me, "It's working." Then he proceeded to get very angry and said, "You're lying! You're a liar!" I wanted to explain that it was the printer that wasn't working, but he interrupted and continued to call me a liar and stormed out.
Well! I continued my work but in later talks at the conference he would be quite nasty. For example, he would sit next to someone and tell them, "I want to sit here, not *over there*" referring to me. This was a senior mathematician who spoke at the ICM at some point in the 1970s.
I just ignored him but the whole situation was unpleasant and over something very petty. What is the correct protocol for dealing with people like this?<issue_comment>username_1: I'd suggest that if you are a junior person and they are senior, then ignoring them is probably your best option. Be polite if you have to interact with them, but otherwise just stay away.
You might ask some neutral person if the professor is jus a jerk generally. Some people have a reputation for being unpleasant - especially to junior people.
Nobody really wins a public shouting match.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Handle it the same way you'd handle an unpleasant neighbor or coworker, be civil.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Many conferences these days (at least in my field) have a code of conduct which all attendees agree to abide by when they register. An example from a recent conference is here: <https://www.cosmologyfromhome.com/code-of-conduct/>
If an attendee breaches the code of conduct (and shouting in that manner at another attendee would certainly constitute such a breach) they can be reported to the conference organisers. The most severe consequence would be asking them to leave the conference.
So, if you are now in a position where you are organising conferences, including a code of conduct would be an excellent thing to do (or suggesting it to the organisers if you are not on the committee).
While the tactic of ignoring the person is another possibility, I worry that this is something of an easy way out. By doing nothing, we are giving tacit approval to harrassers and bullies, effectively emboldening them since they face no consequences for their actions.
We get many questions on this site about how to deal with abusive PhD supervisors and the advice then is never to silently put up with it. Imagine being the PhD student of the person who called you a liar and didn't want to sit next to you at the conference. You were only subjected to that treatment for a day; they could have been subjected to it on a daily basis for years. Think how demoralising it must have felt to have everyone around them ignore this person's behaviour.
I do not, therefore, advocate for ignoring harrassment *if you are in a secure enough position to challenge it*. Obviously if the harrasser has or could have some power over you in the future, it is sensible not to confront them. But if you are a peer or the senior party, you can at least have a quiet word with that person, or ask them not to talk to people in that way. They probably won't change overnight (or perhaps ever), but it's important not to give the message to junior people that you don't care about harrassing and bullying behaviour.
Another practical thing you can do, if you are now senior in your field, is to warn junior people about the behaviour of such a person, especially if their harrassment is particularly targeted towards junior people. Dissuade them from approaching the person in question. Dissuade them from doing a PhD with or collaborating with them, if you can.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Unpleasant people? If you are convinced that you did not do anything to deserve their castigation (and from your story, it sounds like you didn't), purse your lips, raise a slight Spock brow, wait a second, and go/look somewhere else. Nothing shows your opinion about them more clearly than this wordless sequence. They will be seething, but you have better things to do.
If you can not avoid interacting with them, be unwaveringly polite, but distant. You may even exaggerate the politeness by using "Sir" etc. This increases distance.
It's not your job to educate someone who failed to learn basic manners at school. Their manners are not your responsibility.
If they stalk you at a conference, indifference is another strategy. Non-reactivity is boring and they will look for a more reactive victim.
Of course, many conferences have these code-of-conduct declarations now and you could try to invoke them, but I have no idea how effective that is in a case like yours.
Personally, I distrust the effectiveness of formalized rules of behaviour for anything but really egregious and obvious breaches of conduct, and even then I am not sure they really work, unless you belong to a well-delineated group that is seen as requiring special protection. But, your mileage may vary.
Upvotes: 4
|
2021/04/23
| 6,284
| 25,990
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am going to submit a computer science paper to a conference. So the thing is fairly simple. On some datasets with 1:1 ratio, our model achieves really good performance. On datasets with 1:5 or 1:10 ratio, our models only reaches mediocre results.
I just want to report the results of datasets with 1:1 ratio in this case since they are pretty good. Putting a mediocre result (on the 1:5 or 1:10 ratio datasets) may extremely lead to a whole paper getting rejected. However, my PhD advisor told me that we have to put the mediocre result as well.
Meanwhile, the PhD advisor seems really angry about this behavior and disappointed about me, and I feel really sad because I didn't cheat, and I just not want to include the relatively mediocre results in my paper.
I think many other computer science papers do something like that, not reporting their results on some datasets if the result is bad, and reporting their results on some datasets if their result is good.
I don't get why my PhD advisor is so angry about that. Could someone tell me? I am really appreciated it.
Currently, I feel wrongly judged by my PhD advisor and afraid of the whole paper getting rejected because of this since we are going to submit to a top-tier conference.<issue_comment>username_1: Research is a search for truth, not for happy talk. If you have evidence of some behavior then you should be honest and report it just as it is. Don't try to dress it up.
Giving only the "best" results will sometimes mislead people and will cause them, perhaps, to waste time and effort.
You are currently the best source to give an honest and complete review of the meaning of your results. I strongly suggest you do that. At some level, not doing that is malfeasance.
I suggest that the reviewers themselves probably think like I do and won't reject a paper that is honest and complete, other things being equal. They aren't looking for happy talk either.
But you may also have an opportunity to investigate why you get different outcomes. Is it something about your model, or something special about the data? Inquiring minds want to know.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_2: This is indeed bad. It is worse than it appears from the title of the question.
Your situation is that the model performs well on a very balanced dataset and ceases to do well as soon as imbalance creeps into the data. This seems to be a preliminary model, because there are so many ways to address the imbalance now. You must implement those and then see how the model works.
Presenting only the results on 1:1 data alone conveys the false picture that the model works well universally. Keep in mind that ML/DL are used very commonly now in different fields, and someone not familiar with the nuances of data balancing may pick up your work and start using it directly. I work in a non-CS area that is starting to adopt ML, and poor models can have very bad real-world impact.
I hope you now understand why the advisor is unhappy. In your situation, I would apologise and consider not submitting if I don't get actual robust results (considering that its a top-tier conference you are looking at).
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: Well, if the question is why your supervisor is unhappy with you, I don't think we can help you, but in general, the situation is not that terrible at all. It is quite common, for example, that a result which is going to be published is impressive only within a specific region of parameters. The model is working here, and fails there and everywhere else, for example. Of course there is a temptation to hide those less impressive sides of the findings, and of course, sometimes people do this in publications (although they should not).
As a non-specialist in CS, I do not know how bad for your publication is what you said about your model, but your supervisor should know it. If they say the results are publishable, they probably are. If not, well, tough luck. The inclusion of mediocre results does not necessarily make your paper worse; a lot depends on the wording and subtle details. Usually, there is more than one way to publish a particular result and to build up a paper around it. As a PhD student, it is totally fine if you are not sure how to present your results better, and this is where your supervisor should be able help you. A honest discussion between you and them (and possibly other co-authors, if any) on how to improve the paper is probably necessary at some point.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: The 'mediocre' results are good too. They tell you under what circumstances you get good performance, so people know that if the data has a 1:1 ratio they can use your model, and if it doesn't then they should do something else. That's helpful - it improves overall performance by limiting use to where it is most useful.
Knowing what leads to good/bad performance also gives information about *why* the model works as it does, and can lead to insights into how to improve it. If *all* the results are good (or they're *all* bad), that doesn't tell you anything about how to improve it. The most *informative* result is one that shows both.
The purpose of a conference is not to boast about your achievements, but to convey useful information to other researchers. So the more informative you are about what works, what doesn't, and what to look at to improve things next, the better it is for the conference's purposes. Imagine you are explaining your work to somebody thinking about working on it themselves - what would be most useful for them to know? How can you help them? That's what you should be putting in your paper. You are giving them a map showing the areas you have explored - how pleased would they be with you if you only marked in the treasure and left off all the booby traps and pitfalls?
There are two definitions of 'good' here. You are thinking only of whether the *model* is good - how accurate it is. But you also need to consider whether the *research* is good, and the paper. This is about how much detail the paper gives about the performance, about when and why it performs well or badly. A paper that reports in detail exactly *why* a particular type of model doesn't work may be considered excellent from a scientific point of view, and tremendously useful to other researchers. The science can be good, even if the model is bad. Your priority should be to do good science. Producing models with good performance is useful too, but secondary.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: It's bad because large scale behaviour like this pollutes science literature with bogus results, even if researchers are well intentioned.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's a large scale problem, specially (but not exclusively) in health sciences, where ineffective treatments can actually kill people. See the Chloroquine and Ivermectin fiasco in the current pandemics.
Even completely "negative" results are valuable, because they put the results of other researchers in perspective, and avoid people getting into dead ends. Unfortunately its still hard to publish "negative" results, and it hurts academia and generates perverse incentives.
The must read article regarding this is [Why Most Published Research Findings Are False](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=15681017780418799273&hl=pt-BR&as_sdt=0,5)(1), by <NAME>:
>
> Summary: There is increasing concern that most current published
> research findings are false. The probability that a research claim is
> true may depend on study power and bias, the number of other studies
> on the same question, and, importantly, the ratio of true to no
> relationships among the relationships probed in each scientific field.
> In this framework, a research finding is less likely to be true when
> the studies conducted in a field are smaller; when effect sizes are
> smaller; when there is a greater number and lesser preselection of
> tested relationships; where there is greater flexibility in designs,
> definitions, outcomes, and analytical modes; when there is greater
> financial and other interest and prejudice; and when more teams are
> involved in a scientific field in chase of statistical significance.
> Simulations show that for most study designs and settings, it is more
> likely for a research claim to be false than true. Moreover, for many
> current scientific fields, claimed research findings may often be
> simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias. In this essay, I
> discuss the implications of these problems for the conduct and
> interpretation of research.
>
>
>
There is [a XKCD comic](https://xkcd.com/882/) that showcases it nicely:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/jAYSV.png)
(1) Ioannidis, <NAME>. “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False”. PLOS Medicine, vol. 2, no 8, agosto de 2005, p. e124. PLoS Journals, doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_6: There are many answers who address the underlying issues of why such a paper needs publishing all the relevant results and I agree with most of them. I'll simply add a blunt and clear statement of why as a supervisor I would be disheartened or angry with you:
**A PhD is not about publishing x papers in the champions league of journals, a PhD is about learning how to be a good scientist!**
Hiding results for personal fame (publishing in top tier journals) by giving the impression of an awesome breakthrough when you know it is not the case, is an absolute counter-indication of a good scientist.
This attitude leads to the dark side. Next you will omit some "risky" tests right from the start, because you assume they will look bad, select data that you know your algorithm will work good on in the first place or outright doctor it to fit, because, well,you want to show the good results, so why not prepare a test case that fits the strengths of the algorithm, right?! Who cares about the rest when the paper gets accepted.\*
From a good supervisor's point of view they see that they failed in teaching you so far and try to correct that now pretty late.
If someone published 10 papers at top journals, but omitted data, and another one did average work on average projects, but following proper scientific standards of full transparent disclosure, I'd take the second one any day over the first when I look for a good scientist. The first one is a self-seller, but they haven't earned their PhD. I'd hire them perhaps for the marketing department, if I'd work at a company that doesn't care about how they sell their stuff from an ethical point of view.
**Personally I'd have felt ashamed and would have feared to be expelled had I ever brought up the idea to "just omit" bad results to my PhD supervisor.** You don't necessarily need to focus on them, if you want to argue for whatever use-case the test scenario is not so relevant, but you definitely need to report them. I.e. interpretation can have focus, data presentation needs to be complete.
\* There is a difference between 1) selecting data sets that match the problem scenario the algorithm tries to solve best and indicating no effort was spent yet on going for other data sets either in the same category (where results are unknown so far) or another category where one might state it could be interesting (potentially perform worse) because the algorithm doesn't fit that data and 2) leaving out data sets because one knows of quirks in the algorithm that make worse performance likely but not mentioning it, 3) already having results for data sets that fit well but omitting them because the algorithm behaves bad on them without even mentioning it and 4) other scenarios I didn't include because they weren't in my mind at the time and it wasn't the purpose of this answer to give a full list (those scenarios might be either okay or not).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: Do the right thing and put all the results on the paper. It's part of ethics in research, and the work of a researcher is (or should be!) producing new knowledge. Obscuring your results, putting only what looks good is indeed a violation of the ethical code of the research.
On the other side, your supervisor should not be too mad at you. Part of doing research is failing...
If you have such bad results you should also consider submitting the paper to a less prestigious conference, you might get published even without outstanding outcomes.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: >
> Putting a mediocre result (on the 1:5 or 1:10 ratio datasets) may extremely lead to a whole paper getting rejected.
>
>
>
That is a secondary problem that is generally a result of bad refereeing or a bad attitude from the journal. If you have developed a method that is good in some narrow area, but mediocre in another area, it still sounds like a useful method and it is still useful to hear about its performance across various tasks. Good academic journals should generally be open to papers talking about "negative results" where we looked for some effect and didn't find it, or developed a new method but it didn't work well on some kind of problem. This is useful information because it allows researchers who follow in your footsteps to know what has already been tried, even if it failed. (Refusal to publish papers like this leads to a result that is somewhat similar to the injunction, "those who do not known history are condemned to repeat it".)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: Failure to report the mediocre results is unethical
---------------------------------------------------
When writing an academic paper, pretending that you did not get bad results for some cases that you were hoping to get good results from is unethical and damaging, both to your credibility/reputation, and to the field, as others may waste time trying to use your code in cases that it doesn't work for.
But take note...
----------------
There's a difference between reporting your mediocre results, and emphasising them. Your method works well when the datasets have a 1:1 ratio. This should be the central focus of your paper. Focus the paper on that aspect - your new method is great for those cases!
The mediocre results are simply other results. You have shown that it works well for 1:1 ratios. You have also found that it does not do well for 1:5 ratios. This is also useful information. Make a note of it - you have examined the performance of your approach for cases with 1:5 ratios, and found that it does not perform as well.
Not only is this a way to be ethical while also focusing on the good, but it gives you the opportunity to point towards further research possibilities - why doesn't your method work for 1:5 ratios? This is clearly an area for further investigation! If you know what's causing the problem, then simply point to it and note that further work is needed to extend the approach to work for these cases.
It's to your benefit!
---------------------
Your first instinct might be to think that people will dismiss your work because you mention some weaknesses. This would be folly. People will see your approach, think of a new way to adapt your approach to other cases, and publish... referencing YOUR paper as they do so. And that increases your citations.
If you don't mention the weaknesses, then it's less likely that people will spend time thinking about how to adapt your approach - instead, they'll dismiss your approach as faulty when it doesn't work for their situations, and ignore it.
Get the balance right
---------------------
You need to mention the mediocre results, but they shouldn't be at all central to the paper. The trick to this is to frame the paper as focused on the 1:1 ratio cases. It is here that the model works well, and thus you are reporting a new approach to 1:1 ratio cases. When discussing the results of the model, you include a small section discussing what happens for 1:5 and 1:10 ratios - this should not be to the same level of detail as the 1:1 ratio cases, however!
*"When applied to more unbalanced ratios, such as 1:5 ratio cases, it is found that the approach does not perform as well, achieving only XXX where other approaches can achieve YYY. This can be seen, for example, in case ZZZ,..."*
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_10: Your question is mostly on why your supervisor is angry with you.
You acknowledge that you only wanted to include the results when operating on datasets where the model handled them well as you perceive such results as carrying more *cachet* with conference editors. Your post suggests that you see little wrong with doing this.
Your supervisor impressed on you the scientist's obligation to report all work done, the bad as well as the good. He "seems really angry about this behavior and disappointed".
I think that I know why.
In every working relationship there is a basic trust demanded. Clearly with your supervisor, he trusted you to appreciate the need to report the full facts as they occurred - not as you or he may have liked them to have occurred. Somehow when he took you on as a PhD student, he thought he could rely on you having that much integrity. How or why he thought he could rely on you, we don't absolutely know. But we can hazard a guess that other things you did - and perhaps to a greater extent *how* you did them - assured him that you would be sound on data reporting integrity.
I'll be fully honest about what I think here. **I believe that you have been playing your supervisor** rather than having honest exchanges of view with him. From the outset, I believe that you adopted a nice smooth manner with him and deftly ignored any likely areas of conflict. You picked up from your undergraduate days how academics tend to assume that people with agreeable manner would share their views and standards. In reality, life isn't so simple. Many people with forthright - even tactless - manners can often have very high standards and many with great social finesse show little scruple when their own immediate desires are involved.
Now that you have shown your true ethical colors, the professor realizes he has not been vigilant on the professional character of his student. He must be very angry and disappointed *with himself* for being weak and falling for your pretences. On top of this his own reputation in the eyes of peers would be stained by association with someone withholding relevant facts in a conference paper.
**You may not realize it but your career in research could be nearly over. A single nuance in how a supervisor's reference is phrased could eliminate you from any serious scientific position after your PhD.** You have to accept that, notwithstanding the growth of the "executive academic" in the last 30 years, research is still largely a humdrum occupation demanding more of our endurance than of our creativity. If color, glamor, travel to exotic convention capitals is what you seek you need to move into marketing. I know a few PhDs from my own era who did that and are now multi-millionaires. But if - after a period of contemplation - you decide you want to stay in research then you have to learn to take the bad with the good as far as presenting results are concerned.
Lately I had an idea related to a field that has 60 years of global research activity. It was counterintuitive and yet still hard to believe that so many others could have missed it. After a literature check to see if anyone had reported anomalous results, I found a few who had done the very experiments that would bear out what my idea predicted. It would have been easier for these researchers to just not mention these experiments and focus on the more agreeable data from other experiments. (In fact very difficult in the case of one of them, a PhD student who had to present plausible reasons for his observations to some external examiner.) Yet they did not and I appreciate their honesty and integrity.
**EDIT**
I also note from [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/162505/should-i-quit-the-phd-program) that this supervisor took over your programme after 1 year. You should appreciate the fact that someone was prepared to "stand" for you when you changed supervisor. You therefore owe him some consideration even if you see nothing wrong with your own intention.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_11: I don't have anything intelligent of my own to add, but I think <NAME> pretty much [addressed this](https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/9377486-that-is-the-idea-that-we-all-hope-you-have):
>
> “…the idea that we all hope you have learned in studying science in school — we never explicitly say what this is, but just hope that you catch on by all the examples of scientific investigation. It is interesting, therefore, to bring it out now and speak of it explicitly. It’s a kind of **scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty — a kind of leaning over backwards.**
>
>
> For example, **if you’re doing an experiment, you should report everything that you think might make it invalid — not only what you think is right about it:** other causes that could possibly explain your results; and things you thought of that you’ve eliminated by some other experiment, and how they worked — to make sure the other fellow can tell they have been eliminated.
>
>
> Details that could throw doubt on your interpretation must be given, if you know them. You must do the best you can — if you know anything at all wrong, or possibly wrong — to explain it. If you make a theory, for example, and advertise it, or put it out, then you must also put down all the facts that disagree with it, as well as those that agree with it.”
>
>
>
— <NAME> [Caltech commencement address, 1974, quoted in *Surely You're Joking, Mr Feynman!: Adventures of a Curious Character*] (my emphasis)
(He was of course talking about scientific theories, not data models; but since both are aiming to expand human knowledge, I think the same principle applies.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_12: I agree with the previous answers that it is unethical. However, even publishing a paper that hides 'mediocre' data can backfire: suppose someone replicates the process but performs those tests you omitted and find that the outcome is mediocre. That person might publish and your paper will be no longer be 'famous'.
**Don't cheat to get fame because it won't get you any in the short or long run**
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_13: It's possible to [lie by omission](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie#Lying_by_omission) too. You're talking about deliberately leaving out a key fact in order to make it appear that your method works better than it does. Even if everything you say is technically true, you'd still be deliberately deceiving the reviewers in order to manipulate them into signing off on a publication that you think that they wouldn't agree with if they knew the full truth about it.
From the Wikipedia article I linked to:
>
> Lying by omission, also known as a continuing misrepresentation or quote mining, occurs when an important fact is left out in order to foster a misconception. Lying by omission includes the failure to correct pre-existing misconceptions. For example, when the seller of a car declares it has been serviced regularly, but does not mention that a fault was reported during the last service, the seller lies by omission. It may be compared to dissimulation. An omission is when a person tells most of the truth, but leaves out a few key facts that therefore, completely obscures the truth.
>
>
>
Besides, there's no expectation that every method will work equally well in every situation. The fact that an algorithm doesn't work well in certain circumstances is potentially useful information, too (especially if you can identify an interesting reason that that's the case).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_14: Another perspective: I see an [XY problem](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem). OP asks if the *not reporting the relatively not good results* **solution** is bad.
One could also ask:
>
> Should academia require that results be reported without bias?
>
>
>
or
>
> How did and should academia change to reduce bias in reporting?
>
>
>
or
>
> Some of my results are positive and others are negative. What should I do?
>
>
>
Maybe a paper exploring the question of what to present and why would be better than a paper presenting some or all of the results.
It seems to still be the case or perception in much of academia, that surface-level-success in academia is still facilitated by *not reporting the relatively not good results*.
In that part of academic publishing that involves reporting human clinical trial\* results, there is a push to require pre-registration and subsequent reporting of clinical endpoints, but this is [not](http://fdaaa.trialstracker.net) (!) [enforced](https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?f801=Yes). In [very](https://c19ivermectin.com/togetherchanges.html) [important](https://c19ivermectin.com/lopezmedina.html) trials. The solution doesn't seem to be working when it's most important that it does.
\*(Not all clinical trials are in humans. *Veterinary* clinical trials [are](https://vet.purdue.edu/ctr/clinical-research/veterinary-clinical-trials.php) a [thing](https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/cevm/practice-based-research/the-veterinary-clinical-trials-network-vctn/the-veterinary-clinical-trials-network-vctn.aspx).)
>
> How can we make it so, in academic papers, is is not a bad thing to report the relatively not good results?
>
>
>
Now there's a topic worth researching!
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/24
| 609
| 2,387
|
<issue_start>username_0: Jim, *a fictitious character*, scored a mediocre 3.48/4.00 in his undergrad (in Physics). It took him 6 years to complete the 4-year program. He is enrolled in a masters program but due to COVID, he missed the on-campus exams. So he has to sit for the exams next year. He is unemployed and feeling very low. Is it possible for him to make it big in academia and get research or teaching opportunities in future?<issue_comment>username_1: It is *possible* but not *probable.* Also depends on what one means by "making it big." Nobel Prize? I mean, that is a vanishingly small percentage of even top graduates of top schools. Make full professor and have the esteem of some colleagues? More probable, but in today's world, where the tenure track is largely disappearing, still hard even for the most qualified.
The dirty secret of academia is that it creates many multiples more qualified people for the "good" positions than there are "good" positions. The academic labor market is severely misaligned, in terms of ratio of Ph.D.s produced to demanded. So everything else being equal (including qualification and achievement, and those are of course not equal!), most people in academia *will not make it big even with the wind at their backs.*
Like many areas, academia tends to look at credentials--not only where they are from in terms of prestige, but the manner in which they were acquired (how long it took, and so forth).
In addition, academia also relies very heavily on personal recommendations of advisers, and someone with these credentials (OK but not great GPA, long time to degree completion, missing exams, and so forth) would probably not do well in the evaluations necessary for advancement, like letters of rec, or being thought of when a job comes up that needs filling.
This fictional character would likely need to gain a foothold in some sort of more technical job, like working for a large collaborative project where he could do "grunt" work, demonstrate superior completion of that work, and then use that work up the ladder.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Can Jim "get research or teaching opportunities ...?"
(Answer for the US) YES, at least to teaching. Two- and four-year colleges hire Ph.D. physicists for teaching.
Research opportunities will depend on Jim's Ph.D., not on his earlier academic performance.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/24
| 1,402
| 6,026
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been recently offered an interview for Asst. Professor at a mid-tier UK university.
I have completed my PhD from a top-tier (Oxbridge) university in the UK and had applied for this position without really expecting an interview call. At the start of the interview, I am asked to deliver a 10 minute presentation titled "How would you contribute to the research agenda in the Department?"
In my opinion, the question is rather asking "How would your research fit the department"? Please correct me if I am wrong.
The current situation is I have researched the department and find that the department has a research center but my research specialisms do not necessarily fit the research center. For example, my specialisms are financial investments and the school research center focus on cooperate finance. In this case, how should I address "my research fits well with the department". In addition, I am struggling to figure out the exact meaning how should I answer "contribution to their research agenda".
My current problem is that this interview is scheduled immediately (within 5 days), and this doesn't give me sufficient time to contact my former PhD supervisor(s) for their valuable advice.
My specific questions are:
How deeply technical should I go in the presentation slides for such an opportunity? (i.e. are details at the equation-level required and journal citations expected?)
What sort of answers do that expect？ or Which aspects should I discuss in order to address this question? Currently, I can only think of some answers such as potential collaboration with potential staff or contribution to the next REF or etc?
Should I discuss my publications, conference participation, research pipeline or achievements so far?
Should I identify the grants that I shall be applying to (in particular, the specific EPSRC schemes that exist for early career researchers)?
Are there any other aspects that I may have completely missed here?
I am really sorry to be naive in asking a lot of questions here. This is a valuable opportunity for me and I'd like to give it my best.<issue_comment>username_1: There are two ways to "fit" with a department. One way is to do similar things to what they do (and publish). The other is to complement their scope with something that is different enough that the overall scope expands.
If you know what they do, then you can decide which approach is better for you to take. The first implies collaboration. The second implies new opportunities for everyone.
Perhaps the techniques they use in their work will apply in some way to yours. And vice versa.
But to know what to say you need some idea of what they do and how they do it.
The stuff about grants and other things you mention can be used to fill in, but they explicitly want to know about "fit". Think about that, primarily. It would probably be a mistake to describe yourself as entirely independent of their threads.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: (This answer is based on a year of applying to mid-tier UK universities for a Lecturer position, getting two offers and accepting one of them a year and a half ago)
>
> How deeply technical should I go in the presentation slides for such an opportunity? (i.e. are details at the equation-level required and journal citations expected?)
>
>
>
No equations are expected in a 10-minute presentations (I expect it takes at least 5 minutes to explain an equation out of the blue). They are asking for "elevator-pitch" type ideas and research directions. Try and sell two or three ideas as you would to an interesting research connection you just made at a conference.
>
> What sort of answers do that expect？ or Which aspects should I discuss in order to address this question? Currently, I can only think of some answers such as potential collaboration with potential staff or contribution to the next REF or etc?
>
>
>
Pointing out collaborations would be good (either with specific people or "this is how my expertise could be applied to some of the ongoing projects"). Pointing out some high-tier publications might be good. But, what they really want to hear is *how you're going to bring money in*. So make sure **you couple each of the 2 or 3 ideas you present with a potential funding agency/call**.
>
> Should I discuss my publications, conference participation, research pipeline or achievements so far?
>
>
>
No need to discuss your research pipeline -- getting invited for this interview means they trust you on this. Discuss your publications in the sense that your proposed research directions need to come naturally from your previous work, and not "out of the blue". In such a 10-minute presentation, I would dedicate at most 3 minutes (I know, ugh!) for "about me" and the other 7 (or even 8) minutes on your proposals.
>
> Should I identify the grants that I shall be applying to (in particular, the specific EPSRC schemes that exist for early career researchers)?
>
>
>
Yes. *Yes.* **Definetely yes.** This is mostly what they want to hear. They want you to put realistic timelines on your applications as well, and for them to get progressively bigger. You probably want to start with *EPSRC New Investigator Award* (plan to apply in 10 months for a project of an approximate duration of 1.5-2 years). Then, you might talk about how you're going to apply as a CO-I in collaboration with some department colleagues. And then finally, in 2-3 years you will submit a proposal for your first large (EPSRC?) grant as a PI.
>
> Are there any other aspects that I may have completely missed here?
>
>
>
The focus on funding is much bigger than it seems you think it is from your question. You may also want to mention any industry relations or collaborations that you have. And, public engagement opportunities. You may also want to discuss how some of your project might actually apply to the real world/society if you get to pursue your research lines (= get funded).
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/04/24
| 399
| 1,631
|
<issue_start>username_0: My supervisor had a surgery. She notified the other doctorate student other than me and the other members of the group. I have no information. No one in the group said this to me. I feel like an idiot and can't understand why she didn't tell me. I don't know, what should i do?
edit: Thank you very much for your answers. I can think better now. I'm the only foreign student in the group, a small group. When I first arrived, I saw discriminatory attitudes from the head of the group (I was not invited to group meetings but there were all other students). But my supervisor always treated me well, we did not have a problem but when she did not inform me, I was very sorry, she informed the others by phone.<issue_comment>username_1: There is really nothing to do. Most likely it wasn't an intentional slight. An oversight, perhaps, caused by stress.
You can get some information about what happened that required surgery and send a get-well note.
Don't overthink it.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Maybe she just forgot to tell you, in the end she had to undergo surgery! If she notified the other via email, this might be a clue for a typo.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Make sure your supervisor actually is able to contact you.
For example, if your supervisor emailed her students via an email like <EMAIL>, then you need to be a member of that email list, or you won't be notified, and it won't be because your supervisor didn't want to notify you. Alternatively if your supervisor used the phone, it's possible she doesn't have your phone number.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/04/24
| 371
| 1,539
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently interviewed for a tenure track position in a public R1 University. There were 4 candidates. The last one interviewed at the beginning of April. Two weeks ago, I have been told by the chair of the search committee that they have submitted the summary to the dept head and now the choice is in her hand. Currently, I am still waiting.
The emails from the chair and the dept head have always been very matter-of-fact and straight-to-the-point. Particularly, when I sent thank you emails to all the people I met during the interview, the chair is one of the few who did not reply back (overall reply rate ~75%). Does it mean anything? Should I be worried about it? Or am I overthinking? Did you have a similar experience to mine but got the offer anyway?<issue_comment>username_1: Probably overthinking. The chair has other duties, of course. And, since they have the responsibility to make a decision, they might find it improper to communicate outside the committee.
Let it go. You will learn soon enough.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You're overthinking it. All parties involved are required to be neutral between all candidates, and so can't say much that would actually mean anything to you. You'll just have to wait and see.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Thanks for all of your responses. I did not get the position. Therefore, I still think the "vibe" matters. I assume that if I was their top candidate, our interaction would have been more positive.
Upvotes: -1 [selected_answer]
|
2021/04/24
| 1,641
| 6,861
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a quick question about choosing a PhD advisor. I know they are some threads on this but my question is a little more specific.
How important is it that your PhD advisor is an experienced, well-known faculty member?
There is a new professor that is coming to my school this fall. She will officially have her PhD in May. However, she studies almost exactly what I have wanted to focus on ever since I was in high school. Now, I won't start doing research until after I pass my qualifying exams- so I have about a year.
My goal has always been to teach at college. I am really, really good at teaching and have received lots of money and numerous awards for doing so. So many college professors are disconnected from students and simply do not know how to teach and this is something I have been extremely passionate about.
I am not trying to become some world famous mathematician. So, given this, is choosing an advisor this young a bad idea? Is it looked down upon in academia, and does anyone have any experience with this?
I am looking forward to your answers.<issue_comment>username_1: The biggest disadvantage here is that her first priority will be, and needs to be, her own quest for tenure. If that comes in conflict with your needs, say just time for research and publishing, then you will wind up with little help.
Another disadvantage is that, as a new and untested academic, she won't have the name recognition that you might want when it comes time to start your own career. That is less important, as you can establish other relationships with more senior faculty along the way who can also help.
A third disadvantage, perhaps even less important, is that she has little experience in advising doctoral research and may not yet be comfortable with it. Some advisors give too much "help" and some too little. But you don't really have a way to predict (from talking to other more advanced students) how she will interpret the task.
But, none of the above is necessarily a problem. It is just something to keep in mind. Being able to work in a subfield that really interests you is a good thing, but getting finished successfully is more important.
Moreover, the advice here is colored by my bad experience with an untenured advisor who provided little real help. Eventually I moved to a senior professor (at a different university) and had a much better experience.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Just to give contrast with @username_1's list of disadvantages:
* new professors are often full of energy and enthusiasm
* they will probably start with a small number of students, so you may get extra attention
* they may have better rapport with you since it hasn't been long since they were graduate students themselves
* the exact match of research area seems like a big bonus
* as you suggest, the lack of prestige/ranking of your advisor is unlikely to be as big a deal when looking for teaching rather than research positions
The only disadvantage I see in addition to @username_1's list is that a new faculty member might be a bit overwhelmed with all the new things they have to take on (teaching, admin, research, in addition to graduate advising).
All that said, IMO the *most* important characteristic of a graduate advisor is a good match in terms of personality/mentoring style/expectations. Hopefully you will have a chance to speak/interact with them more to find out about these things before choosing your supervisor.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: I'm soon to graduate from my PhD, and I was my supervisor's first student. He was on a research only grant and he had a lot of time for me, we ended up working closely together and I feel like I've benefited a lot from this. I'll be applying for postdoctoral research jobs soon, and I have a number of publications and I feel like I'm in a strong position to apply. I think it worked out well for me that I was my supervisor's first student, I know a lot of other students whose supervisors had more responsibilities and less time to work with them.
I can see different ways in which I may have benefited from having a more experienced supervisor, but I'm pretty independent generally and I'm used to finding my own path with things so I don't feel like this had too much of a negative effect on me.
Personally I think it's more important that you find someone you think you can get along with well, than someone who has more or less experience
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: First of all, it depends on your character. Some people like to follow large trends and be part of larger teams, some other prefer niche research.
Some prefer to work on their own, some expect their advisor to be around to advise.
Now to your question
>
> How important is it that your PhD advisor is ...
>
>
>
I will break it into two parts
>
> ... an experienced [faculty member],
>
>
>
In my case his knowledge of the academic topic did not matter much. I was pushing my own research in an area where there were not many people and my advisor was an expert only on the "context" of my research (for instance he knew particle physics, but not the neural networks based research I was doing on the results (this was at a very early stage of that topic)).
>
> ... well-known faculty member?
>
>
>
That was important in my case because my research was niche and I needed someone courageous enough to stand by me. He was extraordinary in this role, I was very, very grateful to him for that.
He was also very experienced in the academic world, so he knew how the PhD would work out, which general lectures to attend, etc. He was also very helpful when managing the frictions between me and the feudal part of academia (one of the reasons for which I left academia). I owe him a lot.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: This sounds like a bad idea for both of you, and hence I suspect the question is largely academic since the person may not be willing to take on a student (and the university may not permit them to be a primary advisor).
First, if someone is a new faculty member they will already be taking on a lot of responsibilities they haven't had before, and they will need to get used to managing their main duties before taking on anything extra.
Secondly, if someone is fresh out of a PhD they typically haven't yet demonstrated that they can manage their own research independently, let alone yours.
Now there is absolutely no reason why someone has to have experience advising research students before, or needs to be a well-known figure, to have a successful PhD student. And a graduating student will be judged on the papers they have produced, not on their advisor. However, I think it's vital for an advisor to have a reasonable amount of independent research experience.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/04/25
| 399
| 1,676
|
<issue_start>username_0: So long story short a professor at a school I applied to got in touch a few days ago saying he was "impressed with my qualifications" and asked if I decided where to go for my PhD. What would this mean exactly? My assumption is that I was on the waitlist or "leftover list" and he got in touch. I replied saying that I haven't decided yet and I'd love to attend the school he's at (I didn't really receive any offers this round) and that if he wants I'd be down to discuss this further with him.
I think there's only really one reason why a professor would contact an applicant in that manner, but I'm now wondering if I may have made too many assumptions on my part. Do you guys think my interpretation was correct, or maybe I jumped to a conclusion too fast?<issue_comment>username_1: Seems to me like you did the right thing. They may really have been impressed by your qualification; or they just wanted to gauge your interest in remaining on the waitlist, to which you replied "yes".
There's little else we can guess the person might have wanted to ask. You didn't burn any bridges and expressed interest. There's little else anyone could have done in your place.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There can be many reasons.
One reason could be that a professor didn't have funding available by the deadline. Now that they have funding, they are scrambling to find a student.
A second reason could be that they were counting on somebody else to accept the position, but that other person did not commit.
In end end, if you want the position, take it. Don't worry too much about why you were given the chance.
Upvotes: 0
|